中国烟草经济分析-复旦大学课程

2024/12/1中医大07卫管1

AnalysisonChineseTobaccoEconomymid-termreviewcopingstrategyspecificmeasuresfeasibilityanalysisTobaccoconsumptionontheactualimpactofthenationaleconomyMarketfailurenegativeexternalityNaturalmonopolygoodsLackofflexibility2024/12/1中医大07卫管22010-5-313中医大07卫管3TheimpactoftobaccoconsumptionExpandtheincomegapIncreasetheeconomiclossesMedicalcostsHumanCapitalTotaleconomyDoharmtopeople'shealthandpublichealthConclusionTheeffectoftobaccoindustryonthenationaleconomyisnegative,themoreprospersofthetobaccoindustry,themoredamagewillbedonetothenationaleconomy.2024/12/1中医大07卫管4TaxadjustmentDemandreductionSmokingcontrolconfigurationtobaccocopingstrategy---configurationtobaccoThereformdirection:2024/12/1中医大07卫管5HealtheducationSmokingcontrolmeasuresDirectcontrolTaxadjustmentcopingstrategy---configurationtobacco2024/12/1中医大07卫管6HealtheducationLimitcigaretteadvertisingandpromotionalactivitiesSmokingcontrolmeasuresBansmokinginpublicplacesandworksiteForbiddentosellcigarettestominorsDirectcontrolReformoftobaccomonopolysystemTaxadjustmentLevytobaccosurtaxDiscussionThecostofcontrol—benifitanalysisThetobaccotaxanalysis2024/12/1中医大07卫管7Thecostofcontrol—benifitanalysisThecostofcontrol——reduceeconomiccosts、increaseopportunitycost

ReducecigarettesalesVSSlashjobs?

increasethepriceofcigarettesVSincreasesmuggledcigarettes?Thebenefitofcontrol——Economicperformanceovertheeconomiccosts

significantlyfiredanger、occupationalhazard、healthinsurance…2024/12/1中医大07卫管8IncreasetobaccotaxanalysisDemandreductionoftobaccoTobaccoconsumptionreductionofsocialharmIncreasethequotaoftax2024/12/1中医大07卫管9Bansmuggledcigarettes!Demandreductionoftobacco一包烟提价10%预计平均可使香烟需求量在高收入国家减少约4%,而在中低收入国家可减少约8%,因为较低的收入往往使人们对价格变化更加敏感[1]。儿童和青少年比年长的成人对提价更加敏感,因此这一干预措施将对他们产生重大影响[2]。2024/12/1中医大07卫管10[1]Buck,David,C.Godfrey,M.Raw,andM.Sutton.1995.TobaccoandJobs.York,U.K.:SocietyfortheStudyofAddictionandtheCentreforHealthEconomics,UniversityofYork.[2]Chaloupka,F.J.,andH.wechsler.1997.“Price,TobaccoControlPoliciesandSmokingAmongYoungAdults.”JournalofHealthEconomics16(3):359-73.FeasibilityanalysisTheeffectofbansmokingindoorTheeffectofbanteenagersmokingBancigaretteadvertisingandpromotionalactivitiesTheeffectoftheadvertisementagainsttobaccoconsumptionIncreasetheeffectoftobaccotax2024/12/1中医大07卫管111.1Theeffectofbansmokingindoor二手烟患者自主选择权回归

室内吸烟率及吸烟量大幅降低建议：望出台相关法律文件加以支撑，不具法律强制性的《公共场所及室内禁烟条例》无法有效约束烟民！2024/12/1中医大07卫管121.2Theeffectofbanteenagersmoking限制了青少年对香烟的可及性，增加了吸烟的成本，控制了吸烟人数。关于禁止青少年吸烟效果的研究表明:只有这些措施及相关的法律、法规被全面、彻底地执行时,才能取得显著的效果。建议:加大执法力度（监管、行政处罚）2024/12/1中医大07卫管131.3BancigaretteadvertisingVS

Advertisementagainsttobacco全面禁止烟草广告可以有效地降低烟草的消费反烟广告利用媒体提高大众对吸烟危害的认知,也可以明显地降低烟草消费。建议：内外一致！2024/12/1中医大07卫管141.3BancigaretteadvertisingVS

AdvertisementagainsttobaccoSaffer和Chaloupa的研究表明增加15%的反烟广告时间可以使烟草的消费量降低约4%。一些区域性的反烟广告的效果分析如美国的California、Massachusetts以及芬兰、希腊、英国、挪威、以色列、奥地利、加拿大等国的研究均表明反烟广告可以降低烟草消费[3]。[3]HenrySaffer:Tobaccoadvertisingandpromotion.TobaccoControlinDevelopingCountries.OxfordPress.2024/12/1中医大07卫管151.4Increasetheeffectoftobaccotax中国(包括台湾)、土耳其、巴布亚新几内亚、以及南非的研究表明:中低收入国家的香烟的需求对价格的敏感性要高于发达国家,需求弹性的值大都集中于-0.5～-1.0之间[4～5]。发达国家对香烟的需求弹性的研究比较多,美国、加拿大、澳大利亚、日本、英国以及许多西欧国家的研究发现发达国家的香烟的需求弹性的值集中于一个较窄的范围内,并且大都集中于-0.25～-0.5之间[3]2024/12/1中医大07卫管16[3]HenrySaffer:Tobaccoadvertisingandpromotion.TobaccoControlinDevelopingCountries.OxfordPress.[4]毛正中,蒋家林1“卷烟需求及其影响因素:一个断面资料模型”[J].中国卫生事业管理,1997;5:2272229.[5]毛正中,蒋家林等1“卷烟需求与价格政策”[J].中国卫生经济,1997;6:50～52.

aillusion?

thesubstitutesoftobccotheperspectiveoftobcco2024/12/1中医大07卫管17参考文献[1]Buck,David,C.Godfrey,M.Raw,andM.Sutton.1995.TobaccoandJobs.York,U.K.:SocietyfortheStudyofAddictionandtheCentreforHealthEconomics,UniversityofYork.[2]Chaloupka,F.J.,andH.wechsler.1997.“Price,TobaccoControlPoliciesandSmokingAmongYoungAdults.”JournalofHealthEconomics16(3):359-73.[3]HenrySaffer:Tobaccoadvertisingandpromotion.TobaccoControlinDevelopingCountries.