I recently had the opportunity to attend the Kenya Stakeholders’ Forum to Strengthen Tobacco Control Data and Engagement, a meeting that brought together stakeholders to examine some of the issues shaping tobacco control in Kenya.
For me, the forum was more than another meeting about tobacco control. It was an opportunity to reflect on an important question: Do we have the data, policies, taxation systems, and enforcement mechanisms needed to protect Kenyans from the harms of tobacco?
Some of the discussions left me encouraged by the progress Kenya has made. Others reminded me that we still have significant gaps to address.
Data must drive tobacco control
One of the areas discussed was the Tobacco Control Data Initiative – Kenya (TCDI Kenya).
Good policy requires good evidence. Without reliable and accessible data, it becomes difficult to understand who is using tobacco, what products they are using, where those products are reaching consumers, how consumption is changing, and whether our interventions are actually working.
Data should therefore not sit in reports. It should inform decisions.
It should help policymakers determine where to focus enforcement, how to design taxation policies, which populations require targeted prevention and cessation interventions, and how to measure progress.
This is particularly important as Kenya’s tobacco and nicotine landscape continues to evolve.
Tobacco taxation: Kenya can do better
Perhaps the issue that concerned me most was tobacco taxation.
Tobacco taxes are not simply a revenue-generation mechanism. They are a public health intervention.
When tobacco products become more expensive and less affordable, consumption falls. Young people are less likely to initiate tobacco use, and existing users have greater incentives to quit. WHO describes significantly increasing tobacco excise taxes and prices as one of the most effective and cost-effective measures for reducing tobacco use.
Yet Kenya’s tobacco tax levels remain concerning.
During the forum, we discussed that tobacco taxes in Kenya account for approximately 32% of retail prices. Put differently, the tax component represents only about one-third of what consumers pay.
That should make us pause.
The long-established public health benchmark has been around 70% of retail price, while WHO’s current highest best-practice category is 75% or more.
The global comparison is also revealing.
WHO’s 2024 data show that taxes represented an average of 43.5% of the price of a typical cigarette pack in low-income countries, while the corresponding figure for high-income countries was 67.3%.
If Kenya is around 32%, we are below both averages.
This is not simply a matter of comparing Kenya with wealthier countries. It is about asking whether our current tax structure is doing enough to make tobacco less affordable and reduce tobacco consumption.
I believe we need to have a much more serious national conversation about this.
But what about illicit trade?
A common argument against increasing tobacco taxes is that higher taxes will encourage illicit trade.
The concern is legitimate. Illicit tobacco products undermine legitimate taxation, weaken regulation, and can make harmful products more accessible.
But the solution cannot be to keep tobacco taxes low because we are afraid of illicit trade.
The forum reminded me that tax policy and illicit-trade enforcement have to work together.
WHO notes that illicit trade can be addressed even when tobacco taxes and prices are increased. Effective enforcement, strong tax administration, supply-chain controls, and implementation of measures under the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control’s Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade are therefore essential.
In Kenya, this challenge becomes particularly visible when we consider products such as Oris, which we discussed during the forum. Despite being an illegal product, it can reportedly be found widely in the country.
That situation should concern all of us.
If an illegal tobacco or nicotine product can be easily found by consumers, particularly young people, then the issue is no longer simply about whether a law exists. It is about whether the law is being effectively implemented and enforced.
Evidence must translate into action
Another important discussion during the forum was the use of TETSIM projections to understand the potential effects of tobacco control interventions.
This is where I believe data become particularly powerful.
We should not only ask:
What is the prevalence of tobacco use?
We should also ask:
What happens if we increase taxes?
What happens if we strengthen enforcement?
What happens if we improve cessation services?
What happens if we prevent young people from initiating tobacco use?
How many lives could be saved, and how much economic burden could be avoided?
Modelling and surveillance can help policymakers see the potential consequences of different choices before those choices are implemented.
But evidence only becomes valuable when it informs action.
Kenya needs a comprehensive approach
The discussions reinforced for me that Kenya does not have the luxury of treating tobacco control interventions as separate issues.
We need stronger taxation, but taxation must be accompanied by measures to prevent and address illicit trade.
We need better data, but the data must reach policymakers and be translated into decisions.
We need strong legislation, but legislation must be implemented and enforced.
We need cessation support, because people who already use tobacco need help to quit.
And we need to continue protecting tobacco control policymaking from tobacco industry interference, particularly when commercial interests conflict with public health objectives.
The WHO technical guidance is clear that significant tobacco tax increases can reduce consumption while generating additional revenue, but strong tax administration and enforcement are important to achieving these benefits.
The question is whether we will act
I left the forum thinking about the gap between what we know and what we do.
Kenya has evidence.
We have policies.
We have taxation mechanisms.
We have public health institutions.
We have researchers, civil society organizations, healthcare professionals, and advocates working on tobacco control.
What we need is stronger alignment between these pieces.
For me, the message from the forum was clear: tobacco control must be driven by evidence, protected from vested interests, and backed by effective implementation.
If tobacco taxes remain too low, tobacco products remain relatively affordable.
If illegal products remain widely accessible, enforcement gaps will continue to undermine our efforts.
If data are collected but not used, we lose one of our most important tools for accountability.
And if we delay action, the health consequences will continue to accumulate.
Kenya has an opportunity to strengthen its tobacco control response. Raising tobacco taxes, improving enforcement against illicit trade, strengthening data systems, expanding cessation support, and ensuring evidence-based policymaking are not competing priorities.
They are parts of the same public health strategy.
The evidence is increasingly clear. The next step is turning that evidence into action.
#TobaccoControl #TCDIKenya #TobaccoTax #Kenya #NCDs #PublicHealth #IllicitTrade #HealthPolicy #TobaccoIndustryInterference #EndTobacco
ODUOR KEVIN 