Tobacco Consumption in Rural India

Tobacco Consumption in Rural India - Study

SIBM PUne
Nishant Jindal (33158
Mukesh Gudge(33153)
Aditya Khanzode(33161)
Sahil Rohmetra(33174)

Rural Marketing
[Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of the document. Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of the document.]

FMCG Industry Category Breakup

Introduction * FMCG Industry is $25 billion. Out of which 15% is contributed by Tobacco industry. * Recent shifts in global tobacco consumption indicate that an estimated 930 million of the world's 1.1 billion smokers live in developing countries,2 with 182 million in India alone * Statistics by the ministry reveal that about 15 per cent of tobacco consumption in India is in the form of cigarettes while 53 per cent is smoked as bidis. * 32 per cent of tobacco consumption is in the form of traditional tobacco products like chewing "khaini", gutka etc. * More than 800 billion bidis are sold in India each year compared with 100 billion cigarettes sold annually.
We knew there is a huge difference between tobacco consumption pattern in tobacco consumption pattern in Rural and Urban India. While Urban market is dominated by Cigarettes and Guthka. The rural market is primarily dominated by Khaini(raw tobacco which is consumed by keeping it between buccal Cavity) and biddi ( which is largely small scale and unorganized industry) We tried to understand the rural dynamics of Tobacco consumption. Our Test villages are NUSRAPUR, Khed Shivapur, Sarola which is near Pune (around 50 Kms on Pune Banglore Highway)

Objectives 1) Selling pattern of various forms of Tobacco 2) Reach of Various companies in Rural Regions 3) Consumption pattern of Various forms of Tobacco 4) Factors affecting selling of various brands 5) Financial effects of tobacco consumption 6) Awareness of adverse effects of Tobacco

Working Procedure
We did exploratory research in rural markets of the villages named above. We talked to various Shopkeepers (Paan Beedi Shop) and rural consumers. We did Multilevel cross sectional analysis of consumption pattern of tobacco in India

Outcome measures
Our analysis used two dichotomous outcomes, based on the responses to the questions: “Does `household member' chew paan masala or tobacco?” and “Does `household member' smoke?” In addition, a combined measure of participants who smoke and chew tobacco was constructed in order to assess the distribution of consuming any tobacco. In our sample the overall prevalence for smoking was 18.4% and for chewing 21.0%; the combined prevalence was 32.9%.

Various Cigarette Brand Available in Rural Market (ITC) * Navy Cut * Classic * Classic Mild * Classic Ultra Mild (Not found in Rural Market) * Classic Menthol * Small Gold Flake (Second Highest Selling brand) * Gold Flake Classic * Insignia (Not found in Rural market) * India Kings (Not found in Rural Market) * Silk Cut (Not found in Rural Market) * Scissors (Not found in Rural Market) * Capstan (Not found in Rural Market though it’s a cheaper brand) * Berkeley * Bristol (Highest Selling brand in our test subject) * Flake
Other Non ITC Brands Available in India * Charminar * Red and White * Marlboro (Hardly available in Rural market) * MORE (Surprising selling 2-3 packets a day in one store) * Gudang Garam ( Though one of the most expensive one but still selling in Rural market) * Four Square
Points about Cigaratte Consuption 1) Cheaper brands are sold more than expensive brands for obvious reasons 2) Bristol is the highest selling brand with sales of 15-20 packs daily per retail shop. (one rupee margin on pack of 10) 3) Second most selling is Gold Flake with retail price of 38 MRP and margin of 2 rupees. 4) Non ITC brand available is Charminar(filtered/non filtered) which gives a margin of 1 rupee (retail price of 24 rupees) and it is not selling much
Point to be noted – ITC has deep penetration in Rural Markets and small players are not able to stand against it in Cigarette market.

“BIDI Consuption”
Brands available 1) Shivaji (Rs. 8/25 Pieces) (local brand) 2) Kainchi (Rs. 8/25 Pieces) (local brand) 3) Mayna Bidi (West Bengal Dutta Puliya padiya) 4) Sambha ji (Rs. 8/25 Pieces)

Highest Selling is Shivaji and Kainchi * They sell about 50 packets daily from each shop * Margin (50 paise per packet)

Raw tobacco (khaini)
Brands Availaible * Gai chaap (3 Rs.) (One retailer sells 200 packet per day with margin of 50P margin) * Chaini Khaini * Raja Chap Khaini * Miraj Khaine Produced in Nathdwada in Rajasthan and distributed from Pune to all villages around Pune.

