report of endline survey for assessing the current level ... report_0.pdfbiswajit pal and with...

Report of Endline Survey for Assessing the Current Level of

Compliance to the Sections of 4,5,6 of COTPA in 5 Districts of West

Bengal

Under

BI supported grant program India-15-22

With

Technical and financial support from

International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease

(The Union), New Delhi

30th August 2017

MANT

(Manbhum Ananda Ashram Nityananda Trust)

17, Canal South Road, North Purbachal,

Kolkata-700078, West Bengal, India

www.mant.org.in

Foreword

It is exhilarating to learn that MANT, under the stewardship of Mr. Nirmalya Mukherjee and Dr.

Biswajit Pal and with technical and financial support from the Union, has conducted an endline

survey for assessing the current level of compliance to the different sections of COTPA, 2003

and comparing the results with the baseline results to determine the achievement level of work

implemented during the last two years in the field of tobacco control in five districts of West

Bengal.

Dr. Chandidas Mukhopadhyay Mrs. Papiya Sen

Secretary, MANT Executive Director, MANT

Acknowledgement

We are very much grateful to Bloomberg Initiatives, USA and The Union for sponsoring the

study.

The study could not have taken the present shape without the technical guidance from Mr.

Pranay Lal, Technical Advisor, The Union; we feel obliged to him for his continuous support at

every stage of the study.

We are also thankful to Dr. Rana J Singh, Deputy Director, The Union-South-East Asia for the

technical help, offered to us in making the sample size determination easier and purposive.

Our sincere gratitude is to Mr. Bala Gopalan, Contract Administrator, for his support in the form

of project management inputs.

We are indeed indebted to the all data enumerators for providing all possible help in data

collection at the field level.

Our sincere thanks also go to our colleagues Ms. Samarpita Sanyal, Mr. Joydeb Mondal, Ms.

Sanhita Datta, Mr. Soumik Nandy, Mr. Sumit Singha, Mr. Tofail Imam and Mr. Saikat Banerjee

engaged in tobacco control activities without whose help the data collection and data entry would

not have been completed.

We are indebted to all the State and District administrations for their support in collecting data

within their Jurisdiction.

We are very much thankful to the tobacco vendors, without whose pro-active participation, the

study would not have been as informative as it is.

We are thankful to all colleagues Mr. Somenath Ghosh, Ms. Soumi Ghosh, Mr. Sujay Halder,

Mr. Santanu Biswas, Mr. Soumen Bhuinya for their wonderful technical data entry and moral

support and the quality time we have spent discussing the tobacco related issues.

Last but not the least, it is the best opportunity to mention the support we have received from

Mrs. Papiya Sen, Executive Director and Dr. Chandidas Mukherjee, Secretary, MANT. Mrs.

Papiya Sen, Executive Director, MANT, Kolkata should be specially mentioned for her

continuous support and encouragement for the purpose of the study. Conversely, Dr. Mukherjee

took the enormous pain in proof reading and making the language forceful, ecpressive and to the

point.

Mr. Nirmalya Mukherjee

Director & Head- Tobacco Control,

&

Dr. Biswajit Pal

Assistant Director- Research and M&E

Contents

Page no.

1. Chapter-I: Introduction

1.1. Background........................................................................ 1-5

1.2. COTPA,2003...................................................................... 5-7

1.3. Objectives of the study...................................................... 8

2. Chapter-II: Methodology

2.1. Section- 4 of COTPA........................................................ 9-11

2.2. Section-5&6(a) of COTPA............................................... 11-12

2.3. Section- 6(b) of COTPA................................................... 12

2.4. Sample size ....................................................................... 12-14

2.5. Research Team................................................................. 14

2.6. Sampling Process.............................................................. 14

2.7. Data Collection................................................................. 15

2.8. Data Entry........................................................................ 15

2.9. Data validation ................................................................ 15

2.10. Expression of result......................................................... 15

3. Chapter-III: Results

3.1. Compliance to Section 4 of COTPA, 2003..................... 16-22

3.2. Compliance to Section 5 of COTPA,2003...................... 23-26

3.3. Compliance to Section 6(a) of COTPA,2003.................. 27-30

3.4. Compliance to Section 6 (b) of COTPA,2003................ 31-33

4. Chapter-IV: Discussion and Conclusion

4.1. Discussion......................................................................... 34-35

4.2. Conclusion....................................................................... 35

5. References.................................................................................. 36-37

6. Annexure: Checklist of different section under study........... i-v

7. Protocol and timeline for visiting and making observations at different sampled places.................................................... vi

List of Tables

Table no. Subject

1 District wise Custer selected for collection of sample

2 District wise sample size of public places

3 District wise sample size of Point of Sale

4 District wise sample size of educational Institutions

5 District wise sample size of tobacco packages

6 Sample Size under Different Sections

7 District wise list of team leader

8 Comparison of Section -4 results of base line and end line COTPA

compliance

9 Public place type wise Compliance of Sec-4 of COTPA,2003

10 Baseline and end line data of Section-5 of COTPA,2003

11 Percentage of Point of sale signage and sell of tobacco product

12 Presence of Signages at educational institutions and tobacco shops

List of Figures

Fig. no. Subject

1 Baseline Vs. Endline :Presence of signages in public place

2 Baseline Vs. End line: Signage displayed at prominent place

3 Baseline Vs. End line: COTPA specific signage

4 Baseline Vs. End line: Display of designated person's name on signage

5 Baseline Vs. End line: Frequency of absence of active smoking in public

place

6 Baseline Vs. End line: Frequency of absence of smoking in public places

7 Baseline Vs. End line: Absence of smoking in public places

8 Baseline Vs. End line: Frequency of smoked particle free public places

9 Presence of signages of different public places under study

10 Absence of active smoking and absence of smoking aids in the public

places

11 Baseline Vs End line: Presence of advertisement

12 Baseline Vs End line: Promotion and advertisement at POS

13 Baseline Vs End line: Tobacco products show to minors

14 Baseline Vs End line: Health warning at PoS

15 Baseline Vs End line: Tobacco products sell to minors

16 Baseline Vs. End line: Presence of Section 6a signages at POS

17 Baseline Vs. Endline Specification of signages at POS

18 Baseline Vs. End line: Visible tobacco products and availability

19 Baseline Vs. End line:Presence of Section 6b signages at educational

institutions

20 Baseline Vs. End line: Presence of COTPA specific Section 6b signages

21 Baseline Vs. End line: Presence of Section 6b signage in white background

22 Baseline Vs. End line: Presence of tobacco shops within 100 yards of

Educational institutions

1

Chapter-1

Introduction

1.1. Background:

According to WHO "tobacco kills one person every six seconds. Tobacco kills a third to half

of all people who use it, on average 15 years prematurely. Today, tobacco use causes 1 in 10

deaths among adults worldwide – that is more than five million people a year. By 2030,

unless urgent action is taken, tobacco’s annual death toll will rise to more than eight million.

