The federal government has been asked to learn from the contrasting experiences of New Zealand and South Africa in its quest towards dealing with the public health burden of tobacco use.
A global health advocate, Yusuff Adebayo Adebisi stated this while reacting to a recent policy analysis titled: “A Tale of Two Nations” where he noted New Zealand’s success with harm reduction strategies in stark contrast to South Africa’s restrictive approach, which he said has inadvertently boosted illicit trade and failed to significantly cut smoking rates.
He stated: “New Zealand’s model shows that when harm reduction is taken seriously and backed by science, the results can be transformative. South Africa, on the other hand, is an example of how prohibitionist policies can backfire and put more people at risk.”
New Zealand, according to Adebisi, has implemented one of the most effective harm reduction approaches globally, combining public education with access to safer nicotine alternatives.
Public health campaigns like “Vape to Quit Strong,” he noted, 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 added that research from Public Health England supports this approach, estimating that vaping is approximately 95% less harmful than traditional smoking.
Coupled with reduced taxes on safer products and robust consumer education, he noted that New Zealand was on track to become smoke-free by 2025.
In contrast, he noted that 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,” said Adebisi. “It became harder for the government to monitor what people were consuming, and easier for harmful, low-quality products to circulate.”
Despite this, South Africa has yet to adopt a harm reduction framework with roughly 20% of the adult population still smoking 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. “Current tobacco control measures in Nigeria—mainly taxation and public warnings—are important, but they’re not enough,” he said.
“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. “We need balanced oversight—not a free-for-all, and not a ban.”
Adebisi also called for a shift in taxation strategy: “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.”
Public education, he added, is just as critical. “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.”
Nigeria also faces a growing challenge with illicit tobacco trade. Adebisi argued that harm reduction could be part of the solution. “When safer nicotine products are banned or overtaxed, consumers turn to unregulated sources,” he said.
“Legalising and regulating these products bring them under public health oversight and weakens the black market. It’s a win-win for safety and public revenue,” he noted.
He said 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%, 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,” Adebisi said.
“Nigeria can do the same if we embrace harm reduction, regulate sensibly, and communicate clearly.”
He concluded: “The goal isn’t just to eliminate tobacco; it’s to reduce the harm it causes. We owe it to future generations to make that distinction, and act accordingly.”
