Why is Sweden so far ahead in pushing cigarettes back?

A combination of history (traditional snus), differentiated taxation, and a coherent harm-reduction policy. It is also a small, homogeneous country, easier to steer.

Will the UK generational ban really work?

Too early to say. It only kicks in from 2027 and many countries are watching. The challenge is actual enforcement (fake ID, black market).

Why is Australia doing worse than expected?

Probably because of the lack of legal alternatives (vape) combined with very high taxes — which creates a huge black market. A purely repressive strategy has its limits.

And France, can it follow these examples?

Hard as things stand: ambiguous vape policy, low visibility of harm reduction. But shifts are possible if political will grows clearer.

The countries that (almost) beat tobacco: Sweden, New Zealand, the UK — lessons to learn

Sweden 5.4%, New Zealand 6.8%, UK 10.6%: these countries have massively cut smoking rates. Here are the policies that actually worked.

July 11, 2026 Aria

The scientific basis on quitting smoking was reviewed on a voluntary basis by Pr. Bertrand Dautzenberg , a tobacco specialist, in order to rule out gross, potentially dangerous errors. It reflects positions commonly shared by health professionals and health agencies, without always corresponding exactly to his thinking or his practice. He is not the author of this text; he has only carried out a vigilance review of it.

For a while, you could have sworn smoking was a global fatality, carved forever into human societies. Yet some countries are now proving the opposite: they have pushed their cigarette-smoking rate below 10%, sometimes even under 5%. How? With which policies?

Sweden — the 'less harmful' bet

The Swedish case is probably the most surprising. With 5.4% daily smokers in 2024 (vs 12.8% in 2008), it became the first European country to approach the WHO 'smoke-free' threshold (<5%).

5.4% of daily smokers in Sweden in 2024 — vs 12.8% in 2008. Sweden shows 41% fewer cancers than the EU average, and 44% fewer tobacco-related deaths. The flip side: snus remains heavily used (15% daily users, i.e. more than 20% daily tobacco users across all forms combined).

Statistics Sweden / OMS, 2024

How?

Tobacco policy must take into account the differing harms of different products. The cigarette poses a greater health risk than smokeless nicotine. This must be reflected in taxation and policy goals.

Swedish tobacco policy, voted in December 2024

Limits

The Swedish model is culturally specific (centuries of snus use) and hard to transpose elsewhere. It is also debated: some experts worry that nicotine remains widely consumed under another form — more than 20% of Swedes are still tobacco users.

New Zealand — the vape bet

New Zealand almost halved its prevalence in 6 years (12.2% in 2018 → 6.8% in 2024). Strategy: actively encourage vaping as a way out of smoking — at the cost of high daily vaping (around 11%), part of it dual users.

The UK — the 'generational ban' bet

The UK has gone for a hybrid strategy: strong vape promotion (the NHS actively recommends vaping to quit) and a generational law inspired by New Zealand.

10.6% of UK adults (18+) smoke in 2024 — the lowest level since records began in 2011.

ONS, November 2025

The Tobacco and Vapes Act 2024-2025

Passed in 2025, this law contains:

The decisive role of vaping

~3 million people in the UK have quit smoking in 5 years thanks to vaping, according to ASH UK estimates.

ASH UK, 2025

In 2024, for the first time, the number of vapers (5.4 million) overtook the number of smokers (4.9 million) in the UK.

Australia — the 'all-prohibition' strategy, mixed results

Australia has gone for a radically different path: prescription-only vape, very high taxes, plain packaging since 2012.

And the other good performers

The 5 lessons to draw

No one-size-fits-all strategy

Sweden (snus), NZ (vape), UK (vape + generational ban) take different paths — they all work.
Access to less harmful alternatives is almost always a key variable.
Prohibition alone does not work

without alternatives, the black market explodes (the Australian case).
Policy continuity matters: the New Zealand U-turn shows how fragile gains can be.
Taxation alone has limits: too high without alternatives = black market.

When smokers get access to lower-risk options, many switch. The principle is simple. Countries that refuse it lose lives.

Filtermag, 2025, on the Swedish model

The counter-example: France

France is neither among the top performers nor the worst. 24% prevalence in 2024 — a historic drop since 2014 (-4 million daily smokers), but far from the champions.

In United Kingdom

Your questions

Why is Sweden so far ahead in pushing cigarettes back?

A combination of history (traditional snus), differentiated taxation, and a coherent harm-reduction policy. It is also a small, homogeneous country, easier to steer.
Will the UK generational ban really work?

Too early to say. It only kicks in from 2027 and many countries are watching. The challenge is actual enforcement (fake ID, black market).
Why is Australia doing worse than expected?

Probably because of the lack of legal alternatives (vape) combined with very high taxes — which creates a huge black market. A purely repressive strategy has its limits.
And France, can it follow these examples?

Hard as things stand: ambiguous vape policy, low visibility of harm reduction. But shifts are possible if political will grows clearer.

sources

Office for National Statistics (UK), Adult smoking habits in the UK 2024, November 2025.
Statistics Sweden / Folkhälsomyndigheten, smoking prevalence data 2024.
Smoke Free Sweden, press releases 2024-2025.
Lancet Global Health, Which countries are ready for a tobacco endgame?, 2024.