If current trends continue unchecked, it is estimated that around 500 million people alive

today will be killed by tobacco. During this twenty-first century, tobacco could kill up to one

billion people. Most tobacco users will want to quit but will be unable to because of their

dependence on a highly addictive substance."1 Globally every day, 80,000 to 100,000 young

people around the world become addicted to tobacco.2 If current trends continue, 250 million

children and young people alive today will die from tobacco-related diseases.3 It is also

estimated that second-hand smoke kills more than 600,000 people worldwide each year,

including 165,000 children.4 On other hand The burden of tobacco use and tobacco-caused

disease is growing and steadily shifting to developing nations, which increasingly face a

“double burden” of disease.5

National Cancer Institute, USA estimated the global cancer deaths due to tobacco use in the

following way:

• 1.4 million cancer deaths caused by tobacco use

• 1 in 5 cancer deaths attributed to tobacco use

• In men, lung cancer is leading cause of cancer death

• In women, lung cancer surpassed breast cancer as leading cause of cancer death in a

growing number of developed countries, including the U.S

• In developing nations, female lung cancer remains low; this is expected to change as

female tobacco use increases (2007).

India is the second largest consumer of tobacco globally. India also stands third in the

production of tobacco.6 According to Global Adult Tobacco Survey, 2009-2010 "more than

one-third (35%) of adults in India used tobacco in some form or the other. Among them 21

percent adults used only smokeless tobacco, 9 percent only smoke and 5 percent smoke as

well as used smokeless tobacco. Based on these, the estimated number of tobacco users in

2

India was 274.9 million, with 163.7 million users of only smokeless tobacco, 68.9 million

only smokers, and 42.3 million users of both smoking and smokeless tobacco. The prevalence

of overall tobacco use among males was 48 percent and that among females was 20 percent.

Nearly two in five (38%) adults in rural areas and one in four (25%) adults in urban areas

used tobacco in some form. Prevalence of smoking among males was 24 percent whereas the

prevalence among females was 3 percent. The extent of use of smokeless tobacco products

among males (33%) was higher than among females (18%)." Both education and economic

status have strong correlation with tobacco use as found by the analysis of data of National

Family Health Survey of India. Indians with no education were 2.69 times more likely to

smoke and/or chew tobacco than those with a postgraduate education while households

categorized as being in the lowest fifth in the standard of living index were 2.54 times more

likely to use tobacco than those in the highest fifth (Vijayan et. al 2005).

Of late GATS (2016-17) highlighted the followings:

1. The prevalence of tobacco use has decreased by six percentage points from 34.6% in

GATS 1 in 2009-10 to 28.6% in GATS 2 in 2016-17.

2. 19.0% of men, 2.0% of women and 10.7% of all adults currently smoke tobacco.

3. 29.6% of men, 12.8% of women and 21.4% of all adults currently use smokeless

tobacco.

4. 42.4% of men, 14.2% of women and 28.6% of all adults currently either smoke tobacco

and or use smokeless tobacco.

5. Khaini and bidi are the most commonly used tobacco products. 11% of adults consume

khaini and 8% smoke bidis.

6. The number of tobacco users has reduced by about 81 lakh. The National Health Policy

2017 of Government of India has set the target of “relative reduction in prevalence of

current tobacco use by 15% by 2020 and 30% by 2025”. GATS 2 show a relative

reduction of 17% in prevalence of current tobacco use since GATS-1.

7. The prevalence of tobacco use among the young population aged 15-24 has reduced from

18.4% in GATS 1 to 12.4% in GATS – 2 which is a 33% relative reduction. The

prevalence of tobacco use among minors aged 15-17 & adolescents aged 18-24 has a

relative reduction of 54% and 28% respectively. There is an increase of one year in the

mean age at initiation of tobacco use from 17.9 years in GATS 1 to 18.9 years in GATS

2.

3

8. 62% of cigarette smokers and 54% of bidi smokers thought of quiting because of warning

label on the packets.

9. 46% of smokeless tobacco users thought of quitting because of warning label on

smokeless tobacco products.

10. The average expenditure incurred on last purchase of cigarette, bidi and smokeless

tobacco is Rs.30, Rs. 12.5 and Rs.12.8 respectively. The expenditure on cigarette has

tripled and that on bidi and smokeless tobacco has doubled since GATS 1.

GATS (2010) also revealed that Prevalence of tobacco use in Arunachal Pradesh, Bihar,

Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland,

Odisha, Sikkim, Tripura, Assam and West Bengal is higher than the national average.

National Family Health Survey-III (2005) indicated that 50.1% males in State of West

Bengal are smokers whereas 70.2% are using any kind of tobacco. The Global Youth

Tobacco Survey (GYTS) 2009 highlighted that 14.6% of students aged between 13-15 years

currently use any form of tobacco and 4.4% currently smoke cigarettes. The Global Adult

Tobacco Survey (GATS) India report 2009:10 revealed that in West Bengal 36.3% of adults,

52.3% males and 19.3% of females are currently using any kind of tobacco. It also showed

that 21% people of Bengal as against national average of 14% are presently smoking. This

data is alarming as Bengal is the second largest home state of smokers after Uttar Pradesh in

India. GYTS 2009 highlighted that 50% students live in homes where others smoke and over

two thirds are exposed to smoke in public places in Kolkata. Half of the students have

parents who are addicted to tobacco. While 70% students think smoke from others is harmful

to them and over three fourth agree that smoking should be banned in public places, an

encouraging figure, only fifty percent of the smokers actually want to quit smoking. The

GATS India showed that 62.4% of adults were exposed to second hand smoke at home

against 29.8% in public places in West Bengal.

The first report of the Kolkata Cancer Registry (2002) mentioned that highest incidence rate

of lung cancer in men in India is reported from Kolkata. Smoking (56.4%) emerged as the

major risk factor among young (<40 years) patients of ischemic heart disease and lung cancer

patients in West Bengal. Again, the Population Based Cancer Registry, Kolkata (2006-2007)

highlighted that Tobacco related cancer accounts for an overall 44.4% in males and 12.3% in

females. The study also found that Kolkata had the highest number of new lung cancer

patients in 2007 among the Metros in India - 14.9 cases per one hundred thousand people.

4

The state is home to the largest cigarette manufacturing company i.e. Indian Tobacco

Company (ITC). The bidi industries are the major source of livelihood for a sizeable section

of the population of the state, which is already regarded as industry-starved. The bidi

manufacturers' lobby is believed to be very powerful in the state.

Considering the harmful effects of tobacco, the WHO in 2003 negotiated the world’s first

public health treaty called “The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control” (FCTC), which

mandates governments of all nations to take specific steps to reduce tobacco use. Article 8 of

the FCTC binds governments to protect their citizens from exposure to tobacco smoke and

requires them to adopt and implement effective legislative, executive, administrative and/or

other measures for this purpose. In 2008, the WHO developed and recommended a policy

package to reduce the tobacco epidemic called MPOWER – this package expanded the

measures of the WHO FCTC that have been proven to reduce smoking prevalence. In 2003,

the Government of India enacted comprehensive legislation for tobacco control called the

Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of

Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act (hereafter referred to as

COTPA) – section 4 of COTPA prohibits smoking in public places, public transport,

workplaces and all places where public have access. Mere enactment of legislation is not

enough to stop smoking in public places and it requires strong enforcement to ensure

compliance to the law by the public. It is also necessary to regularly measure compliance to

the law to monitor progress as well as inform and guide enforcement.

In West Bengal initially two districts (Murshidabad and Cooch Behar) were covered under

Government of India’s National Tobacco control Program (NTCP) though not with much

success. Of late, another 10 districts have now been covered under NTCP. State Level

Coordination Committee (SLCC) has been formed and 1st meeting was held on 15th January,

2014. The State government has issued instructions to notify such coordination committees at

district and block level. Challan books and receipts have already been printed in the

government press; they are now available to many district authorities. Separate head of

account has also been notified for depositing the money to be collected as fine. However, the

court of law for Section 4 and 6 has not been notified until now. Secretary- Public Health has

issued instructions twice to all municipal commissioners, police department and district

administrations for effective enforcement of the law. Moreover, the State Government in the

5

2013-2014 financial year, from its own Budget, sanctioned Rs. 50 Lakhs to the Districts to

organize one district level advocacy workshop, two capacity building trainings, printing of

challan books and the like.

