Framing THR: matching messages to audiences and purposes

There is no single THR narrative that works for all audiences. How THR is framed should depend on who is being addressed and why. Equity and health justice arguments may resonate with donors, civil society organisations, and some policymakers, but they are often not persuasive to people who smoke or to more conservative political actors.

In practice, THRSP scholars have used multiple frames:

• For people who smoke and families: autonomy, choice, and reducing harm without moral judgement (e.g. “You don’t have to quit nicotine to reduce harm”).
• For policymakers: pragmatism, cost savings, and reduced healthcare burden.
• For conservative or libertarian audiences: personal responsibility and freedom from state interference.
• For public health audiences: proportionality, evidence, and harm minimisation.

Some THRSP scholars have produced short films and documentaries to explain THR in accessible, human terms, showing real smokers’ experiences rather than abstract data. Others have used storytelling, blogs, or podcasts to normalise switching away from smoking and counter stigma. These approaches often reach audiences that formal policy documents never do.