India’s dual approach — discouraging tobacco domestically while promoting it abroad — undermines Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam and exports preventable harm
The Global Youth Tobacco Survey (GYTS-4) in 2019 found that, among the age group 13-15 years, the use of e-cigarettes was reported by 2.8 percent of the population in India. E-cigarettes were banned in India in the same year in an effort to protect the young generation from their harms, particularly as they function as a gateway to nicotine addiction and smoking. Despite the ban, there are concerns of increasing illicit trade, particularly in urban areas, making e-cigarettes easily accessible to the young population. The ongoing Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATS-3), which covers the population aged 15 and above, will provide the much-needed evidence on contemporary e-cigarette consumption in the country. GATS-2 found that in 2016-17, only 0.02 percent of the sample population used e-cigarettes.
Figure 1. Tobacco use among age group 13–15: GYTS India 2003, 2006, 2009, 2019
Source: Observer Research Foundation (2025)
The e-cigarette ban in 2019 was a strong step by the Government of India to protect and consolidate recent gains in reducing tobacco consumption among the Indian population, particularly the youth (Figure 1). India's efforts to reduce tobacco consumption through concrete policy actions combined stronger regulation with sustained public awareness. Anti-tobacco content was incorporated into school curricula, shaping attitudes early, while campaigns through media and cinemas broadened reach, reinforced the health risks, and supported nicotine quitting. At the same time, tighter rules on sales and promotion limited children’s access to tobacco, reducing exposure and availability. Even among older adults, India has made significant strides in tobacco control, leading to notable reductions in tobacco use prevalence over the last two decades (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Tobacco consumption trends among the age group 15-49 in India (NFHS)
Source: Observer Research Foundation (2025)
Given this history, it came as no surprise when the Government of India recently decided to consolidate these gains through a series of strong policy measures limiting tobacco consumption. Taking effect from 1 February, the government has notified a higher central excise duty on cigarettes ranging from INR2.05 to INR8.50 per stick, alongside a revised GST framework that places tobacco in the highest “demerit” bracket at 40 percent. These measures, spearheaded by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, were intended to lift the cigarette tax incidence from about 53 percent closer to the WHO-referenced benchmark of 75 percent. These developments also followed Parliament’s passage of the Health Security se National Security Cess Act, 2025, that directly targets pan masala.
The Tobacco Board of India, a quasi-governmental agency, regulates the production and marketing of flue-cured variety (FCV) tobacco, offers direct and indirect subsidies and benefits for the cultivation of FCV tobacco, and undertakes various export promotion activities.
Alongside the success of tobacco prevention policies in India implemented through the National Tobacco Control Programme, a second story runs in parallel, which is hard to reconcile with the former. Even as health policy aims to limit tobacco access across the country, other parts of the state machinery continue to treat tobacco as an opportunity, with an explicit objective of “export promotion”. The Tobacco Board of India, a quasi-governmental agency, regulates the production and marketing of flue-cured variety (FCV) tobacco, offers direct and indirect subsidies and benefits for the cultivation of FCV tobacco, and undertakes various export promotion activities. Figure 3 shows that the Board has been highly successful in promoting tobacco exports, particularly in recent years.
Figure 3. Exports of Tobacco and Tobacco Products from India (Metric Tonnes)
Source: Prepared by the author using data compiled from The Tobacco Board
India’s tobacco governance is multi-institutional, with competing interests negotiated across ministries and levels of government. This produces predictable friction between health objectives and commercial or revenue imperatives. Interestingly, tobacco-related livelihood policy in India has not been framed only around sustaining cultivation. Government statements note that the Tobacco Board has pursued a transition objective alongside its regulatory and promotional functions. In 2019, the Tobacco Board reiterated its commitment to a gradual phase-out of tobacco cultivation, while working with the Central Tobacco Research Institute to promote economically sustainable alternatives for growers. In parallel, the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare has run a dedicated diversification instrument: the Crop Diversification Programme (CDP) under the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY), which was extended to 10 tobacco-growing states starting 2015–16 with the stated purpose of encouraging tobacco farmers to shift to alternative crops. However, despite the tobacco consumption rates at the population level declining in India, domestic production of tobacco has been increasing over the years (Figure 4).