Hence, it could be redoubtably said that there is a very high tobacco burden in West Bengal

which requires urgent attention from all concerned to initiate a result-based tobacco control

initiative in the State. And for that, establishment of a strengthened tobacco control

framework in every District, Block, and Municipality and in the State as well is the need of

the hour. Against this backdrop The International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung

Disease under Bloomberg’s Initiatives To Reduce Tobacco Use provided technical and

financial support to MANT by implementing a grants program (India-15-22) covering 5

districts of West Bengal namely Kolkata, Howrah, Bankura, PaschimMedinipur, and Purulia.

The thrust of the project has been to support the state and the district administrations in

promoting smoke-free jurisdictions, curbing the access to tobacco products of the minors,

restrict all kinds of tobacco advertising and promotion and ensuring pictorial health warnings

on all tobacco products through setting up of an effective enforcement mechanism through

sensitizing political and administrative leadership, awareness generation, capacity building,

creating partnerships and networking and the like. With an objective to assess the current

level of compliance to all sections of COTPA at an initial period of the project, this baseline

study has been conducted to know the compliance at the initial stage.

1.2. Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and

Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act 2003

(COTPA 2003):

Is the first comprehensive law on tobacco control which protects the public from SHS and

Section 4: Prohibition of smoking in public places .

1. The owner, proprietor, manager, supervisor or

in charge of the affairs of a public place shall

ensure that :

(a) No person smokes in the public place (under

his jurisdiction/implied).

(b) The board as specified in schedule II is

displayed prominently at the entrance of the

public place, in case there are more than one

6

entrance at each such entrance and conspicuous place(s) inside. 1n case if there are more than

one floor, at each floor including the staircase and entrance to the lifts at each floor.

(c) No ashtrays, matches, lighters or other things designed to facilitate smoking are provided

in the public place.

1. The owner, proprietor, manager, supervisor or in-charge of the affairs of a public

place shall notify and cause to be displayed prominently the name of the person(s) to whom a

complaint may be made by a person(s) who observes any person violating the provision of

these Rules.

Section 5 : Prohibition of advertisement of cigarettes and other tobacco products.

“(1) No person engaged in, or purported to be engaged in the production, supply or

distribution of cigarettes or any other tobacco products shall advertise and no person having

control over a medium shall cause to be advertised cigarettes or any other tobacco products

through that medium and no person shall take part in any advertisement which directly or

indirectly suggests or promotes the use or consumption of cigarettes or any other tobacco

products.

(2) No person, for any direct or indirect pecuniary benefit, shall-

(a) Display, cause to display, or permit or authorize to display any advertisement of

cigarettes or any other tobacco product; or

(b) Sell or cause to sell, or permit or authorize to sell a film or video tape containing an

advertisement of cigarettes or any other tobacco product display any advertisement of

cigarettes

(c) Distribute, cause to distribute, or permit or authorize to distribute to the public any leaflet,

handbill or document which is or which contains an advertisement of cigarettes or any other

tobacco product; or

(d) Erect, exhibit, fix or retain upon or over any land, building, wall, hoarding, frame, post or

structure or upon or in any vehicle or shall display in any manner what so ever in any place

any advertisement of cigarettes or any other tobacco product:

Provided that this subsection shall not apply in relation to – An advertisement of cigarettes or

any other tobacco product in or on a package containing cigarettes or any other tobacco

product; Advertisement of cigarettes or any other tobacco product which is displayed at the

entrance or inside a warehouse or a shop where cigarettes and any other tobacco products are

offered for distribution or sale.

(3) No person, shall, under a contract or otherwise promote or agree to promote the use or

consumption of- a) Cigarettes or any other tobacco product; or b) Any trade mark or brand

7

name of cigarettes or any other tobacco product in exchange for a sponsorship, gift, prize or

scholarship given or agreed to be given by another person.”

SECTION 6: Prohibition on sale of cigarettes and other tobacco products to and from a

person below the age of 18 years and in a particular area.

“No person shall sell, offer for Sale or

permit sale of, cigarettes or any other

tobacco product- a) To any person who is

under eighteen years of age, and”

“No person shall sell, offer for Sale or

permit sale of, cigarettes or any other

tobacco product- b) In an area within a

radius of one hundred yards of any

educational institution.”

Additional Notification: 1. No. GSR 345

(E) dated 31st May, 2005, states that “no

tobacco product is handled or sold by a

person below the age of eighteen years.”

Section 7: Restrictions of trade and commerce in, and production , supply, distribution

of cigarettes and other tobacco products without specified warnings.

1. No tobacco product to be manufactured and sold without specified pictorial health

warnings including imported brands.

2. Every package of tobacco should indicate the tar and nicotine content and permissible

limits thereof.

Section 8 : manner in which specified warning shall be made.

1. The specified warnings must be legible and prominent so as to be visible to the

consumer.

Section 9 : Language in which specified warnings shall be expressed.

1. Specified warning shall be expressed in English language and

Any other Indian language or languages.

8

1.3. Objectives:

1. To find out the compliance level to the Section 4 of COTPA in public places across 5

districts of West Bengal.

2. To measure the compliance level to the Section 5 of COTPA at point of sale across 5

districts of West Bengal

3. To study the compliance to the Section 6 (a)of COTPA at Point of Sale and 6(b) of

COTPA at Educational Institutions across 5 districts of West Bengal.

4. To compare the baseline and endline data of Section 4,5 &6 of COTPA across 5

districts of West Bengal and scale the difference level.

9

Chapter-2

Methodology

The same methodology followed in baseline study, has been followed in the present study

also. In addition a comparative study of the baseline and end line results is considered for

further analysis and is reported accordingly.

2.1. SECTION-4 of COTPA

2.1.1. Operational Definition :

a. Section-4 (prohibition of smoking in a public places) under Cigarettes and Other Tobacco

Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production,

Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003. It strongly implies that nobody can smoke in any public

place.

b ‘Smoking’ means smoking of tobacco in any form whether in form of cigarette, cigar, bidi,

or otherwise with the aid of pipe, wrapper or any other instruments.

c. “Public Place” means any place where the public have access, whether as of right or not,

and includes auditorium, hospital buildings, railway waiting room, amusement centres,

restaurants, public offices, court buildings, work places, shopping malls, cinema halls,

educational institutions, libraries, public conveyances and the like which are visited by

general public but does not include any open space. This definition for public place will be

used for the present study.

2.1.2. Study Design and Time Frame: The study was crosssectional study conducted during

January to May 2015. However, the protocol of the study was developed during November -

December 2014.

2.1.3 Geographical Scope: The public places here are sub divided into seven broad

categories. The name of categories are given below:

a. Accommodation Facilities (Hotels, rest houses, lodge, sarai, guest house, Dharamshala,

rain baseraetc.)

b. Eating Facilities (standalone restaurants, standalone canteens, bars, dhabas, street food

vendors, food court etc.)

c. Offices and Workplaces (both in Government and private sector)

d. Educational Institutions (both in public and private sector)

e. Health Care Facilities (both in public and private sector)

10

f. Most Commonly Visited Places (Railway stations, market, bus stations, airport, shopping

mall, parks, playground etc.)

g. Public Transport Service (Bus / Taxi / Cabs / Auto Rickshaws etc.)

