Evaluation of the Belgian government’s measures to counteract tobacco industry interference

Abstract Tobacco industry interference remains a major barrier to effective public health policy, undermining tobacco control. Under Article 5.3 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), governments are obligated to protect policymaking from tobacco industry interference. Although Belgium ratified the FCTC in 2005, implementation of Article 5.3 guidelines is incomplete, highlighting the need for systematic monitoring of government responses. This study assesses the Belgian government's efforts to limit tobacco industry interference using the Global Tobacco Industry Interference Index (GTI) methodology, which evaluates seven indicators of interference derived from Article 5.3. A desk review of publicly available sources, including websites of the tobacco industry, front groups, government departments and news articles, was conducted for the period October 2020 to March 2025. Indicators were scored based on the frequency and severity of observed interference. Findings reveal several gaps in the Belgian government's responses to tobacco industry interference. While direct involvement of tobacco companies in policymaking is generally avoided, interactions with front groups such as press shop federations persist. Furthermore, the tobacco industry has agreements with the government on litter management, including financial contributions and co-developed campaigns. Key preventive measures are lacking, such as a transparency register, formal disclosure procedures, and a code of conduct for interactions. Positively, the Interfederal Strategy Tobacco 2022-2028 includes commitments that align with Article 5.3, aiming to establish a transparency register and a code of conduct. This study highlights shortcomings of the Belgian government to prevent tobacco industry interference, illustrating how industry tactics still undermine tobacco control policies. It formulates recommendations for stronger regulatory responses, ensuring alignment with international standards. Key messages • Belgium lacks effective measures to prevent tobacco industry interference, revealing gaps in implementing WHO FCTC Article 5.3. • Findings urge the Belgian government to strengthen regulations, enhance transparency of activities and improve accountability of the tobacco industry.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Journal of Public Health
Published
2025-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckaf161.014
Primary Topic
Smoking Behavior and Cessation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluation of the Belgian government’s measures to counteract tobacco industry interference

Danielle van Kalmthout, Sarah Nayani, Stefanie Vandevijvere, Mathilde Vankelegom et al.
European Journal of Public Health
Smoking Behavior and Cessation
article

Evaluation of the Belgian government’s measures to counteract tobacco industry interference

Danielle van Kalmthout, Sarah Nayani, Stefanie Vandevijvere, Mathilde Vankelegom, Suzannah D’Hooghe, S Cnockaert, S Croes
article en

Abstract

Abstract Tobacco industry interference remains a major barrier to effective public health policy, undermining tobacco control. Under Article 5.3 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), governments are obligated to protect policymaking from tobacco industry interference. Although Belgium ratified the FCTC in 2005, implementation of Article 5.3 guidelines is incomplete, highlighting the need for systematic monitoring of government responses. This study assesses the Belgian government's efforts to limit tobacco industry interference using the Global Tobacco Industry Interference Index (GTI) methodology, which evaluates seven indicators of interference derived from Article 5.3. A desk review of publicly available sources, including websites of the tobacco industry, front groups, government departments and news articles, was conducted for the period October 2020 to March 2025. Indicators were scored based on the frequency and severity of observed interference. Findings reveal several gaps in the Belgian government's responses to tobacco industry interference. While direct involvement of tobacco companies in policymaking is generally avoided, interactions with front groups such as press shop federations persist. Furthermore, the tobacco industry has agreements with the government on litter management, including financial contributions and co-developed campaigns. Key preventive measures are lacking, such as a transparency register, formal disclosure procedures, and a code of conduct for interactions. Positively, the Interfederal Strategy Tobacco 2022-2028 includes commitments that align with Article 5.3, aiming to establish a transparency register and a code of conduct. This study highlights shortcomings of the Belgian government to prevent tobacco industry interference, illustrating how industry tactics still undermine tobacco control policies. It formulates recommendations for stronger regulatory responses, ensuring alignment with international standards. Key messages • Belgium lacks effective measures to prevent tobacco industry interference, revealing gaps in implementing WHO FCTC Article 5.3. • Findings urge the Belgian government to strengthen regulations, enhance transparency of activities and improve accountability of the tobacco industry.

European Journal of Public HealthVol. 35(Supplement_4)
Vrije Universiteit Brussel (BE), Monsanto (Canada) (CA), Food and Nutrition Service (US), Royal Belgian Society for Surgery (BE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 61%
Smoking Behavior and Cessation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.