Background
Methods
Study design
Study settings and participants
Inclusion criteria
Sample and sampling method
Study tool
Data collection
Analysis
Ethics considerations
Results
Institute 1 | Institute 2 | Total | |
---|---|---|---|
Total | 14 (100) | 12 (100) | 26 (100) |
Sex | |||
Male | 11 (78.6) | 11 (91.7) | 22 (84.6) |
Female | 3 (21.4) | 1 (8.3) | 4 (15.4) |
Age | |||
25-45 years | 3 (21.4) | 5 (41.7) | 8 (30.8) |
45-above | 5 (35.7) | 5 (41.7) | 10 (38.5) |
Not mentioned | 6 (42.8) | 2 (16.6) | 8 (3.8) |
Position | |||
Civil society representative | 6 (42.8) | 5 (41.7) | 11 (42.3) |
Program manger | 4 (28.6) | 3 (25) | 7 (26.9) |
Researcher | 3 (21.4) | 3 (25) | 6 (23.1) |
Policy maker | 1 (7.2) | 1 (8.3) | 2 (7.7) |
Occupation status | |||
In service | 8 (57.1) | 11 (91.7) | 19 (73.1) |
Retired | 1 (7.1) | 1 (8.3) | 2 (7.7) |
Self employed | 5 (35.7) | – | 5 (19.2) |
Organization | |||
Government | 5 (35.7) | 5 (41.7) | 10 (38.5) |
Non-Government | 4 (28.5) | 7 (58.3) | 11 (42.3) |
Private | 5 (35.7) | – | 5 (19.2) |
Years of Association with tobacco control | |||
5–10 years | 10 (71.4) | 5 (41.7) | 15 (57.7) |
11–20 years | 2 (14.3) | 5 (41.7) | 7 (26.9) |
20 years above | 2 (14.3) | 2 (16.6) | 4 (15.4) |
“TI are various kinds of people who lead or who are part of tobacco production and selling (tobacco). Whosoever works for furthering the interests of TI are also part of TI; they may be peers, packagers, marketers, or advertisers are also TI.” (One respondent).
“It's an established industry which is present in both organized and unorganized industry and it is well connected (politically).” (a health professional)
Stakeholders | Average score (N = 10) |
---|---|
Manufacturer | 9 |
Wholesaler | 6.8 |
Vendors | 6.2 |
Advertisers | 7 |
PR Company | 6.7 |
Government with tobacco stocks | 5.8 |
Government without tobacco stocks | 2.2 |
Tobacco union workers | 4.6 |
Farmers | 3.8 |
Farmers corporations | 4 |
Pension funds and other Financial incentive schemes | 2.6 |
Banks and financial institutions | 3.6 |
Bidi rollers | 4.6 |
Politicians | 5 |
Bureaucrats | 4 |
Civil Society Organization | 3.6 |
Hospitality Industry | 0.6 |
Themes | Sub-themes |
---|---|
Influencing the policy and administrative decisions | Projected revenue generation and livelihood creation |
Providing sponsorships for government events & political parties | |
Using policy loopholes | |
Offering undue favors | |
Lack of prioritization towards tobacco control | |
Interference with implementation of tobacco control laws and activities | Interference in the judiciary system |
Interfering with work of tobacco control officials | |
Interference in functioning of NGOs who work on tobacco control | |
Prompting sellers for non-cooperation with tobacco control officials | |
False propaganda and hiding the truth | Exaggerating the economic impact of tobacco and loss of livelihood |
Hiding facts about tobacco harms | |
Promoting CSR activities to gain social respectability | |
Hiding involvement in sponsored events | |
Misguiding tobacco growers | |
Manipulating through front action groups | Instigating protests and non-cooperation |
Threatening tobacco shop owners | |
Rampant tobacco advertising and promotion activities | Promoting surrogate advertisements |
Creating new customer base with attractive offers | |
Support and bonus for tobacco shops and vendors | |
Others | Evidence of Government honoring tobacco industry officials |
Poor awareness on harmful effects of tobacco among ancillary stakeholders of tobacco industry | |
Lack of cohesion at institutional levels for tobacco control discussion at state and national level | |
Lack of understanding and support for tobacco control initiatives | |
Situational priority i.e. tobacco control taking backseat over other priority issues |
Tobacco industry role players | Theme 1 (Influencing the policy and administrative decision) | Theme 2 (Interference with implementation of tobacco control laws and activities) | Theme 3 (False propaganda and hiding the truth) | Theme 4 (Manipulating front action groups) | Theme 5 (Rampant TAPS activities) | Theme 6 (Others) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Manufacturer | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Wholesaler | Y | Y | Y | Y | ||