2.1.4 Sampling and Sample Size:

Each district, save Kolkata, consists of several administrative Blocks and Municipal areas.

Each Block and Municipal area is considered as an individual cluster. In Kolkata, 15 Borough

under Kolkata Municipal corporation and 6 Municipality of greater Kolkata are considered as

individual cluster. So in case of Kolkata the numbers of clusters are 21. In each district a

minimum 30% of the clusters were selected randomly for collecting samples. However, all

the Municipalities at the District Headquarters have been selected by using purposive

sampling procedure. The clusters were listed alphabetically and every third cluster has been

selected for the purpose. However, for the last one the rule will be relaxed whenever

applicable and the last one has been selected.

Table-1: District wise Custer selected for collection of sample

AREA Total cluster Selected cluster

Kolkata 15 Borough(KMC) 6 Municipalities

Borough no.3,6,9,12,15 Dum Dum Municipalty, South Dum Dum Municipality

Howrah

14 Blocks Bagnan-I, Damjur, Sankrail, Udaynarayanpur

3 Municipalities Howrah Municipal Corporation

Paschim Medinipur

29 Blocks

Chandrakona-I, Dantan-II, Debra, Garbeta-III, Gopiballavpur-II, Keshiyari, Kharagpur-II, Narayanghar, Sabang, Sankrail

8 Municipalities Medinipur Municipality, Jhargram Municipality

Bankura

22 Blocks Barjora, Hirbandh, jaypur, Mejhia, Raipur, Sarenga, Taldangra

3 Municipalities Bankura Municipality

Purulia

20 Blocks Balarampur, Hura, Jhalda-II, Manbazar-II, Puncha, Raghunathpur-I, Santuri

3 Municipalities Purulia Municipality

The sample size has been enumerated at the level of 95% confidence interval with 50 %

compliance rate while the design effect of the study was 1.0. The Epi-info 7 software has

been used for the purpose. This same sample calculation was used in baseline study.

Table-2: District wise sample size of public places

2.2. SECTION: 5 &6(a) of COTPA

2.2.1.Operational Definition:

a) Prohibition of advertisement and promotion of tobacco product (Section

b) Minor: A person below the age of 18 years.

c) Indian language: Languages listed in Eighth schedule of the Constitution of India.

2.2.2 Geographical scope (venues of visit

(where tobacco products are sold) in each district were considered.

2.2.3 Sampling and sample

clusters (mentioned in Section

Name of the Districts

Kolkata

Howrah

PaschimMedinipur

Bankura

Purulia

2: District wise sample size of public places

6(a) of COTPA

2.2.1.Operational Definition:

tion of advertisement and promotion of tobacco product (Section

) Minor: A person below the age of 18 years.

Languages listed in Eighth schedule of the Constitution of India.

2.2.2 Geographical scope (venues of visit) – For the purpose of study, all the points of sale

(where tobacco products are sold) in each district were considered.

2.2.3 Sampling and sample size: The samples were selected from the previously selected

clusters (mentioned in Section-4 sampling). At first all district wise POS were estimated to

Estimated numbers of Public places

Public places selected as sample

82000

15378

21002

11421

7329

11

tion of advertisement and promotion of tobacco product (Section -5)

Languages listed in Eighth schedule of the Constitution of India.

For the purpose of study, all the points of sale

The samples were selected from the previously selected

4 sampling). At first all district wise POS were estimated to

Public places selected as sample unit

1057

1000

1020

976

936

12

determine the district wise total numbers of POS. After that the samples were selected from

the total number of POS at the level of 95%c confidence interval with a confidence limit of 5.

Table-3: District wise sample size of Point of Sale Name of the Districts Estimated numbers of POS POS selected as sample unit

Kolkata 42300 385 Howrah 13698 375

PaschimMedinipur 21994 384 Bankura 17484 376 Purulia 20030 384

2.3 Section-6(b) of COTPA

2.3.1. Operational Definition:

Educational Institution: It means any place or centre including any school/college and place

or organisation of higher learning established or recognized by an appropriate authority

where education instructions are imparted according to the specific norms.

2.3.2 Geographical scope (venues of visit): For the purpose of study, all educational

institutions as defined above in each district were considered.

2.4. Sampling and sample size:

For the purpose of feasibility the clusters selected for section-4 were considered for selecting

the sample. The list of educational institution used in baseline study has also been considered

here for sampling procedure. The samples were selected from the total population at the level

of 95% confidence interval.

Table-4: District wise sample size of educational Institutions Name of the Districts Estimated numbers of

Educational Institutions Educational institutions selected as sample unit

Kolkata 1209 294

Howrah 5337 360

PaschimMedinipur 8913 372

Bankura 4738 360

Purulia 3337 344

13

Table- 6 Sample Size under Different Sections

District Block Populati

on Area

Population

% Sec-4

Sec-5

& 6(a)

Sec

6(b)

Kolkata Borough-3 341876

N.A.

16.77 177 65 49 Kolkata Borough-6 313638 15.39 163 59 45 Kolkata Borough-9 370538 18.18 192 70 53 Kolkata Borough-12 225438 11.06 117 43 33 Kolkata Borough-15 274706 13.48 142 52 40 Kolkata DumDum 101296 9.73 4.97 53 19 15

Kolkata South

DumDum 410524 15.47 20.14

213 78 59

TOTAL 2038016 1057 385 294

Howrah Bagnan I 221500 83.01 10.04 100 38 36 Howrah Domjur 377588 58.33 17.12 171 64 62 Howrah Sankrail 343933 36.64 15.60 156 58 56 Howrah Udaynaranpur 190186 124.8 8.62 86 32 31 Howrah Howrah (M.C.) 1072161 51.74 48.62 486 182 175 TOTAL 2205368 1000 375 360

PaschimMedinipur Chandrakona-I 118085 214.16 6.28 64 23 17 PaschimMedinipur Dantan-II 134360 186.48 7.15 73 27 19 PaschimMedinipur Debra 255220 337.63 13.58 139 51 37 PaschimMedinipur Garbeta-III 145854 304.51 7.76 79 29 21

PaschimMedinipur Gopiballavpur-

II 93306 201.77 4.96 51 19 14 PaschimMedinipur Keshiary 132061 292.26 7.03 72 26 19 PaschimMedinipur Kharagpur-II 161828 271.46 8.61 88 32 23 PaschimMedinipur Narayanghar 266675 499.93 14.19 145 53 39 PaschimMedinipur Sabang 238686 308.53 12.70 130 47 35 PaschimMedinipur Sankrail 102634 36.64 5.46 56 20 15 PaschimMedinipur

Medinipur(M)

169127

18.36

9.00

92

34

24

PaschimMedinipur Jhargram (M) 61682 21.4 3.28 33 12 9 TOTAL 1879518 1020 374 372

Bankura Barjora 179007 246 18.23 178 67 66 Bankura Hirbandh 72502 215.6 7.39 72 27 27 Bankura Jaypur 141497 262.74 14.41 141 53 52 Bankura Mejhia 76123 162.9 7.75 76 29 28 Bankura Raipur 151293 364.4 15.41 150 57 55 Bankura Sarenga 95128 228.07 9.69 95 36 35 Bankura Taldangra 128747 349.7 13.11 128 48 47 Bankura Bankura (M) 137386 19.05 13.99 137 52 50 TOTAL 981683 976 368 360

Purulia Balarampur 118102 290 13.97 131 54 48 Purulia Hura 127443 402.92 15.08 141 58 52 Purulia Jhalda - II 123714 284.9 14.64 137 56 50 Purulia Manbazar - II 85253 419.5 10.09 94 39 35

14

Purulia Puncha 108129 330 12.79 120 49 44

Purulia Raghunathpur -

I 99226 188.4 11.74 110 45 40 Purulia Santuri 69587 181 8.23 77 32 28 Purulia Purulia(M) 113766 13.93 13.46 126 52 46 TOTAL 845220 936 384 344

However, when number of Public places mentioned in column of district headquarters had

not been available, then the public places of other clusters were selected as representative

samples.

