Tobacco Control: Nigeria Can Learn from New Zealand, South Africa’s Diverging Paths

Dike Onwuamaeze

A global health advocate, pharmacist, and policy researcher on health equity, innovation, and sustainable development, Mr. Yusuff Adebayo Adebisi, has advised the federal government to borrow a leaf from New Zealand on how embracing harm reduction strategies could lessen the burden on public health that stemmed from tobacco consumption.

Adebisi, who contrasted the New Zealand and South Africa’s experiences, said that while the former has recorded successes with its harm reduction strategies stands, South Africa’s restrictive approach has inadvertently boosted illicit trade and failed to significantly cut smoking rates.

He said: “New Zealand’s model shows that when harm reduction is taken seriously and backed by science, the results can be transformative.”

“On the other hand, South Africa is an example of how prohibitionist policies can backfire and put more people at risk.”

He said that New Zealand has implemented one of the most effective harm reduction approaches globally bycombining public education with access to safer nicotine alternatives.

According to him, public health campaigns like “Vape to Quit Strong” have empowered smokers to switch to less harmful products such as e-cigarettes, nicotine pouches and heated tobacco devices.

“These products aren’t without risk,” Adebisi noted, “but they are significantly less harmful than smoking combustible cigarettes—and that distinction matters when lives are at stake.”

He posited that research from Public Health England supported this approach, estimating that vaping is approximately 95 per cent less harmful than traditional smoking.

“Coupled with reduced taxes on safer products and robust consumer education, New Zealand is on track to become smoke-free by 2025.

“In contrast, South Africa’s policy choices have yielded troubling outcomes. During the COVID-19 pandemic, a temporary ban on tobacco products led to an explosion of unregulated sales and counterfeit goods.

“Instead of reducing smoking, the ban drove consumers into the arms of the black market.

“It became harder for the government to monitor what people were consuming, and easier for harmful, low-quality products to circulate,” said Adebisi.

He argued that since South Africa has yet to adopt a harm reduction framework, roughly 20 per cent of its adult populations have continued to smoke, and the absence of viable alternatives means that quitting remains an uphill battle.

Adebisi emphasised that Nigeria must learn from both case studies to avoid repeating South Africa’s mistakes.

He said: “Current tobacco control measures in Nigeria—mainly taxation and public warnings—are important, but they’re not enough.

“We need a smarter strategy that provides smokers with safer alternatives and encourages them to switch through evidence-based communication and reasonable regulation.”

He advocated for legal recognition and regulation of reduced-risk nicotine products, noting that such a framework would improve consumer safety while helping reduce smoking rates.

“Without proper regulation, these products can either flood the market unmonitored or remain inaccessible to those who could benefit from them,” Adebisi explained, adding that “we need balanced oversight—not a free-for-all, and not a ban.”

Adebisi also called for a shift in taxation strategy, arguing that “tax policies must reflect the relative risks of products. Taxing all nicotine products the same way removes the financial incentive for smokers to switch to safer options.”

He also said that public education is also critical because “many Nigerians are still unaware that some nicotine alternatives are significantly less harmful than cigarettes. If we don’t provide clear, accurate information, we leave people in the dark—and that’s dangerous.”

He further stressed the importance of monitoring and evaluation systems that track the effectiveness of harm reduction policies in real time. “Dynamic policies—those that can be adjusted based on new data—are essential for long-term success,” he said.

Adebisi pointed out that Nigeria also faces a growing challenge with illicit tobacco trade that harm reduction could be part of the solution.

“When safer nicotine products are banned or overtaxed, consumers turn to unregulated sources.

“Legalising and regulating these products brings them under public health oversight and weakens the black market. It’s a win-win for safety and public revenue,” he said.

According to her, the success of countries like New Zealand and Sweden offers a proven template. Sweden, for example, has the lowest smoking rate in Europe at just 5.6 per cent, largely due to the widespread use of snus and other smokeless alternatives.

“These countries have reduced smoking not by banning products but by giving people better options.

“Nigeria can do the same—if we embrace harm reduction, regulate sensibly, and communicate clearly,” Adebisi said.

He concluded: “The goal is not just to eliminate tobacco; it is to reduce the harm it causes. We owe it to future generations to make that distinction, and act accordingly.”