Highest selling brand is Gai Chaap and it sells at premium of 1 Rs.
People have a perception of High Taste and Quality about Gai Chaap.

“Gutka”

* Goa Gutka (Highest Selling brand) (Rs. 2.50 MRP) * Sir Mawa (Rs. 2 MRP) * RMD (Manikchand Most expensive brand) (Rs. 6 and Rs. 10 per packet retail price) * Pan Parag * Kolhapuri * Dildar * Prince
Margin – 50 paisa

Pan (Beetle) with Tobacco added in it * Eaten most in the rural area. * Totally unorganized sector * People consume 3-5 paans per day on an average. * Each Paan cost around 5 Rs. Per day. * Tobacco used in this is numbered like (120, 300) sold in tolas. Rs. 50/ Tola (10 gms) and 300 (Rs. 135/50 Gms)

Financial Implication of Tobacco
As most people consume tobacco of very less price like consuming “Gai Chap” Cost just 3 Rs. Per day which is very less as compared to Alcohol which takes a beating on finance.
Differential socioeconomic and geographical susceptibilities to tobacco consumption
Men are more likely to consume tobacco than women. A strong gradient with regards to education and standard of living is apparent. Higher levels of education and standard of living are inversely related to the probability of smoking and chewing; the gradient is stronger for smoking. The relation between these socioeconomic markers and tobacco consumption is similar to relations observed in developed countries. Further, the caste based differences in tobacco consumption show the persistent effect of caste as a key axis along which health and other wellbeing outcomes are stratified, over and above the adverse effects of low education and an index of material standard of living. In addition, the distribution of tobacco consumption by marital status is contrary to what has been observed in developed countries, where marriage is seen to have a protective effect. Importantly, the large differences observed between states in tobacco consumption, even after controlling for the demographic and socioeconomic markers at individual or household level, highlight the potential importance of the state context in influencing this behaviour.19
Limitations of the study
In addition to the general limits to drawing causal inferences based on cross sectional, observational data, one caveat that is pertinent to our analysis relates to the extent to which the observed magnitude of socioeconomic gap reflects “actual” gaps compared with “reporting” gaps, especially since formal and informal social conventions related to tobacco consumption can influence reporting patterns.
Moreover, data were available only on overall tobacco smoking. Differences in the socioeconomic gradient in the use of manufactured cigarettes (higher among people with more education) and bidis (higher among people with less education) have been shown to exist. Smoking bidis is more strongly related to lung and oral cancer than smoking manufactured cigarettes and the preponderance of bidi smoking among less advantaged socioeconomic groups will tend to exacerbate health inequalities.

Differential socioeconomic and geographical susceptibilities to tobacco consumption
Men are more likely to consume tobacco than women. A strong gradient with regards to education and standard of living is apparent. Higher levels of education and standard of living are inversely related to the probability of smoking and chewing; the gradient is stronger for smoking. The relation between these socioeconomic markers and tobacco consumption is similar to relations observed in developed countries. Further, the caste based differences in tobacco consumption show the persistent effect of caste as a key axis along which health and other wellbeing outcomes are stratified, over and above the adverse effects of low education and an index of material standard of living. In addition, the distribution of tobacco consumption by marital status is contrary to what has been observed in developed countries, where marriage is seen to have a protective effect. Importantly, the large differences observed between states in tobacco consumption, even after controlling for the demographic and socioeconomic markers at individual or household level, highlight the potential importance of the state context in influencing this behaviour.19
Limitations of the study
In addition to the general limits to drawing causal inferences based on cross sectional, observational data, one caveat that is pertinent to our analysis relates to the extent to which the observed magnitude of socioeconomic gap reflects “actual” gaps compared with “reporting” gaps, especially since formal and informal social conventions related to tobacco consumption can influence reporting patterns.
Moreover, data were available only on overall tobacco smoking. Differences in the socioeconomic gradient in the use of manufactured cigarettes (higher among people with more education) and bidis (higher among people with less education) have been shown to exist. Smoking bidis is more strongly related to lung and oral cancer than smoking manufactured cigarettes, and the preponderance of bidi smoking among less advantaged socioeconomic groups will tend to exacerbate health inequalities.
Tryst with Rural Markets

“Shopkeeper who helped us out”

Income of typical Paan Waala
He has his own shop and he earned around 800 per day in Nusrapur.

BIDI which came from West Bengal( New Packing)

“The Man, The Machine, The Beast” checking out the rural market consumption pattern.
Uncle who told us to be more systematic for the surveys.

“Scared of being Photographed”