Background The preservation of the economic livelihood of tobacco farmers is a common argument used to oppose tobacco control measures. However, little empirical evidence exists about these livelihoods. We seek to evaluate the economic livelihoods of individual tobacco farmers in Malawi, including how much money they earn from selling tobacco, and the costs they incur to produce the crop, including labour inputs. We also evaluate farmers’ decisions to contract directly with firms that buy their crops. Methods We designed and implemented an economic survey of 685 tobacco farmers, including both independent and contract farmers, across the six main tobacco-growing districts. We augmented the survey with focus group discussions with sub-sets of respondents from each region to refine our inquiries. Results Contract farmers cultivating tobacco in Malawi as their main economic livelihoods are typically operating at margins that place their households well below national poverty thresholds, while independent farmers are typically operating at a loss. Even when labour is excluded from the calculation of income less costs, farmers’ gross margins place most households in the bottom income decile of the overall population. Tobacco farmers appear to contract principally as a means to obtain credit, which is consistently reported to be difficult to obtain. Conclusions The tobacco industry narrative that tobacco farming is a lucrative economic endeavour for smallholder farmers is demonstrably inaccurate in the context of Malawi. From the perspective of these farmers, tobacco farming is an economically challenging livelihood for most.

Tobacco control norms have gained momentum over the past decade. To date 43 of 47 Sub-Saharan African countries are party to the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). The near universal adoption of the FCTC illustrates the increasing strength of these norms, although the level of commitment to implement the provisions varies widely. However, tobacco control is enmeshed in a web of international norms that has bearing on how governments implement and strengthen tobacco control measures. Given that economic arguments in favor of tobacco production remain a prominent barrier to tobacco control efforts, there is a continued need to examine how economic sectors frame and mobilize their policy commitments to tobacco production. This study explores the proposition that divergence of international norms fosters policy divergence within governments. This study was conducted in three African countries: Kenya, Malawi, and Zambia. These countries represent a continuum of tobacco control policy, whereby Kenya is one of the most advanced countries in Africa in this respect, whereas Malawi is one of the few countries that is not a party to the FCTC and has implemented few measures. We conducted 55 key informant interviews (Zambia = 23; Kenya = 17; Malawi = 15). Data analysis involved deductive coding of interview transcripts and notes to identify reference to international norms (i.e. commitments, agreements, institutions), coupled with an inductive analysis that sought to interpret the meaning participants ascribe to these norms. Our analysis suggests that commitments to tobacco control have yet to penetrate non-health sectors, who perceive tobacco control as largely in conflict with international economic norms. The reasons for this perceived conflict seems to include: (1) an entrenched and narrow conceptualization of economic development norms, (2) the power of economic interests to shape policy discourses, and (3) a structural divide between sectors in the form of bureaucratic silos.

Introduction Tobacco production continues to increase in low- and middle-income countries creating complications for tobacco control efforts. There is the need to understand and address the global tobacco leaf supply as a means of decreasing tobacco consumption and improving farmers livelihoods in line with Article 17 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. This study aims to understand the reasons why farmers grow tobacco and identify factors that influence these reasons. Methods Primary survey data (N = 1770) collected in Kenya, Malawi, and Zambia in the 2013–2014 farming season. Data analysis uses both descriptive and multinomial logistical regression methods. Results Majority of farmers started and are currently growing tobacco because they believed it was the only economically viable crop. Compared with Malawi, farmers in Kenya and Zambia have a 0.2 and 0.4 lower probability of growing tobacco, respectively because they perceive it as the only economically viable crop, but a 0.04 and 0.2 higher probability of growing tobacco, respectively because they believe it is highly lucrative. There are district/county differences in the reasons provided with some districts having a majority of the farmers citing the existence of a ready market or incentives from the tobacco industry. Statistically significant factors influencing these reasons are the educational level and age of the household head, land allocated to tobacco and debts. Conclusion There is the need to address the unique features of each district to increase successful uptake of alternative livelihoods. One consistent finding is that farmers' perceived economic viability contributes to tobacco growing. Implications This study finds that perceived economic viability of tobacco is the dominant factor in the decisions to grow tobacco by smallholder farmers in Malawi, Kenya, and Zambia. There is the need to more deeply understand what contributes to farmers' perceived viability of a crop. Understanding and addressing these factors may increase the successful uptake of alternative livelihoods to tobacco. Furthermore, this study demonstrates that a one-size fits all alternative livelihood intervention is less likely to be effective as each district has unique features affecting farmers' decisions on growing tobacco.

Purpose Policy misalignment across different sectors of government serves as one of the pivotal barriers to WHO Framework convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) implementation. This paper examines the logic used by government officials to justify providing investment incentives to increase tobacco processing and manufacturing in the context of FCTC implementation in Zambia. Methods We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews with key informants from government, civil society and intergovernmental economic organizations (n=23). We supplemented the interview data with an analysis of public documents pertaining to economic development policy in Zambia. Results We found gross misalignments between the policies of the economic sector and efforts to implement the provisions of the FCTC. Our interviews uncovered the rationale used by officials in the economic sector to justify providing economic incentives to bolster tobacco processing and manufacturing in Zambia: 1) tobacco is not consumed by Zambians/tobacco is an export commodity, 2) economic benefits outweigh health costs, and 3) tobacco consumption is a personal choice. Conclusions Much of the struggle Zambia has experienced implementing the FCTC can be attributed to misalignments between the economic and health sectors. Zambia’s development agenda seeks to bolster agricultural processing and manufacturing. Tobacco control proponents must understand and work within this context of economic development in order to foster productive strategies with those working on tobacco supply issues. These findings are broadly applicable to the global analysis on the barriers and facilitators of FCTC implementation. It is important that the Ministry of Health monitors the tobacco policy of other sectors and engages with these sectors to find ways of harmonizing FCTC implementation across sectors.

Tobacco farming households enter into contract with tobacco companies to realise perceived economic benefits. The narrative that tobacco farming is a lucrative economic undertaking for smallholder farmers, however, is inaccurate in the context of Kenya.