A Tale of Two Approaches: Nicotine Pouch Policies in South Africa and New Zealand

When it comes to tackling smoking, two nations—South Africa and New Zealand—have taken strikingly different paths. The comparative report Tale of Two Nations, published by Smoke Free Sweden, highlights these opposing strategies. New Zealand’s success with harm reduction stands in stark contrast to South Africa’s counterproductive regulatory trajectory.

New Zealand: Leading Through Harm Reduction

New Zealand’s journey to reduce smoking rates is remarkable. In the 1980s, a third of the adult population smoked. While early tobacco control measures like tax hikes and indoor smoking bans made progress, it wasn’t enough to reach their ambitious goal of a 5% smoking rate by 2025. The turning point came with the introduction of harm reduction policies focused on vaping and other smokeless alternatives.

A government-endorsed campaign, Vape to Quit Strong, and platforms like VapingFacts provided clear information to smokers about safer alternatives. As a result, smoking prevalence fell from 12.2% to 6.8% in just five years, while adult vaping rates rose, with 78% of daily vapers being former or current smokers. Importantly, youth uptake was monitored and contained through sensible safeguards.

New Zealand’s approach underscores how accessible, properly regulated alternatives such as nicotine pouches and vaping can drive down smoking rates. These measures dispelled myths, prevented youth uptake, and encouraged quitting without resorting to draconian restrictions.

South Africa: Prohibition’s Pitfalls

South Africa, meanwhile, is following a path that risks worsening the problem. Despite implementing traditional tobacco control measures—tax hikes, advertising bans, and even a ban on tobacco product sales during the COVID-19 pandemic—smoking rates have stagnated. Nearly 26% of adults still smoke, and smoking-related diseases claim tens of thousands of lives annually.

The pandemic-era sales ban served as a case study in policy failure. Rather than deterring smoking, it fuelled a booming illicit trade. Post-ban, more than half of all tobacco sales in South Africa were illicit, costing the country billions in lost tax revenue and undermining public health efforts. Yet, the South African government now plans to enact even stricter regulations on alternative nicotine products, including nicotine pouches and vapes, effectively equating them with combustible cigarettes.

Why a One-Size-Fits-All Policy Fails

The crux of South Africa’s misstep is a refusal to distinguish between the harm caused by burning tobacco and the much lower risks of smokeless alternatives. Reports from institutions like the UK Royal College of Physicians show that products like e-cigarettes pose only 5% of the health risks associated with smoking. Nicotine pouches, which do not involve combustion or tobacco, are even safer. Treating these alternatives as equivalent to cigarettes ignores a wealth of evidence supporting harm reduction.

This misguided approach also risks pushing consumers towards unregulated, black market products. History shows that prohibition often backfires, leading to poorer health outcomes and economic losses.

Lessons from New Zealand for a Healthier Future

New Zealand’s policies show that balancing access and regulation works. The country’s reduced smoking rates are not just statistics; they represent thousands of lives saved from cancer, heart disease, and other tobacco-related illnesses. South Africa has the opportunity to learn from this example by adopting a regulatory framework that encourages the use of harm reduction products while maintaining protections against youth access and misinformation.

Public health campaigns could play a pivotal role here. By educating both smokers and the wider population on the benefits of switching to alternatives like nicotine pouches, South Africa could begin to reverse its smoking epidemic. Dispelling outdated fears about nicotine itself is vital—it’s the combustion of tobacco, not nicotine, that causes most smoking-related harm.

A Call to Action

South Africa’s proposed legislation risks entrenching high smoking rates and worsening public health outcomes. Policymakers need to reassess these plans through the lens of harm reduction. By creating sensible, evidence-based regulations, they can promote safer alternatives, reduce illicit trade, and save lives.

For readers interested in more details on this report, visit Smoke Free Sweden or you can see the full PDF report here.