Vendors | Y | Y | Y | |||
Advertisers | Y | Y | Y | |||
PR Companies | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Government with tobacco stocks | Y | Y | Y | Y | ||
Government without tobacco stocks | Y | Y | Y | |||
Tobacco union workers | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | |
Farmers | Y | Y | Y | |||
Farmers corporations | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | |
Pension funds and other financial incentives schemes | Y | Y | ||||
Banks etc. | Y | Y | Y | |||
Bidi rollers | Y | Y | Y | Y | ||
Politicians | Y | Y | Y | Y | ||
Bureaucrats | Y | Y | Y | Y | ||
Civil Society Organizations | Y | Y | Y | Y | ||
Hospitality Industry | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Interference of tobacco industry with tobacco control activities
Influencing the policy and administrative decisions
“TI are spending crores of money in various states. They are sponsoring a lot of money in the food industry.” (A tobacco control advocate)
The participants felt that TI creates an impression of ‘no immediate threat associated with tobacco’ among the public, which results in a lack of public pressure on policymakers and politicians in framing effective tobacco control policies.“Recently we had got a governmental order issued for increased taxation on tobacco products which was immediately reversed by our Government, possibly due to pressure (of TI). Similarly, political leaders opposed the ban of Gutka (oral chewable tobacco) in the parliament on the pretext of loss of income of farmers” (A tobacco control advocate)
The respondents also shared the information that many political parties and officials in the Government receive favors from TI, which undermine tobacco-related policy decisions.“Unlike accidents and epidemics, tobacco use is not seen as an immediate danger to politicians and public, which is effectively utilized by TI. Whenever we go to public for a raid (COTPA enforcement), they question, 'why don't you close the tobacco companies rather than making the people suffer?” (A government official)
Tobacco is still not considered an illegal product and no license is needed for processing, manufacturing or selling tobacco products, unlike liquor by the law of the land. TI uses this argument to convince policymakers to make tobacco products easily accessible at various Point of Sales.“In one of our state’s budgets, the then minister declared a 5% VAT on bidis, which was immediately reversed to zero percent on the behest of TI, which we could be due to interference from the TI.” (A government official)
TI takes advantage of slow legal proceedings and poor implementation of tobacco control laws. The conflicting orders from different ministries provide the opportunity for the TI to carry out promotional activities.“The biggest challenge for us is that we are one of the largest tobacco-growing and exporting countries. It's not an illegal product. TI use this argument for its easy accessibility in markets” (A health professional)
The participants reported undue favours being offered by the higher officials of the Government from the TI representatives in the form of gift hampers or financial support to the organizations, as a tool to influence them to take policy decisions at the behest of TI.“TI has people who find loopholes in government policie, which leads to slowing of legal proceedings.” (A government official)
Most of the respondents felt that the TI uses existing corruption within the system and week political setup to their benefit.“One of the Corporation officials daughter’s marriage was completely sponsored by a Gutka industry, starting from booking marriage hall to buying jewelry which was almost everything for the wedding.” (A tobacco control activist)
“TI tries to build pressure through their political representatives to delay or dilute the policies.” (A participant).
