South Africa’s vape industry operates in a legislative vacuum, while lawmakers push a tobacco-style bill that could ban flavors and drive consumers to the illicit market. At the heart of the debate is the hostile slogan “harm is harm,” a rhetorical weapon used to erase distinctions between smoking and safer nicotine products.
Shot on location at GFN 2025 in Warsaw, Asanda Gcoyi, CEO of the Vapour Products Association of South Africa, exposes how global NGOs shape local policy, the challenges of youth vaping narratives, and why recognizing relative risk is essential for the country’s smoke-free future.
Featuring:
Asanda Gcoyi
CEO, Vapour Products Association of South Africa
Vapour Products Association of South Africa on X.com
Vapour Products Association of South Africa Website
Transcription:
00:02 - 00:33
[Brent Stafford]
Hi, I'm Brent Stafford and welcome to another edition of RegWatch on GFN.TV. We're here in Warsaw, Poland for the Global Forum on Nicotine, the annual conference on safer nicotine products and tobacco harm reduction. We have a very interesting conversation today. We're going to be discussing the battle to save vaping in South Africa. Asanda, thank you for coming on the show.
00:33 - 00:35
[Asanda Gcoyi]
Thank you for having me.
00:35 - 00:39
[Brent Stafford]
So you're the CEO of the Vapor Products Association of South Africa.
00:39 - 00:41
[Asanda Gcoyi]
That is correct. Yes.
00:41 - 00:50
[Brent Stafford]
So we've done some coverage on South Africa over the years, but I'm afraid I don't know exactly what's going on there. What's the update? Do you still have a ban?
00:50 - 01:16
[Asanda Gcoyi]
We're currently in the middle of parliament hearings where a draft bill was introduced as far back as 2018 that seeks to regulate electronic nicotine delivery systems and they're adding the other nicotine products as well. That process is still not finalized, so we're still operating in that legislative vacuum, unfortunately.
01:16 - 01:20
[Brent Stafford]
So there is no ban, it's just been hanging over your head. Precisely.
01:21 - 01:21
[Asanda Gcoyi]
Precisely.
01:21 - 01:25
[Brent Stafford]
So why is it taking them so long to figure out one way or the other?
01:26 - 02:08
[Asanda Gcoyi]
I think a lot of it has to do with the pushback we've given from an industry point of view, because the current bill does not differentiate between tobacco products and these new safer nicotine products. It seeks to transplant every regulation that is on the tobacco industry into our industry. And that's something that we are completely opposed to. And because we've been opposing it and we've been insisting that they look at the latest science, they sort of drag their feet because quite clearly they don't want to accept what the prevailing science is saying.
02:08 - 02:13
[Brent Stafford]
So has the industry been growing over this time?
02:13 - 03:01
[Asanda Gcoyi]
Yes, the industry has grown quite substantively. I mean, to date, we have over 1.2 million vapers in South Africa, and we don't have the figures yet of users of the other nicotine products. And growth in a legislative vacuum is not a good thing because the industry is quite fragmented. So currently what is governing us as an industry broadly is the self-regulatory measures that our organization has put in place. But those only apply to those businesses that are members of the association. So you've got quite a lot of players that are outside of any structure or framework, which obviously does create problems as we've seen over the past year or so.
03:02 - 03:06
[Brent Stafford]
What arguments have the anti-industry people been making?
03:07 - 03:54
[Asanda Gcoyi]
There's quite a lot of mischaracterization in terms of how these products are classified by our government. Everyone agrees that tobacco products are bad for you, but they're extending that to nicotine as well to say if a product contains nicotine, then it can't be good for you. And now the latest rhetoric is harm is harm, irrespective of the proportion of that harm in any product. So you can tell that they keep shifting the goalpost to find something that they can problematize. And I think it's a way of justifying this approach they want to take, because ultimately we believe they're really pushing to ban certain components that are linked to the industry.
03:54 - 03:58
[Brent Stafford]
So who are the people that are complaining the most?
03:59 - 04:00
[Asanda Gcoyi]
From a government point of view?
04:00 - 04:02
[Brent Stafford]
Yeah, or public health?
