In a few weeks, Beijing plans to implement a citywide ban on smoking in all indoor public spaces, such as restaurants and offices, as well as on tobacco advertising outdoors, on public transportation and in most forms of media. If the initiative, agreed on late last year by the Beijing Municipal People’s Congress, is successful, China might impose a similar ban nationwide.
A significant decline in smoking would undoubtedly bring enormous public health benefits to China, but is it feasible?
With an estimated 300 million smokers, China represents one-third of the world’s total and accounts for an average of about 2,700 tobacco-related deaths per day. The costs of treating smoking-related diseases, not to mention the associated productivity losses, are considerable.
However, China has so far struggled to reduce smoking or effectively enforce bans. Indeed, despite ratifying the WHO’s Framework Convention to Tobacco Control in 2005, China failed to fulfill its commitment to ban indoor smoking by 2011.
Moreover, tobacco output increased by 32 percent.
Bans have since been implemented in 14 Chinese cities, including Shanghai, Hangzhou and Guangzhou. However, they have done little to reduce smoking, owing not only to weak enforcement, but also to the view held by 75 percent of Chinese adults that smoking does not cause serious harm. Only about 16 percent of Chinese smokers report an intention to quit.
Against this background, the Beijing municipal authorities’ plan to fine smokers up to 200 yuan (US$32) for lighting up in public places appears unpromising at best.
The obvious question is why China’s government, which is not known to be shy about imposing paternalistic policies in other areas, does not simply ban cigarette production and use altogether. After all, other countries and localities, from Scandinavia to New York City, have made smoking prohibitively expensive and illegal in most public places.
The reason why China has not taken this path lies in the jobs and revenue that the industry provides. The state-owned China National Tobacco Corp sells almost all of the cigarettes consumed in the nation; it is the world’s largest cigarette manufacturer, supplying 2.5 trillion annually, which in turn generates 816 billion yuan (from 7 to 10 percent of GDP) in revenue.
Tobacco receipts finance as much as half of some provincial governments’ budgets. Even in an authoritarian nation like China, the loss of so much income — not to mention the ire of 300 million addicts — would make prohibition a huge challenge.
However, there is an alternative that could help appease angry Chinese and mitigate the revenue loss from an outright ban on smoking: Electronic cigarettes. Given that e-cigarettes merely heat a nicotine solution to produce an inhalable vapor, they release none of the carcinogenic tar of cigarette smoke, making them the ideal nicotine-delivery system for smokers seeking — or being forced — to reduce or halt their tobacco intake.
Aside from being far less damaging than cigarettes, e-cigarettes are a homegrown product, invented in China in 2003. However, despite considerable progress in China’s e-cigarette industry — in 2013, Shenzhen housed 900 manufacturers of the devices, up 200 percent from 2012, and accounted for over 95 percent of global e-cigarette production — traditional cigarettes still dominate the Chinese market.
As Yanzhong Huang (黃 延中) of the Council on Foreign Relations recently said: “If only 1 percent of China’s smoking population turned to e-cigarettes, it would mean a market of about 3.5 million e-cigarette users.”
The China National Tobacco Corp could become the world’s largest e-cigarette maker.
One reason that China has not managed to tap the e-cigarette industry’s enormous potential is a lack of adequate regulation.
Low entry barriers enable intense competition that diminishes producers’ profit margins, and shoddy products are rife, owing to low manufacturing standards.
If e-cigarettes are to replace traditional cigarettes and offset lost tobacco revenues, Beijing must regulate the industry more carefully to ensure safety and quality.
However, such efforts would mean little without a shift in people’s attitudes. In this regard, the ban on smoking in public places or during official activities imposed in 2013 on Chinese Communist Party officials could be helpful. Huang said that if more officials turn to e-cigarettes, ordinary Chinese might be inspired to follow suit.
Already, it seems that the directors of the China National Tobacco Corp have complied with a government-mandated ban on cigarette smoking.
Whether they have become e-cigarette “vapers” is not known.
A smoke-free China — one that benefits from rising productivity and massive healthcare savings — might seem like a pipe dream. However, nationwide ban on smoking, with a reliable e-cigarette industry providing an alternative — both to smokers and to budgets — offers an intriguing way to turn the dream into reality.
Sally Satel, a medical doctor, is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington. Sarahann Yeh is a student at the University of Maryland.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath