Publication Date

4-4-2020

Document Type

Article

Organizational Units

Sturm College of Law

Keywords

E-cigarettes, Behavioral law, Economics, Nudges, Boosting, Coercive paternalism, Mandates, Public policy, Loss aversion, Health policy, Health regulation, Smoking, Tobacco regulation

Abstract

After reports of alarming number of teen vaping and deaths associating with e-cigarettes, many countries around the world began imposing complete or partial ban on the sale of e-cigarettes. Notwithstanding, conflicting research claims the health risks of e-cigarettes are less than a tobacco-based cigarette (traditional cigarettes). This has caused uncertainty in a uniform approach towards regulating the use and the sale of e-cigarettes. This article argues that based on findings of behavioral economics, when there is not a widespread social norm shaped by the use of e-cigarettes, coercive paternalism is the best way to eliminate the unwanted health risks associated with the product. In these instances, loss aversion is low and people are more likely to comply with the new law. Moreover, allowing former smokers to use a prescription to purchase e-cigarettes from authorized drug stores can address the research findings indicating that e-cigarettes are safer alternatives to traditional cigarettes. In protecting citizen’s health in democratic states, early restrictive measures prevent the creation of new social norms for an unhealthy behavior, such as smoking e-cigarettes, and thus facilitate subsequent intervention by reducing the inertia associated with loss aversion.

Publication Statement

Copyright held by the authors. User is responsible for all copyright compliance.

Originally published as Zahra Takhshid, Lessons from Regulating E-Cigarettes: A Case of Coercive Paternalism, Nudging, or Behaviorally Informed Boosting? J. OF BIOMEDICAL L. & ETHICS (2020).

Download



Share

COinS