Evaluating the long term impact of Scotland’s Tobacco and Vaping Retail Register

About the study

The Tobacco and Vapes Act 2026 provides powers to introduce a new retail licensing scheme in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for tobacco, vapes and nicotine products and strengthens Scotland’s existing retail register. 

A Scottish Tobacco Retail Register (STRR) was implemented in Scotland in April 2011 with the aim of preventing underage people from accessing tobacco products, and amended in 2017 to include e-cigarettes and vapes.

The Scottish Centre for Social Research (ScotCen) was commissioned by Cancer Research UK to draw insights from the Scottish Tobacco Retail Register to identify transferable policy lessons for a potential registration and/or licensing scheme in England and the rest of the UK. This current review builds on a previous evaluation of the Scottish Tobacco Retail Register conducted by ScotCen in 2017 for Cancer Research UK. 

Findings

Operational benefits were highlighted in interviews, with stakeholders agreeing  that the Tobacco and Vapes register provides a strong national-level dataset which is widely used in research to understand retail availability. Enforcement stakeholders reported that it helps them identify retailers quickly and communicate statutory requirements consistently. The expansion to nicotine vapour products was also viewed positively because it reflects changes in the retail market and supports work to understand issues such as youth access to vapes.

The evidence also highlighted challenges that limit the register’s impact on enforcement, research and public health. The most commonly reported issue is the accuracy of information on the register, such as incorrect or incomplete addresses and duplicate entries, which reduce confidence in the data and make it difficult for enforcement officers to use the register to issue fixed penalties. 

The impact of the register on retail practice and public health was perceived to be limited. Stakeholders believed most retailers comply with the requirement to register but felt that registration alone does not influence decisions about stocking tobacco or nicotine products. 

International evidence from the literature review provided insight into alternative approaches to tobacco control and retail enforcement. Countries or areas that operate licensing schemes with fees have seen reductions in tobacco retailer density, often accompanied by stronger enforcement powers and more clarity on what is expected of retailers. 

In interviews, suggested modifications to strengthen the register included ways to improve the accuracy of data collected such as introducing verification of addresses, improving the online platform, adding new data fields such as sales volumes, and expanding the scope to include all new nicotine products and online retailers. Many also supported moving towards a conditional register or a licensing scheme with fees, particularly as a way to reduce the availability of tobacco and vapes in areas near schools and in more deprived communities. A fee was viewed as a potential disincentive to sell tobacco products, although stakeholders stressed that this must be communicated clearly and supported by adequate resource for enforcement.

When considering transferrable lessons from the Scottish Tobacco and Vapes register, a number of key policy implications have emerged from this review:

• The introduction of a registration or licensing scheme should form one part of a coherent strategy and policy approach working towards the Smokefree UK target. 
• Sufficient resource should be available to ensure effective enforcement of any new registration or licensing scheme. 
• The data collected by a licensing or registration scheme should be of sufficient detail and quality to allow its use in enforcement activity and research. 
• In a rapidly changing retail landscape where both new products and methods of sale are constantly developing, a new licensing or registration scheme should remain adaptable and responsive to the emerging market. 
• In decisions around whether to introduce a licensing fee for retailers, there should be careful consideration of appropriate amount and fee structure. 

Methodology

The report consists of a literature review and qualitative interviews with 12 stakeholders from academia, public health, enforcement and third sector/advocacy groups. These two strands were analysed together to identify cross cutting themes and transferable lessons for England.