2.5. Research Team

There was a separate research team for each district comprising of 3-5 field investigators,

one in-charge and one data entry operator. The overall team lead under the following

persons:

Table-7 District wise list of team leader

Name of the Districts Responsible person

Kolkata SanhitaDatta,Regional Co-ordinator,Tobacco

Control,MANT

Howrah JoydebMondal, Regional Co-ordinator,

Tobacco Control, MANT

PaschimMedinipur SumitSingha, District Coordinator

Bankura Tofail Imam, District Coordinator

Purulia Saikat Banerjee, District Coordinator The overall research work was conducted under the supervision of

1. NirmalyaMukherjee, Director-Planning, MANT

2. Dr.Biswajit Pal, Asst. Director-Research and M& E, MANT

3. Somenath Ghosh, Research Officer, MANT

2.6. Sampling Process:

After getting the required total units (Public Places/POS/Educational Institutions),the

research team started the data collection procedure in the same clusters, where baseline study

was conducted. They followed the transect walk method to observe the study area. Each field

investigator selected a central point of the cluster to start his work and walked towards east,

south, west and north and observed compliance to each section of COTPA. When the total

numbers of samples were reached, the process stopped at that point, and the investigator

started with another fixed central point in the cluster to cover the remaining samples.

15

2.7. Data Collection:

Responsible field investigators collected data from the sample units (Public Places, Point of

Sale and Educational Institution) at the specific time (busy hours for that place) mentioned in

Annexure-IV with the help of specified check list (Annexure-I, II and III). At the time of

visit, a systematic observation was made and the applicable check list was filled in. In each

area search team took a minimum of 15 minutes to complete the compliance checklist.

Data triangulation were made on randomly selected 15% sample units for verifying the data

which were collected by the filed investigator. The research team in charge was responsible

for conducting the triangulation process him/herself.

2.8 Data Entry:

After completion of data collection, the collected data were compiled and entered in the

specified entry format with the help of EP Data or MS Excel by the data entry operator.

2.9. Data Validation:

The double entry of data has been performed to recheck the data entry and the "count if" and

"Count Blank" were also performed.

2.10. Expression of Result:

After completion of data collection, the data were analysed statistically. The Data were

expressed as Mean, Proportion, and Percentage. To compare the results between baseline and

endline, the independent sample t-test has been performed. The analysed results were

expressed briefly in all aspects of COTPA sections.

16

Chapter-3

Results

3.1. Compliance of Section 4 of COTPA:

Table-8: Comparison of Section -4 results of base line and end line COTPA compliance

From the above table, it can be observed that in 70% of the surveyed locations signage are

present at the time of end line survey in Bankura. Whereas, it is found 83%, 47%, 37% and

42% of the surveyed locations have signages in place at Howrah, Kolkata, PaschimMedinipur

and Purulia respectively. The numbers of signages in all the mentioned districts have

increased significantly in between the period of base line and end line survey.

District Bankura Howrah Kolkata

Paschim

Medinipur Purulia Total

Signage Present

Baseline 0.9 25.3 35.2 6.6 12 16.3

Endline 70.4 83.8 47.3 37.1 42.6 56.2

Sig. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Signage displayed at

prominent places

Baseline 0.8 23.9 32 4.9 6.8 14

Endline 68.3 82.5 44.3 35.2 38.6 53.7

Sig. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

COTPA Specific signage

Baseline 0.1 2.4 0.3 1.1 0.6 0.9

Endline 63.4 80.8 30.2 30.8 31.7 47.2

Sig. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Designated official’s

name

Baseline 0 1 0.7 0.5 0 0.2

Endline 53.1 80 20.8 18.9 21.2 38.7

Sig. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

No Active smoking

Baseline 75.3 88 91.2 67.5 57.8 76.3

Endline 76.8 91.7 91.5 84.7 70.7 83.4

Sig. 0.893 0.00 0.652 0.00 0.00 0.00

Absence of smoking

aids

Baseline 55.8 90.1 92.7 59.6 53.3 70.8

Endline 57.9 89.9 93.1 82 64.1 77.9

Sig. 0.58 0.766 0.498 0.00 0.00 0.00

No recently smoking

Baseline 77.2 80 88.8 64.8 57.8 74.2

Endline 78.8 91.9 89.8 85 68.1 83

Sig. 0.323 0.00 0.159 0.00 0.00 0.00

No Smoking evidence

Baseline 39.7 62.1 59.1 30.1 40.3 46.5

Endline 40.8 80.8 61.3 73.1 57.9 63

Sig. 0.311 0.00 0.042 0.001 0.112 0.00

17

In 68%, 82.5%, 44.3%, 35.2% and 38.6% of the public places signages have been displayed

at prominent places of Bankura, Howrah, Kolkata, Paschim Medinipur and Purulia

respectively. Numbers of signages at prominent places in those locations have significantly

increased from its base line percentage.

The numbers of COTPA specific signages have significantly increased from the time of base

line in all mentioned districts. In 63.4%, 80.8%, 30.2%, 30.8% and 31.7% of public places of

the respective districts have COTPA specific signages at the time of end line survey.

53.1%, 80%, 20.8%, 18.9% and 21.2% of public places have signages with the name of the

designated person in the respective districts. The expositions of the signages with the name of

designated persons have increased significantly in the districts.

Absence of active smoking is observed in more than 70% and 90% of public places at both

the surveys in Bankura and Kolkata respectively. In 91.7%, 84.7% and 70.7% of the public

places no active smoking has been observed in the districts of Howrah, Paschim Medinipur

and Purulia respectively.

Absence of smoking aids is significantly more prominent in the public places at the time of

end line survey in the districts of Paschim Medinipur and Purulia.