Figure 4. Agriculture production: Tobacco (Lakh Tonnes)
Source: Prepared by the author using data compiled from the Reserve Bank of India
An analysis of historical data shows that, despite the stated policy objective of encouraging tobacco farmers to switch to alternative crops through at least two government-led initiatives, the area under tobacco cultivation in India has not seen any significant decline over the decades (Figure 5). The long-run series shows persistence: tobacco area was 4.4-4.6 lakh hectares in the late 1960s and early 1970s, touched 5.0-5.1 lakh hectares in the late 1970s and again in 1998-99, dipped sharply to 2.6 lakh hectares in 2000-01, and then returned to a familiar band of around 3.5 to 4.9 lakh hectares for most years since. This trend is somewhat surprising, given the oft-repeated diversification intent — including the Tobacco Board’s stated push towards alternative livelihoods and the Crop Diversification Programme under RKVY in tobacco-growing states — suggesting that transition efforts have not matched the strength of the production-and-market incentives that keep cultivation viable. That is precisely why diversification cannot remain a peripheral programme while export promotion continues to be the core objective.
Figure 5. Area under cultivation: Tobacco (Lakh Hectares)
Source: Prepared by the author using data compiled from the Reserve Bank of India
The Tobacco Board’s stated interest in encouraging farmers to shift to alternative crops sits uneasily alongside the simultaneous strengthening of the tobacco economy. While diversification is often discussed, the production system has been made progressively more efficient through coordinated support from public agencies, research and extension services, and private procurement channels. Analysis of the yield data series captures this shift: tobacco productivity rose from about 821 kg/ha in 1968-69 to 1,425-1,486 kg/ha by the early-mid 1990s, and then to over 2,000 kg/ha in recent years, reaching 2,317 kg/ha in 2017-18 and staying around 2,109 kg/ha in 2023-24 (Figure 6). When actions often facilitated by government agencies raise yields so sharply, exiting tobacco cultivation becomes much harder for the farmer.
Figure 6. Yield per Hectare: Tobacco (KG per Hectare)
Source: Prepared by the author using data compiled from the Reserve Bank of India
At the same time, the livelihood argument that tobacco remains a feasible cultivation option in arid areas has weakened over time, as irrigation and cropping choices have expanded across many tobacco-cultivating regions. Taken together, this reflects policy working at cross purposes: encouraging farmers to shift while simultaneously making tobacco cultivation more productive and commercially attractive. According to the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, India is currently the second-largest producer as well as exporter of tobacco in the world. Communication from the ministry also states that Indian tobacco farmers’ income has doubled over the last five years, and maintains that “effective Government policies” and “persuasion of the Tobacco Board” resulted in achieving an export growth of 87% between 2019-20 to 2023-24.
A state can, in good faith, conclude that adult choice does not outweigh the burden of addiction, cancer, heart disease, and lost productivity, and design taxes and rules accordingly. India has taken that approach, and senior political leaders have regularly and publicly urged citizens to reduce tobacco consumption. If India’s public stance is that tobacco is harmful and should be deterred, it is difficult to defend a posture that treats export-oriented tobacco production as an important growth sector. Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, or the slogan ‘The world is one family,’ is incompatible with promoting a known health-harming product abroad while simultaneously using every instrument of the state to deter domestic consumption. The ethical issue is not that India sells tobacco, but that it aspires to be a global health leader — by being a reliable supplier of medicines and vaccines — while simultaneously normalising its role as a major tobacco exporter.
This reflects policy working at cross purposes: encouraging farmers to shift while simultaneously making tobacco cultivation more productive and commercially attractive.
The National Academy of Medical Sciences under the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, in its Report of the Taskforce on Tobacco Control (2025), explicitly recommended the phase-out of the Tobacco Board and the Central Tobacco Research Institute (CTRI). While such drastic measures may not be feasible in the short- or medium-run, there is a need to undertake a time-bound, inter-ministerial effort to align national objectives concerning tobacco policy. It is imperative to repurpose the Tobacco Board’s primary focus from export expansion to a realistic, scalable transition plan for farmers that reduces rural dependence on tobacco, co-led by the agriculture and rural development ministries and state governments. Such a shift would also allow India to reconcile its role as “the pharmacy of the world” with a clear refusal to become the “tobacco farm of the world”.
Oommen C. Kurian is Senior Fellow and Head of the Health Initiative at the Observer Research Foundation.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
Oommen C. Kurian is Senior Fellow and Head of the Health Initiative at the Inclusive Growth and SDGs Programme, Observer Research Foundation. Trained in economics and ...
Read More +
PREV
