Table 2 Main Findings of Selected Social Science Research Papers on Cigarette Consumption, 1994 – 2004

Keeler et al,

2004 [4]

Econometric analysis of cigarette consumption shows the negative impact of price rise. However, increased spending on advertisements offsets the effect to some extent.

Kim and Seldon,

2004 [5]

Taxation has negative impact on cigarette consumption. Anti-smoking awareness programs also have negative impact.

Ling and Glantz,

2002 [6]

Marketing plays a greater role for stronger addiction among youth. Cigarette advertisements promote regular smoking and thus increase the consumption.

Cornelia and Knight,

2002 [7]

Cigarette advertisement increased the consumption among the teenagers. Antismoking advertisements prevented cigarette advertising from promoting smoking.

Isao and Zhou,

2002 [8]

Derived hypothetically cigarette demand in Japan and studied the impact of propaganda on cigarette consumption.

Badi and Griffin,

2001 [9]

Reexamined the rational addiction models of Becker, Grossman and Murphy (BGM) for cigarette consumption. The results are supportive of the rational-addiction model.

Keeler et al,

2001 [10]

Estimates consumer response to cigarette price change (reduces the consumer response by 40–50%). Hypothesizes that a correlation between schooling and healthy behaviour occurs.

Teh-wei Hu and

Yi-wen Tsai, 2000 [11]

Education and occupation are two important factors in explaining smoking in rural China. People in rural China consume fewer cigarettes than those in urban areas.

Ping Zhang et al,

2000 [12]

Tobacco price support programme (restrictions on imports and quotas) has direct (negative) effect on cigarette consumption.

Chapman et al,

1999 [13]

Australian and US restrictions on smoking at work places has the effect of reducing smoking rates and prevalence.

Depken, Craig A,

1999 [14]

Complete banning of cigarette advertising will not influence the prices of cigarettes, while limits on marketing initiatives reduce the cigarette prices.

Hsieh, Chee-Ruey,

1999 [15]

Taiwan has counterbalanced the impact of market opening on overall cigarette consumption (positive effect) by antismoking campaigns (negative effect).

Yen, Steven T,

1999 [16]

Considers two alternative models and concludes that they generate similar demand elasticities for smoking among women.

Showalter, Mark H,

1998 [17]

State excise taxes are found to be more effective in reducing cigarette consumption than federal excise taxes.

Cameron et al,

1998 [18]

This paper studies the effect of parameters like cigarette prices, income, education and health on cigarette demand. Some of the findings of earlier studies have been questioned.

George and

Papapetrou, 1997 [19]

Provides an empirical analysis of cigarette consumption using the Johansen co-integration procedure.

Brown, A. Blake,

1995 [20]

The price elasticity of demand for cigarettes exports from US is estimated through the increased excise taxes, smoking restrictions, tobacco prices and quantities.

Becker et al,

1994 [21]

Empirical results are derived to indicate that smoking is addictive.