Author:
van Deelen Tessa R.D.,Veldhuizen Els M.,van den Putte Bas,Kunst Anton E.,Kuipers Mirte A.G.
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Previous studies found that tobacco outlets were unevenly distributed by area socioeconomic status (SES). However, evidence from continental Europe is limited. This study aims to assess differences in tobacco outlet presence, density and proximity by area SES in the Netherlands.
Methods
All tobacco outlets in four Dutch cities (Amsterdam, and medium-sized cities Eindhoven, Haarlem, and Zwolle) were mapped between September 2019 and June 2020. We estimated associations between average property value of neighbourhoods (as an indicator of SES, grouped into quintiles) and (1) tobacco outlet presence in the neighbourhood (yes/no), (2) density (per km2), and (3) proximity to the closest outlet (in meters), using logistic and linear regression models.
Results
46% of neighbourhoods contained at least one tobacco outlet. Tobacco outlets were mostly situated in city centres, but the distribution of tobacco outlets varied per city due to differences in urban structures and functions. In the medium-sized cities, each quintile higher neighbourhood-SES was associated with lower tobacco outlet presence (OR:0.71, 95%CI:0.59;0.85), lower density (B:-1.20 outlets/km2, 95%CI:-2.20;-0.20) and less proximity (B:40.2 m, 95%CI 36.58;43.83). Associations were the other way around for Amsterdam (OR:1.22, 95%CI:1.05;1.40, B:3.50, 95%CI:0.81;6.20, and B:-18.45, 95%CI:-20.41;-16.49, respectively). Results were similar for most types of tobacco outlets.
Conclusion
In medium-sized cities in the Netherlands, tobacco outlets were more often located in low-SES neighbourhoods than high-SES. Amsterdam presented a reverse pattern, possibly due to its unique urban structure. We discuss how licensing might contribute to reducing tobacco outlets in low-SES neighbourhoods.
Funder
Longfonds
KWF Kankerbestrijding
Hartstichting
Diabetes Fonds
Trombosestichting Nederland
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Reference40 articles.
1. Freeman B, Watts C, Astuti PAS. Global tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship regulation: what’s old, what’s new and where to next? Tob Control. 2022.
2. van Deelen TR, Kunst AE, van den Putte B, Veldhuizen EM, Kuipers MA. Ex ante evaluation of the impact of tobacco control policy measures aimed at the point of sale in the Netherlands. Tob Control. 2022.
3. East K, Hitchman S, Stead M, Mackintosh A, McNeill A. The development of tools to measure norms towards smoking, nicotine use, and the tobacco industry. Public Health Research Consortium. 2017.
4. Paynter J, Edwards R. The impact of tobacco promotion at the point of sale: a systematic review. Nicotine and Tobacco Research. 2009;11(1):25–35.
5. Robertson L, Cameron C, McGee R, Marsh L, Hoek J. Point-of-sale tobacco promotion and youth smoking: a meta-analysis. Tob Control. 2016;25(e2):e83–e9.