Evidence on Article 5.3 of FCTC (Tobacco Industry Interference in Tobacco Control Activities) in India - A Qualitative Scoping Study

Abstract

Background: Tobacco Industry (TI) strives to portray itself as being “socially responsible” and contest for pertinent decision-making positions, which it uses to deter, delay or dilute tobacco control measures. There is little documented evidence of Tobacco Industry Interference (TII) from India, the scope of their interference and challenges faced by the experts for effective tobacco control.Methods: A cross-sectional qualitative research design, based upon in-depth interviews (N=26), was used to explore the opinion of key stakeholders regarding TII in India. The interview schedule collected information about the socio-demographic information of the study participant, the participant’s roles and responsibilities in tobacco control, the nature of TII faced by the participant, means of influence by TI, barriers and challenges to tobacco control efforts using a set of questions. Principles of the ‘grounded theory’ were used to understand beliefs and thoughts of key-experts about TII in India, its interactions and interference at various levels. Results: Most of the respondents were engaged in tobacco control, training, advocacy, and awareness generation activities from the last 5-10 years or more. The respondents defined the TI and its scope as per their experience. We identified six major domains (Influencing the policy and administrative decisions, Interference with implementation of tobacco control laws and activities, False propaganda and hiding the truth, manipulating front action groups, Rampant tobacco advertising and promotion activities, and others) under which TII activities can be classified comprehensively. Conclusions: The activity documented a significant level of TII in different domains with stakeholders acting at various hierarchical levels. This can help to provide insights about the nefarious tactics of TI, enable stakeholders to anticipate and pre-empt the kinds of alliances the TI may attempt to build, stimulate academicians and researchers to undertake in-depth analysis into various strategies and underscore the need for ensuring transparency in official interactions with the TI and their representatives.

Exploring the influence of food labels and advertisements on eating habits of children: a cross-sectional study from Punjab, India

“…Despite being opposed vehemently, In June 2016, the first phase of the Chilean Food Labelling and Advertising Law and initial assessments reported the benefits of such legislation [ 55 ]. This case study highlights that implementing effective food labels may not be easy and will face strong resistance from the industrialist due to deep-rooted industry interference similar to what has been documented for the tobacco [ 56 ]. Hence, a large-scale advocacy drive is required in this regard involving different levels of stakeholders.…”

Tobacco Endgame: Can India Share the Dream?

“…They recommended that the focus be shifted to supply reduction measures for tobacco elimination, indicating mass appeal and acceptability. 20, 21, 22…”

“…They recommended that the focus be shifted to supply reduction measures for tobacco elimination, indicating mass appeal and acceptability. 20,21,22 Considering the feasibility of a generational fade-out plan, one is faced with multiple sociocultural challenges. Epidemiological studies have reported the practice of smoking beedi (indigenous, hand-rolled cigarette, tobacco flakes rolled in a leaf ) in a large majority of South East Asian smokers, a market that continues largely unregulated in India.…”

Tobacco Industry and Surrogate Advertising in South East Asia Region: Moves and Countermoves

“…More than 70% of tobacco consumers reported that advertisements by tobacco companies inspired their tobacco brand and product preferences, while >80% agreed that advertisements can alter consumer perceptions about the product advertised. 8, 22…”

“…8,22 Timeline of Tobacco Advertisements and Control Measures in the South East Asia Region. Report of the Advisory Committee to the Surgeon General of the United States published in 1964.…”