04:02 - 05:36
[Asanda Gcoyi]
And I think this is the troubling part for me. So our Department of Health is meant to legislate for the South African public. So it needs to take into account local context. It needs to understand what's happening and try to come up with policies that respond to the need. But now what you see is the voices of the public health organizations that are linked to the Department of Health So they are the ones that are driving the studies, for example, studies that prove that vaping products are not good and vaping products are targeting kids and those kinds of things. So that's the public health side of things. And then you have a very active civil society that is openly supporting the positions of the WHO. We have international NGOs, the likes of Control for Tobacco-Free Kids, which are part of our government decision making processes. I mean, it's something that when we had recently negotiations with government and they had to put together a team. And you had three officials from the Department of Health, and the other three came, one came from Control for Tobacco-Free Kids, one came from a public health institution, and one came from a higher education institution. So, quite obvious, it's quite obvious that it's not just government thinking. There's other external thinking that is involved in all of this process, which is quite problematic.
05:36 - 05:43
[Brent Stafford]
Yeah. And it's campaigned for tobacco-free kids. Yes. And they are heavily supported by Bloomberg.
05:43 - 05:44
[Asanda Gcoyi]
Yes.
05:44 - 05:58
[Brent Stafford]
Yes. But they've come into some issues, I believe, in the Philippines and a couple of other countries for being very involved. Isn't there anything within government that says that this is a bad thing or...
05:59 - 06:44
[Asanda Gcoyi]
They don't see anything wrong with it. I mean, we raised at the very first meeting because they were telling us about this conflict was this vested interest of industry that all we care about is profit and not people's health. And then the question we asked was, but then when you bring in individuals or organizations that have openly opposed uh these industries so then what what does that say about your position so obviously it's not objective you know and we were shot down and told that government has the prerogative to decide who they partner with and they will partner with whomever they want to partner with to further the agenda that they want to put forward
06:45 - 06:47
[Brent Stafford]
That puts you in a bad position, the industry.
06:48 - 06:48
[Asanda Gcoyi]
It does.
06:48 - 06:59
[Brent Stafford]
Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids is known for basically writing legislation and handing it to the government. So do you fear that that's what's going to happen in South Africa?
06:59 - 07:53
[Asanda Gcoyi]
It's already happened. I mean, the bill that we have currently, it's a copy and paste. It's so out of touch with what's happening in South Africa. And a very big thing that is a consideration, South Africa has the highest number of illicit tobacco use in the world. It's estimated at 60%. So if you are going to bring more regulations that seek to ban, that seek to cancel certain components of the industry, then what do you expect is going to happen? Obviously, it's going to exacerbate the tobacco illicit industry. And what we are worried about also is then that could happen to these other products. But we're pushing back. And I think that's the... the way we've managed to take it to where it is right now, where they're forced to listen to us. They have to listen.
07:53 - 07:57
[Brent Stafford]
How is it that you've been able to maneuver the industry into that position?
07:58 - 09:13
[Asanda Gcoyi]
We're quite vocal. I think it's understanding. For us, it's not opinions that we are putting forward. It would be one thing if it was an opinion. It's scientific data. It's data that has been used across the world in other geographies. to really help them in crafting legislation that's fit for purpose. So it would be one thing if there was absolutely no country in the world that has relied on the science. So that's been our push to say other jurisdictions have looked at the science and they've found merit. You don't have to adopt what the likes of the UK have done, for example, because we are different. There are certain safeguards you would need to put in place, but you can't disregard the science. And that's been the greatest push. And I think another big thing that has helped us, the political shift last year, we had our elections last year in the country, and the ruling party for the first time did not have a majority. So we now have a government of national unity with different political parties with different ideologies are now part of government, which is a good thing. So I think that also is enabling the discourse and conversations to keep going.
09:13 - 09:31
[Brent Stafford]
We've heard often from some countries that if the research didn't originate in that country, then they won't utilize it. But you're saying different. They'll actually take the research from other areas and listen to it.