Few of the respondents threw light on how TI manipulates policy making and implementation by challenging such procedures in the court by using fake documents and poorly generated scientific evidence. Respondents reported witnessing instances when the TI used artificial self-sponsored researches in its favour.“Vested interests of politicians results in lack of their will to combat Tobacco menace.” (A participant)
“Smokeless tobacco lobby always tries to threaten them (Government officials). They also support high-level officials to refine the fake evidence which are provided by TI in support of their business.” (A respondent)
Interference with the implementation of tobacco control laws and activities
“TI has top level lawyers who challenge every favorable decision on tobacco control in the court of law, to dilute its effective implementation” (A tobacco control advocate).
“After a state high court had given an order about the 85% pictorial warning on tobacco packets, TI went to court several times which delayed its implementation.” (An academician and researcher)
“TI representatives met me with an only agenda to stop supporting govt. initiatives in tobacco control program.” (A public health activist)
“TI threatened me for implementing tobacco control activities in my state and even filed many RTIs to build the pressure.” (A government official)
“Sometimes, when we are creating awareness among shopkeepers, some agents used to come from a particular company, and question us why are we stopping their business?” (A tobacco cessation expert)
Most of the respondents said that the TI creates a non-cooperative attitude among the distributors and point-of-sale owners by providing various incentives like installing and replacing advertisement boards removed during enforcement drives or compensating for losses in case of seizers or challans.“Foundation for Smoke Free World associated with a multinational tobacco company, is trying to influence people who are working for tobacco control. This foundation approached many tobacco control advocates through in-person meetings and mails by presenting favours. The foundation approached President of an association but he denied their proposal. I sense that TI has used its financial muscle power to cancel FCRA licence of many associations.” (A respondent)
“A point-of-sale owner told me that TI people came to him to reimburse the challan (fine) and even replaced his advertisement boards that were removed during the enforcement drives” (An academician and researcher)
Most of the stakeholders opined that there is a shortage of awareness at all levels, i.e. among the stakeholders, the enforcers, the policymakers and the masses, which hinders the proper implementation of the tobacco control laws.“TI instructs the sellers of cool lips (a flavored form of smokeless tobacco) to distribute among the children for which they paid incentives.” (A tobacco control enforcing official)
“Lack of awareness and passion for tobacco control is the root cause of the challenges that came up during the implementation of tobacco control policies in the state.” (A Deputy Director working in tobacco control)
False propaganda and hiding of truth
“TI offered to support our school intervention program, and we denied it” (A tobacco control expert)
By discrediting scientific evidence, TI misguides the existing and future customers and discourages tobacco users from quitting.“Earlier, we (in NGO) used to carry out tobacco control activities in collaboration with other NGOs. But, when the tobacco companies started CSR activities, they started funding many NGOs, which resulted in rifts between NGOs to garner funds from them (TI).” (A leading tobacco control advocate)
Some respondents reported misleading claims by TI representatives of being a support for global tobacco regulation that aligns with the FCTC“They (TI) are advocating that the tobacco is not harmful, tobacco is not causing cancer. They have many such studies (false evidence) to prove their statements”. (An academician and researcher)
Tobacco growing is the only means of earning for a section of people. The TI doesn’t want the tobacco growers to switch to other means of livelihood.“A person who worked for tobacco control, later joined as the head of ‘Foundation for Smoke Free World’, an initiative by a leading multinational tobacco company, wrote a mail to about 300 people all over the globe to join their organization and the people who did not know much about TI easily accepted his proposal.” (A Behavioral Scientist)
“Most of them, either tobacco growers, or tobacco users are not aware of the big industry involved. Only middlemen are aware of the industry nexus.” (A leading health professional)
Manipulating front action groups
“Smokeless tobacco lobby always tries to threaten our staff” (An Executive Director of an NGO)
“TI tries their best efforts to influence public health policies by providing them with policy loopholes and manipulating the facts. They are all directed towards the single motive of increasing their business.” (A Manager working with an NGO)
With a vested interest, the tobacco company instigates the front action groups to protest tobacco control laws citing livelihood issue and harassment.“When we asked them (tobacco sellers), why they were again selling (tobacco), they said that it was because of physical threat (from tobacco dealers)” (A tobacco cessation advocate)
“I’m working closely with the government tobacco control cell. Recently, they have instigated the retailers to protest, over the livelihood issue.” (A leading health professional working for an NGO)
Rampant TAPS activities
“They do things indirectly, and it is like hide and seek game with them (tobacco companies); because, surrogate advertisements are still there, which we (government) need to find or somebody has to inform us.” (A public health professional)
Besides, TI uses different tactics to create a new customer base and maintain the existing one. Lowering of price and selling components separately is another tactic.“We have also taken efforts to stop various competitions sponsored by tobacco industry like 'Sun-feast competition', 'Spell bee', and 'Mangal deep' singing competitions. These are against that order (Order 242).” (An advocate)
“We got to know that the TI came up with two cigarette contained pack. So, that it is a pack (tobacco pack) and not a loose cigarette.” (An academician)
Flavoured chewable tobacco products at point-of-sale attract new customers, especially students and children.“We convinced the new government to ban Gutkha. But, since then, Gutkha is being marketed with tobacco and betel leaves separately in smaller packets and in reduced rates.” (An academician).