The evidence of no recent smoking or smoking at all is found to be more significantly

prominent in all the districts except Bankura at the time of end line survey

Fig.1: Baseline Vs. Endline :Presence of signages in public place

Fig.2: Baseline Vs. End line: Signage displayed at prominent place

Fig.3:Baseline Vs. End line

0.9

25.3

70.4

83.8

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Bankura Howrah

020406080

100

0.8

68.3

Signage displayed at prominent place

0.1

63.4

0

20

40

60

80

100

Bankura Howrah

Baseline Vs. Endline :Presence of signages in public place

Vs. End line: Signage displayed at prominent place

Baseline Vs. End line: COTPA specific signage

25.3

35.2

6.612

16.3

83.8

47.3

37.142.6

56.2

Howrah Kolkata Paschim

Medinipur

Purulia Total

Presence of Signage

23.932

4.9 6.8 14

68.382.5

44.335.2 38.6

53.7


Baseline Endline

2.4 0.3 1.1 0.6

80.8

30.2 30.8 31.7


Medinipur

Purulia

COTPA specific signage

Baseline Endline

18

Baseline Vs. Endline :Presence of signages in public place

Vs. End line: Signage displayed at prominent place

: COTPA specific signage

Baseline

Endline


0.9

47.2

Total




0

53.1

0

20

40

60

80

100

Bankura Howrah

Presence of Designated person name

0

50

100 75.376.8

Frequency of absence of active

smoking in public places

0

20

40

60

80

100

Bankura

77.278.8

Frequency of absence of smoking at

Baseline Vs. End line: Display of designated person's name on signage

Baseline Vs. End line: Frequency of absence of active smoking

Baseline Vs. End line: Frequency of absence of smoking in public places

1 0.7 0.5 0

80

20.8 18.9 21.2


Medinipur

Purulia


on signage

Baseline Endline

88 91.267.5 57.8

76.376.891.7 91.5 84.7

70.783.4

Frequency of absence of active

smoking in public places

Baseline Endline


Medinipur

Purulia Total

8088.8

64.857.8

74.2

91.9 89.8 85

68.1

83


public places

Baseline Endline

19

: Display of designated person's name on signage

: Frequency of absence of active smoking in public place

: Frequency of absence of smoking in public places

0.2

38.7

Total


83




Public place wise complianceTable-9: Public place type wise Compliance of Sec

Type of public places

Signage COTPA

Accommodation 60.13

Eateries 52.20

Educational Institution

54.75

Offices 67.75

Health care centre 60.67

0

50

100 55.857.9

Absence of smoking aids in public

places

39.740.8

0

20

40

60

80

100

Bankura

Frequency of smoked particals free

Baseline Vs. End line: Absence of smoking in public places

Baseline Vs. End line: Frequency of smoked particle free public places

Public place wise compliance Public place type wise Compliance of Sec-4 of COTPA,2003

COTPA Designated person

No active smoking

absence of smoking aids

44.05 35.05 82.30 77.50

42.98 32.49 73.60 63.60

51.17 44.88 95.60 93.60

56.66 49.30 91.70 90.90

52.53 44.38 90.20 90.20

90.192.7

59.6 53.370.857.9

89.9 93.1 8264.1 77.9


places

Baseline Endline

62.1 59.1

30.140.3

80.8

61.373.1

57.9


Medinipur

Purulia Total


public places

Baseline Endline

20

: Absence of smoking in public places

: Frequency of smoked particle free public places

4 of COTPA,2003

absence of smoking Total compliance

77.50 59.81

63.60 52.97

93.60 68.00

90.90 71.26

90.20 67.60


46.5

63

Total


21

Bus stand/Mall/Market

48.24 39.98 31.94 65.60 65.20 50.19

Transport 43.90 33.33 18.03 80.50 80.50 51.25

Compliance level to section 4 of COTPA,2003 in different types of public places has also

been analysed in this study. Public places are particularly categorized as accommodations

like hotel, lodge, etc, where compliance rate is 59.81% to Sec-4 of COTPA. 60.13 % of

accommodation places have signages and 44.05 % and 35.05 % of those signages are

COTPA specific and have been displayed with the name of the designated person

respectively. At the time of data collection 82.30 % of accommodations have no incidence of

active smoking and 77.50 % of them did not have any smoking aids during the time of visit.

52.20 % of eateries have signages out of which 42.98 % are COTPA specific signages and

35.05 % of them have mentioned the name of designated person. 73.60 and 63.60 % of the

eateries have been found with no event of active smoking and smoking aids respectively.

Overall compliance to the section-4 of these categories is 52.97 %.

68% of the Educational Institutions are compliant to section-4 of COTPA,2003. 54.75 % of

Educational Institutions have signages and out of those signages 51.17 % and 44.88 % are

COTPA specific and show with the name of designated persons. 95.60 % and 93.60 % of

these places have no records of active smoking and smoking aids respectively.

71.26 % of offices have been found to be compliant to section-4 of COTPA,2003. 67.75 % of

the offices have signages and of those signages 56.66 % are COTPA specific and 49.30 %

have designated person's name. 91.70 % and 90.90 % of them have no active smoking and

smoking aids at the time of data collection.

67.60 % health care centres are compliant to the section-4 of COTPA,2003. More than half

(60.67%) of this type of public places have signages and out of these signages 52.53 % are

COTPA specific and 44.38 % display designated person's name. Most of the public place

(90.20 %) have no incidence of active smoking and no presence of smoking aids at the time

of data collection.

Sixth category of public places including bus stand, Mall ,market stadium have 50.19 %

compliance. 48.24 % of public places have signages and out of these 39.98 % and 31.94 are

COTPA specific and mention the designated person's name respectively. More than half

(65.60 % and 65.20 %) of the location is smoke free with marked absence of any smoking

aids.

All the road and public transport facility considered under seventh type of public place of

which 51.25% have achieved the compliance level to Sec-4 of COTPA. 43.9 % of public

places have signages, out of that 33.33 % and 18.03 % are COTPA specified and display

designated person's name respectively. 80.50 % of tra

absence of smoking aids.

Fig.9: Presence of signages of different public places under study

Fig.10:Absence of active smoking and absence of smoking aids in the public places

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Type-I Type-II

60.13

52.2

44.05 42.98

35.05 32.49

Presence of sinages of different public places under study

Signage

0

20

40

60

80

100

Type-I Type-II

82.373.677.5

63.6

Absence of active smoking and absence of smoking aids in

No active smoking

out of that 33.33 % and 18.03 % are COTPA specified and display

name respectively. 80.50 % of transport is free from active smoking

Presence of signages of different public places under study

Absence of active smoking and absence of smoking aids in the public places

II Type-III Type-IV Type-V Type-VI

54.75

67.75

60.67

48.2442.98

51.1756.66

52.53

39.98

32.49

44.8849.3

44.38

31.94


Signage COTPA Designated person

Type-III Type-IV Type-V Type-VI

95.6 91.7 90.2

65.663.6

93.6 90.9 90.2

65.2


the public places

No active smoking absence of smoking aids

22

out of that 33.33 % and 18.03 % are COTPA specified and display the

free from active smoking with

Presence of signages of different public places under study

Absence of active smoking and absence of smoking aids in the public places

Type-VII

43.9

33.33

18.03


Type-VII

80.5 80.5


23

3.2. Compliance of section 5 of COTPA:

Table-10: Baseline and end line data of Section-5 of COTPA,2003

District Bankura Howrah Kolkata PaschimMedinipur Purulia Total Sig

Presence of

advertisement

Baseline 42 44.1 61.1 35.2 27.9 43.4

0.000 Endline 32.7 32.2 50.3 29.7 24.9 33.9

Presence of

advertisement

Board

Baseline 15.9 15 31.6 7.5 18.4 20

0.000 Endline

5.6 12.3 25.4 7.5 18.2 17.1

Promotional

message

Baseline 0.5 10 25.9 1 3 8.3

0.000 Endline 0.3 0.3 11.4 0.5 2.8 3.7

Presence of Brand

name

Baseline 11.1 15 46.4 7.5 18.4 19.6

0.000 Endline 3.2 12.3 21.5 6.9 16.6 12.2

Full body

advertisement

Baseline 3.3 11 8 18.9 4.2 9.1

0.000 Endline 0.8 3.8 2.3 2.6 1.9 4.3

Presence of health

warning

Baseline 8.1 15 42 6.8 11 16.7

0.000 Endline 3.2 11.2 14.8 5.9 9.9 9

HW in White

background

Baseline 5.4 4.5 10.4 4.5 9 6.9

0.000 Endline 2.7 3.8 3.6 4.1 8.1 4.4

Show to minors Baseline 74.5 99.2 94.8 92.5 83.9 89

0.000 Endline 43.9 73 79.8 84 80.3 72.3

Sell by minors Baseline 1.4 1.6 1 9.9 5.7 3.9

0.462 Endline 0.8 1.3 0.5 6.9 4.8 2.8

The above table shows the 'Presence of advertisements' at the 'Point of Sale' has reduced

considerably from 42% to 37% in Bankura, 44.1% to 32.2% in Howrah, from 61% to 50.3%

in Kolkata and 35.2% to 29.7% in PaschimMedinipur and 27.9 to 24.9% in Purulia. The

result of the test of significance indicates that overall the advertisement of cigarettes at the

POS has reduced significantly.