09:32 - 10:36
[Asanda Gcoyi]
Yes. So what we've said is, if you're going to cry that we don't have local research and you're not investing in that research, and when you do, it is to prove a particular point that you want to drive, then that exercise is futile. So we need to balance it out. So there's certain data that is location specific. so the prevalences and all of that stuff yeah get get the data locally but the toxicological aspects of stuff i mean that stuff is you can use that you they even disregarding the cochrane review you know what are you saying but some of the stuff doesn't make sense you know uh so so i think with with this uh new group of legislators they're a lot more open-minded because they've been asking us questions if we had to visit any country in the world you know for a study tour where would you recommend we go? So we've been giving those suggestions. And I guess the fact that they're asking says some are listening.
10:36 - 10:51
[Brent Stafford]
And I think it says a lot, the pushback that you're providing, right? So that is amazing. Let me ask you, even though you're getting some traction, they're still looking to ban flavors, are they?
10:51 - 11:46
[Asanda Gcoyi]
So the current bill, they've written it in such a way that when we say you're looking to burn flavors, they say, show us what it says in the bill. And it doesn't say that, but what it does, there's a clause that says the minister will be given powers to decide what ingredients are used in these products, including flavoring, decide the kind of packaging as well as where and when and who sells these products without undergoing a consultative process. So what that essentially means is that once the bill is passed, then the minister can wake up tomorrow and say, I'm going to ban flavors and he doesn't have to take that to parliament. So that's what we are fighting because they've put it in a smarter way to say, we're not banning it. We just want to give the minister that prerogative should there be a need later on.
11:46 - 11:58
[Brent Stafford]
Right, and it sounds like it doesn't even have a regular regulatory process where there's consultations and so forth. The minister can just decide it. Yeah, that's bad news.
11:58 - 12:35
[Asanda Gcoyi]
That's very bad news, especially when you have a minister who's driven by ideology. I mean, we've got an example from COVID-19 where the vaping products and tobacco products were banned in South Africa. And the minister decided. He did not have to justify his decisions. He just decided and he said it was for public health purposes. And that's what has exacerbated the illicit trade in tobacco in South Africa. So you can't trust one individual to make such decisions that have far-reaching consequences.
12:35 - 12:39
[Brent Stafford]
So during COVID, safer nicotine products were banned.
12:39 - 12:48
[Asanda Gcoyi]
Everything, yes. So alcohol was banned, tobacco products were banned, as well as safer nicotine products were banned. But people still bought them. People still use them.
12:50 - 12:55
[Brent Stafford]
The retail industry, in your association, how strong is that?
12:56 - 13:50
[Asanda Gcoyi]
It's very fragmented. I mean, it helps that we've got members that come from retail manufacturers as well as distributors. But we represent about 65% of the industry in terms of market share. and not necessarily in terms of the number of businesses. And that does have its problems because we as an association are quite vocal. We have one position and we're pushing for a particular position. And then you've got all these other players who are in the periphery who have their own agendas and that's why they wouldn't want to be a part of the association. So I wouldn't say we have a united voice in the industry. You still have those different interests coming out. But our voice, I think, carries more weight because we've been involved right from the beginning.
13:50 - 14:02
[Brent Stafford]
So from the industry's point of view, whether they're in the association or not, is there agreement on tobacco harm reduction or is there some disunity on that?
14:03 - 15:20
[Asanda Gcoyi]
I think what I've seen, I mean, this is, I think it was someone had brought this up that they've seen it in another geography that the guys who started vaping in South Africa, when I say start, so the first guys who opened their businesses, these specialist stores, they were individuals who were driven by harm reduction because they were individuals who they were smokers themselves and it helped them and they opened their stores and wanted to help others. But I'd say over the past four years, the character has changed. It doesn't feel like it's driven by harm reduction as we would like it. So the advocacy component of it is gone from the retail point of view. uh obviously when you ask them they say yeah yeah because we know it's it's for harm reduction but sometimes their actions uh make you think otherwise that you think that this is more for for money making than you know harm reduction but i would say of just globally in terms of the the retail space people do acknowledge that vaping products are indeed less harmful nicotine pouches are less harmful than combustible cigarettes. It's just how I think it's marketed or how they bring out the products to market which is problematic.
15:21 - 15:31
[Brent Stafford]
Are you able to, as a business in South Africa, put out a billboard or sign on the street that says, you know, quit smoking, come on in, you know, use our products?
