Estonia’s smoking rate falls by more than a quarter as vaping more than triples

The figures come from a new briefing by the Global State of Tobacco Harm Reduction (GSTHR), which examines changing nicotine use in Estonia, Ireland and South Korea.

In Estonia, the proportion of adults who currently smoked fell from 26.1 per cent in 2020 to 19 per cent in 2024. That is a fall of 7.1 percentage points, or around 27 per cent compared with the 2020 level.

Over the same period, current vaping rose from 3.8 per cent to 13.5 per cent. Daily vaping increased fourfold, from 1.6 per cent to 6.4 per cent.

Daily smoking also declined, falling from 17.9 per cent in 2020 to 13.2 per cent in 2024.

The figures are based on Estonia’s national Health Behaviour Survey, which covers people aged 16 to 64. The survey is conducted every two years by the country’s National Institute for Health Development.

The latest results show that vaping has become a much more significant part of Estonia’s nicotine market as smoking has fallen. By 2024, daily vaping prevalence was approaching half the level of daily smoking.

Nicotine pouches and heated tobacco products were also being used, although at lower levels. The GSTHR briefing reports that 2.8 per cent of adults used nicotine pouches daily, while 1.2 per cent used heated tobacco products daily.

A possible shift away from cigarettes

The pattern is significant because the changes can be seen in both current and daily use. That makes it less likely that the increase in vaping reflects only occasional experimentation.

The GSTHR authors write that “the simultaneous acceleration in smoking decline and vaping uptake provides one of Europe’s strongest descriptive signals of possible substitution”.

The figures cannot show whether the same people who stopped smoking began vaping. Population-level surveys can identify broad movements over time, but they can’t prove that one behaviour directly caused the other.

The briefing also notes that some people will be using more than one nicotine product. Others may have stopped smoking without taking up vaping at all.

Even with those qualifications, the timing is notable. Smoking had been declining gradually in Estonia before 2020. The fall became sharper over the following four years, while vaping rose quickly.

Estonia hasn’t formally adopted tobacco harm reduction as government policy. Its rules reflect the precautionary approach used in much of the European Union, with restrictions on advertising, flavours, distance sales and vaping in public places.

Vapes and other non-combustible nicotine products have nevertheless remained legally available. The GSTHR report says Estonia shows how “a consumer-led transition can develop without explicit government support, provided that safer alternatives remain sufficiently accessible and acceptable”. That accessibility may now face a test.

New restrictions under consideration

In July 2026, Estonia opened a consultation on draft amendments to its Tobacco Act. The proposals would restrict e-liquid flavours to tobacco and menthol, introduce a nicotine cap of 4mg per gram for nicotine pouches and other products, and ban domestic and cross-border distance sales.

The government’s stated aim is to protect young people. But the GSTHR briefing warns that tighter restrictions could reduce the appeal, effectiveness and availability of legal alternatives for adults who smoke.

Research from the United States has raised similar concerns. A 2024 study published in JAMA Health Forum found that flavoured vape sales restrictions were associated with changes in tobacco use among young adults. A separate study published in Health Economics in 2025 examined comprehensive flavour bans and reported possible increases in cigarette use among some groups.

The GSTHR authors say future survey waves will be important in showing whether Estonia’s smoking decline continues or whether new restrictions interrupt the trend.

The GSTHR briefing argues that youth protection and adult harm reduction can be pursued together. It says governments can restrict youth-oriented promotion while preserving accurate information about relative risk and access to acceptable alternatives for adults who smoke.

For people who continue to smoke, this difference counts. Smoking combustible tobacco remains far more hazardous than using nicotine without combustion.