The presence of advertisement board has also been reduced considerably in the POS of all the

Districts except PaschimMedinapur and Purulia, the percentage of POS with the

advertisement board remained the same in both the surveys. The presence of advertisement

board has got down from 15.9% to 5.6% in Bankura, 15% to 12.3% in Howrah and 31.6% to

25.4% in Kolkata. However, the result of the test of significance indicates that overall the

POS advertisement board has been reduced.

Negligible Promotional massages are found in the POS of Bankura, PaschimMedinipur&

Purulia in both the surveys. In Kolkata, the percentage of POS delivering the promotional

massages has got reduced from 25% at the time of base line to 11% at the time of end line.

Though the overall percentage of POS containing the promotional massages has been reduced

significantly.

Display of Brand names have been reduced in all the districts. In Bankura, the POS

displaying the brand names have been reduced significantly from 11.1% to 3.2% from the

24

base line to end line. The brand names are remarkably struck off from the POS at kolkata

from 21.5% to 8% between the period of base line & end line. In the districts like Howrah,

PaschimMedinipur& Purulia, the exposition of significance shows that display of brand

names have got reduced significantly.

It has been observed that a full body advertisement is rarely seen in the shops of Bankura&

Purulia at the time of end line survey, which has been reduced from 3.3% to .08% and 4.2%

to 1.9% respectively. Huge drop of full body advertisement has been noticed in the POS of

the district of Howrah, Kolkata &PaschimMedinipur where it reduced from 11% to 3.8%, 8%

to 2.3% and 18.9% to 2.6% respectively. Overall there is significant decline in the full body

advertisement.

However, there are also significant decline in pictorial health warnings in the POS and it has

been observed that at the POS of Bankura, Howrah, Kolkata, PaschimMedinipur& Purulia,

the pictorial health warnings in the POS have got reduced from 8.1% to 3.2%, 15% to 11.2%,

42% to 14.8%, 6.8% to 5.9% & 11% to 9.9% respectively.

Moreover, it is also observed that use of white board for advertisement in POS has got

reduced in all the districts. It has gone down from 5.4% to 2.7% in Bankura, 4.5% to 3.8% in

Howrah, 10.4% to 3.6% in Kolkata and 9% to 8.1% in Purulia within the period of base line

to end line. In Paschim Medinipur, the Situation has remained the same.

Displaying and selling of tobacco products have reduced remarkably in all the mentioned

districts between the period of base line and end line. Displaying tobacco products in front of

the minors has got reduced to 43.9%, 73%, 79.8%, 84%, 80.3% & 72.3% in the districts of

Bankura, Howrah, Kolkata, Paschim Medinipur& Purulia respectively. There is also

reduction in sell of the tobacco products to the minor. Sell to minors has been reduced to

0.8%, 1.3%, 0.5%, 6.9% & 4.8% in the districts of Bankura, Howrah, Kolkata, Pashim

Medinipur& Purulia respectively.