15:32 - 17:19
[Asanda Gcoyi]
Previously, yes. So what we've done as part of our self-regulatory efforts, we picked up that people were making a lot of false claims in their advertising where they would remove, so instead of safer, it would be these products are safe, you know, and just the advertising, I mean, attracting kids, etc., So that was going on and we decided that because our code of conduct does address issues of advertising and false health claims, it's only applicable to Vipassa members. So we needed to extend it to the entire industry. So we joined an organization called the Advertising Regulatory Board of South Africa that regulates advertising for every product. So you don't have to be a member of anything. for you to fall in line with what they tell you. So from that, we developed a vaping advertising code and it looked at two areas. It was mainly advertising that seeks to attract young people or advertising that is perceived to draw young people, as well as advertising that makes health claims without substantiating them. And that has been successful because then even if you're not a member of Vipassa and you are found to be advertising irresponsibly in billboards, saying things and inviting people who are not smokers, you know, to come buy your products, you can be held to account. And that's what we were driving because in the absence of legislation, we've had to be creative on how we... maintain the integrity of the industry and make sure that the target is adult smokers.
17:20 - 17:23
[Brent Stafford]
How much of an issue is youth vaping?
17:25 - 19:54
[Asanda Gcoyi]
It's, my view is that there is an issue, but it is selective in the sense that, so there's outrage currently on the number of young people who are vaping. There's a recent study that was published by University of Cape Town. It's a very reputable institution for us. And essentially what this research said, we have an epidemic here. South African youth are vaping disposables, what they are addicted to. And it just, I mean, media caught onto it and it was a big, it was a big thing. And so it's good for us to talk about the issue of youth, to acknowledge that yes, young people should not be vaping, but to also understand that they will, they will vape in as much as they will smoke, in as much as they will drink. But where for me it's problematic is the fact that we have more young people in South Africa who are smoking, but there's absolutely no outrage when it comes to that. And it goes back also, I mean, when you look at class in South Africa and racial disparity, the majority of kids who are vaping live in peri-urban, not vaping, smoking, live in rural and peri-urban areas. Cigarettes are cheap, dead cheap. I mean, a pack of cigarettes is, I mean, not less than what, less than a dollar that you can get a pack. And the kids who are vaping are kids who come from more affluent households because the entry point of a vape in South Africa is not that cheap. I mean, it's three times the price of a pack of cigarettes, the illicit stuff. So I always say we need to balance the outrage. If we are outraged, let's... Let's have outrage for everything, you know? It's not okay for young people to smoke. It's not okay for young people to vape. It's not okay for young people to drink. But now, because of where we are and the influences from the likes of Control for Tobacco-Free Kids, this thing of youth vaping has just been blown way out of proportion, in my opinion. And when you look at the figures, you can tell that, I mean, the sample size is so small and you look at how many young people are in South Africa. But it is a topical, it's a topical thing every way we talk about it.
19:54 - 19:59
[Brent Stafford]
Are you able to get time on mainstream media to make those comments?
20:01 - 21:27
[Asanda Gcoyi]
No. No. And for us, the difficulty as well is, so when you speak about the numbers, to say, let's look at, I'm not saying we don't have an issue to deal with. Yes, we do have an issue to deal with. Industry has a responsibility as well, and there are things that industry needs to do differently, you know, to ensure that it plays its part. But when you then take the conversation forward and say, let's be unhappy about the number of young people who are using cigarettes. Why have we forgotten about them, you know? So we have a problem in South Africa. We have a problem overall where young people are concerned. I mean, we have just to think a couple of months ago, we had statistics released on the number of kids who are committing suicide, wellness issues. And all of these are deeply entrenched in the societal issues that we have, high unemployment, It's gender-based violence. There's a whole host of things that are happening in our society that you can't just cherry pick one thing and say, oh, this is a big thing we need to deal with. We need to deal with the surface level issues. And that's the conversation they don't want to have.
21:27 - 21:28
[Brent Stafford]
Could it be deflection?