TI provides financial support in reimbursement for the penalty imposed by officials and bonuses for selling tobacco products. This encourages the tobacco sellers and vendors to continue promoting tobacco products despite legal actions.“We had recently faced difficulty to seize a product named ‘Cool lips’. This is a chewable form of tobacco sold like chocolates targeting the school children. The pictures of the product are also available on the internet.” (A tobacco control enforcing official).
“Cigarette companies and dealers used to promote their products by giving some bonus or cash prizes to the shopkeepers; they (shopkeepers) want that also.” (A tobacco cessation advocate)
Others
Challenges faced and the factors pertaining to the same
Tactic | Goal | Key stakeholders for tobacco industry | Example | Violation or contradiction to the guiding principles of article 5.3 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Intimidation | Use its power to harass and threaten tobacco control community | Politician and bureaucrats | Recent cancellation of permissions of tobacco control organisations | Clause 3, 9 |
Creating alliances and front groups | Present exaggerated and widespread negative impact tobacco control legislation/ tobacco control policies | Civil society, farmers networks etc. | FAIFA, State level farmers associations All India Bidi Federation | Clause 19 Recommendation 1.2 |
Supporting Government agencies that assist tobacco sector | Garner support from within the government | Ministries of Finance, Labour, Agriculture, Commerce, Tobacco Board | Various policy measures | Clause 3, 13,20,21 Recommendation 2.1, 3.1, 7.1 |
Political funding | Contribute to local and national political parties for campaign and seek favours from elected politicians | Political parties and party leaders | ITC annual reports Report of various tracts through which political funding is routed | Clause 22–23, 26–27 Recommendation 4.10, 4.11,6.4 |
Lobbying | Influence political and decision-making processes by presenting specious data and distracting officials from tobacco control | Front groups, PR firms | Lobbying by PR firms during Committee of Subordinate Legislation on pack warning (2015–16), TII | Clause 24–25 Recommendation 5.2 |
Litigation | Challenge laws and intimidate tobacco control advocates | Vendors, farmer associations, vested interest groups, Industry | Ghodawat pan masala pvt. ltd v/s the state of Maharashtra and others (WP no. 1632 OR 2012); | Recommendation 6. |
Public relations | Shape public opinion by using media to and promote positions favourable to the tobacco industry and its allies | Media houses, PR companies, Government flagship programmes | Participation of tobacco companies in Government flagship programmes as a part of CSR | Clause 26–27 Recommendation 6.1,6.2 |
Philanthropy and Corporate Social Responsibility | Re-normalise and re-legitimize tobacco with society; gain social respectability by participating in social and economically relevant issues. | Through reputed NGOs and government schemes | Support neglected areas of investment. Eg: GPI supports vendors in flood affected areas by creating tobacco vends Partner with Govt in its flagship schemes like Swachh Bharat Abhiyan etc., floods/drought situation/ pandemic | Clause 26–27 Recommendation 6.2 |
Participate in decision making with government | Promise investments to state government | Industry associations and government bodies | Investments promised by ITC, GPI, and DS Group to states | Clause 28–29 Recommendation 7.1,7.2,7.3 |