21:29 - 22:34
[Asanda Gcoyi]
It is. It is. It is. And we are an easy target. The industry is an easy target. Doesn't help that then we've got the bill sitting in parliament. So all of these sentiments obviously are meant to sway the opinion of regulators because it's an emotive topic. You know, people have kids, you've got parents, you've got, you know, so you care about young people. And that's why for me, it's important, you cannot regulate from emotion. You need to make sure that the facts on the ground guide what's happening and come up with safeguards because the conversation of youth is now moving to, Let's ban disposables then. Let's talk about flavors. And those are not the solutions. We need to recognize that, yes, there is a problem. But I think for me, you should expect to have a problem in a place where there's no legislation. It's bound to happen. But we just need to find ways of dealing with it.
22:35 - 22:45
[Brent Stafford]
For me, the issue based on what you're saying is that they go harm is harm. Yes. Well, harm isn't just harm. There is relative risk. And that's so that's not a part of the conversation.
22:46 - 22:59
[Asanda Gcoyi]
No, that's part of our conversation. So we telling them this and you've got they've had opportunities to listen to independent individuals as well who are not linked to industry. But harm is harm.
23:00 - 23:12
[Brent Stafford]
That's quite shocking. That's quite shocking. Could some of this be like just kind of an entrenched attitude towards big tobacco and vaping products are lumped in?
23:13 - 24:50
[Asanda Gcoyi]
I think there's a lot at play. When I spoke about the change in government, the significance of that. So we have a history of legislating from emotion and ideology. And I think our past, I mean, coming out of apartheid, et cetera. So there are certain behaviors or ways of looking at things that were normal for the time, you know. You had to have outrage for you to do something and doing something resulted in the legislation. But we passed that stage. There's data, there's scientific data, empirical data, lived experience. So you need to look at all of these different facets. Your own emotions don't matter anymore. And I always say to the legislators that you are not there for yourself. You've been put there by a constituency because you ran on a particular position. So you're not representing yourself when you're there. Just because you've got a child who has started vaping and you're angry with the industry, you think this industry needs to be punished, you know? And in saying this, it's not to say that industry does not have responsibility. We have a responsibility as well. But I think we need to get to a point where it's a shared responsibility. And those are the conversations that we want to have. And they're starting. I mean, whether they'll result in anything, I don't know. But we need to have the conversations.
24:51 - 25:03
[Brent Stafford]
Isn't there something icky about people being so upset and caught up in this moral panic over something? We're just talking about nicotine. Nicotine without smoke.
25:03 - 25:49
[Asanda Gcoyi]
Yes. And those same individuals say nicotine kills. Nicotine is dangerous. So show me what science are you relying on? Here's the evidence that we've looked at that says otherwise. No, no, no, that evidence could have been backed up by industry because tobacco industry is so powerful. You've got everyone in your pocket. So those are the kinds of responses that you get, you know. So you have to relent. It's just this relentless pushing of information and it gets picked up. Some media does cover it. Some media do give you an opportunity. But I think more and more we're learning we also need to create our own avenues of sharing the information.
25:50 - 25:56
[Brent Stafford]
So we're here at the Global Forum on Nicotine. What do you get out of a conference like this and why is it important?
25:57 - 27:45
[Asanda Gcoyi]
I think this is a good place for people who are in this area of tobacco harm reduction. It's peer sharing information, understanding what has happened in other regions and learnings, etc. But I think for me the beauty of something like this is if you could get the people who are against it to be attending these kinds of things because sometimes it feels like you're preaching to the converted. We all agree on the importance of this but I think beyond just that then because you are unable to get the other side to attend, we are able to learn from each other. For example, today I was on a panel with someone from Canada. Some of what they've gone through and what they did. So those are things that I can take back to South Africa and say, okay, crossroads when Canada was here. this is what happened, maybe let's change tact. So I appreciate these kinds of events and just gatherings of people in the space to help us in fine tuning what it is that we want. We followed the UK for the longest of times. In our self-regulatory frameworks, we looked at what the UK has done. And that's been very good because we are in a position now to sort of preempt what South Africa could look like five years from now. So to avoid that, what do we need to do today to ensure that our policy framework is going to be fit for purpose for a long time to come?