Fig.11: Baseline Vs End line: Presence of advertisement

Fig.12. Baseline Vs End line: Promotion and advertisement at POS

Fig.13. Baseline Vs End line: Tobacco products show to minors

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Bankura Howrah Kolkata

42 44.1

61.1

32.7 32.2

50.3

15.9 15

31.6

5.6

12.3

Baseline and endline comparison of presence of

0

10

20

30

40

50

Baseline Endline

Prmotional message

0.5

0.3

10

0.3

25

.9

11

.4

1 0.53

8.3

Baseline Vs. Endline results of promotion and advertisement at POS

Bankura Howrah

74.5

43.9

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Bankura Howrah

Baseline Vs. Endline tobacco products show to minors

Show to minors Baseline

Baseline Vs End line: Presence of advertisement

Baseline Vs End line: Promotion and advertisement at POS

Baseline Vs End line: Tobacco products show to minors

Kolkata Paschim

Medinipur

Purulia Total

35.2

27.9

43.4

50.3

29.724.9

33.931.6

7.5

18.4 2025.4

7.5

18.2 17.1


advertisement

Presence of advertisement

Baseline


Endline


Board Baseline


Board Endline

Endline Baseline Endline Baseline

Presence of Brand name Full body advertisement

11

.1

3.2

3.3

0.8

15

12

.3

11

3.8

46

.4

21

.5

8

0.5

7.5

6.9

18

.9

2.8

18

.4

16

.6

4.2

3.7

19

.6

12

.2

9.1


Howrah Kolkata Paschim Medinipur Purulia

99.294.8 92.5 83.9

7379.8 84 80.3

Howrah Kolkata Paschim Medinipur Purulia

Baseline Vs. Endline tobacco products show to minors

Show to minors Baseline Show to minors Endline

25

Baseline Vs End line: Presence of advertisement

Baseline Vs End line: Promotion and advertisement at POS

Baseline Vs End line: Tobacco products show to minors





Board Baseline


Board Endline

Endline

Full body advertisement

0.8 3

.82

.32

.61

.9 4.3


Total

89

72.3

Total

Fig.14: Baseline Vs End line: Health warning at PoS

Fig.15: Baseline Vs End line: Tobacco products sell to minors

0 5

Bankura

Howrah

Kolkata

Paschim Medinipur

Purulia

Total

3.22.7

3.8

3.6

4.1

4.4

Baseline Vs. Endline data related Health

HW in White background Endline

Presence of health warning Endline

1.4

1.6

0.8 1.30

2

4

6

8

10

12

Bankura Howrah

Baseline Vs. Endline of tobacco products sell

Sell by minors Baseline

Baseline Vs End line: Health warning at PoS

Baseline Vs End line: Tobacco products sell to minors

10 15 20 25 30 35

8.1

15

6.8

11

16.7

3.2

11.2

14.8

5.9

9.9

9

5.4

4.5

10.4

4.5

9

6.9

2.7

3.8

3.6

4.1

8.1

4.4


Warning at POS

HW in White background Endline HW in White background Baseline

Presence of health warning Endline Presence of health warning Baseline

1

9.9

5.7

1.3 0.5

6.9

4.8


Medinipur

Purulia


to minors

Sell by minors Baseline Sell by minors Endline

26

Baseline Vs End line: Health warning at PoS

Baseline Vs End line: Tobacco products sell to minors

40 45

42


HW in White background Baseline

Presence of health warning Baseline

3.92.8

Total


27

3.3. Compliance of section 6a of COTPA:

Table-11: Percentage of Point of sale signage and sell of tobacco product

District Bankura Howrah Kolkata

PaschimMedinipu

r Purulia Total Overall

sig. Baseline Endline

Baselin

e Endline Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Baseline Endline

Signages 0.8 7.9 1.6 9.3 1.9 7.6 1.3 9.9 1.6 8.8 1.4 8.7 0.000

Prominant place 0.5 7.6 1.1 7.7 1.4 6 0.8 7.5 0.9 5.2 0.9 6.8 0.000

Sinage size

60''X30" 0.3 7.1 0.3 3.7 0.9 4.6 0.3 5.9 0.5 3.1 0.4 4.9 0.000

Indian language 0.3 6.2 1.6 4.8 0.8 4.3 1.1 6.1 0.9 4.2 0.8 5.1 0.000

50% pic 0 4.9 0.3 2.4 0.3 3.5 0 4.8 0.3 3.9 0.2 3.9 0.000

50% text 0 4.3 0.3 3.5 0.3 2.7 0 4.5 0.3 3.9 0.2 3.9 0.000

COTPA wise text 0 4.3 0.5 4 0.3 4.3 0.3 4.5 0.3 3.9 0.3 3.9 0.000

Sell by minor 1.4 0.8 1.6 1.9 1.1 0.5 10.2 4.8 5.7 4.2 4 2.5 0.000

Sell to minor 32.9 19.3 12.3 9.9 13.7 7.1 33.2 26.2 36.9 29.9 25.9 18.5 0.000

Vendor see age

proof 0 9.3 0 0 0.2 0 0.4 8 0.3 2.3 0.2 2.3 0.000

Visible tobacco

product 66.8 53.3 98.4 89.1 96.3 87.5 77.8 67.6 75.1 42.3 82.9 67.8 0.000

Product easily

accessible 58.7 45.9 89.7 84.5 86.7 65.8 62.8 46.8 62.6 32.5 74 54.9 0.000

28

Table11 shows that presence of signages at the POS has increased remarkably in the

mentioned districts between the period of base line and end line. It is observed that numbers

of POS having the signage of section 6(a) of COTPA have increased from 0.8% to 7.9% in

Bankura, 1.6% to 9.3% in Howrah, 1.9% to 7.6% in Kolkata, 1.3% to 9.9% in Paschim

Medinipur and 1.6% to 8.8% in Purulia. Result of the test of significance indicates significant

increase of signage of 6(a) in overall POS of all the districts combined within the period of

base line & end line.

Moreover, it has been observed that the signages placed in prominent places of the shops,

have increased remarkably between the period of base line & end line. The signages placed in

prominent places inside the shops have increased from 0.5% to 7.6% in Bankura, 1.1% to

7.7% in Howrah, 1.4% to 6% in Kolkata, 0.8% to 7.5% Paschim Medinipur and 0.9% to

5.2% in Purulia. Overall, there is significant increase of signages, placed in prominent places

in the shops.

The size of the signage has been maintained correctly in the shops as mentioned in COTPA

and the display has increased within the period of base line & end line. It has increased from

0.3% to 7.1% in Bankura, 0.3% to 3.7% in Howrah, 0.9% to 4.6% in Kolkata, 0.3% to 5.9%

in Paschim Medinipur and 0.5% to 3.1% in Purulia. Overall, there is significant increase in

signage with correct size.

There is rise in the number of signages, on which the contents are written in Indian

languages, in the shops during the time of end line survey. The percentage of shops having

the signages written in Indian languages increased from 0.3% to 6.2% in Bankura, 1.6% to

4.8% in Howrah, 0.8% to 4.3% in Kolkata, 1.1% to 6.1% in Paschim Medinipur, 0.9% to

4.2% in Purulia between the period of base line & end line. The number of shops containing

signages written in Indian language has increased significantly.

The rise of signages designed with 50% of text and 50% of pics inside the shops is found at

the time of end line survey. The signages consisting of 50% text and 50% picture placed

inside the shops have increased to 4%, 3%, 3%, 4.5% and 3.9% in the districts of Bankura,

Howrah, Kolkata, Paschim Medinipur and Purulia respectively.

Increase of signages, containing COTPA prescribed text placed inside the shops, from nearly

0 to 4% in the mentioned districts is significant.

Sale of tobacco products by the minors has been reduced considerably. The minors selling

tobacco products have got reduced from 1.4% to 0.8% in Bankura, 1.6% to 1.9% in Howrah,

1.1% to 0.5% in Kolkata, 10.2% to 4.8% in Paschim Medinipur and 5.7% to 4.2% in Purulia.

There is a significant decline in the minors selling tobacco.

Sale of tobacco products to the minors

purchasing tobacco products have

9.9% in Howrah, 13.7% to 7.1% in Kolkata, 33.2% to 26.2% in Paschim

36.9% to 29.9% in Purulia. There is a significant decline in the minors purchasing tobacco.

During the time of end line survey it is

verify age while selling tobacco products to the

vendors have asked for age proofs from the young customers in the districts of Bankura,

Paschim Medinipur& Purulia

The tobacco products in the shops visible to minors have declined from 66.8% to 53% in

Bankura, 98.4% to 89.1% in Howrah, 96.3% to 87.5% in Kolkata, 77.8% to 67.6% in

Paschim Medinipur and 75.1% to 42.3% in Purulia between the period of bas

line. The test of significance indicates significant decline of shops displaying tobacco

products.

There is a decline in the shops keeping the tobacco products within the reach of the minors. It

has declined from 58.7% to 46% in Bankura, 89

Kolkata, 62.8% to 46.8% in Paschim

period of base line & end line.

Fig.16: Baseline Vs. End line: Presence of Section 6a signages at POS

0

2

4

6

8

10

Ba

selin

e

En

dlin

e

Ba

selin

e

Bankura Howrah

0.8

7.9

1.6

9.3

0.5

7.6

1.1

0.3

7.1

0.3

Presence of Sinages at POS

Signages

of tobacco products to the minors has also got reduced considerably. The minors

purchasing tobacco products have been reduced from 32.9% to 19% in Bankura, 12.3% to

9.9% in Howrah, 13.7% to 7.1% in Kolkata, 33.2% to 26.2% in Paschim


During the time of end line survey it is observed that the vendors have become more aware to

while selling tobacco products to the young customers. 9.3%, 8% & 2.3% of the


respectively.



Medinipur and 75.1% to 42.3% in Purulia between the period of bas



from 58.7% to 46% in Bankura, 89.7% to 84.5% in Howrah, 86.7% to 65.8% in

Kolkata, 62.8% to 46.8% in Paschim Medinipur and 62.6% to 32.5% in Purulia between the

period of base line & end line.

Baseline Vs. End line: Presence of Section 6a signages at POS

En

dlin

e

Ba

selin

e

En

dlin

e

Ba

selin

e

En

dlin

e

Ba

selin

e

En

dlin

e

Ba

selin

e


Medinipur

Purulia Total

9.3

1.9

7.6

1.3

9.9

1.6

8.8

1.4

7.7

1.4

6

0.8

7.5

0.9

5.2

0.9

3.7

0.9

4.6

0.3

5.9

0.5

3.1

0.4

Presence of Sinages at POS

Signages Prominant place Sinage size 60''X30"

29

reduced considerably. The minors

d from 32.9% to 19% in Bankura, 12.3% to

9.9% in Howrah, 13.7% to 7.1% in Kolkata, 33.2% to 26.2% in Paschim Medinipur and


observed that the vendors have become more aware to

young customers. 9.3%, 8% & 2.3% of the




Medinipur and 75.1% to 42.3% in Purulia between the period of base line and end



.7% to 84.5% in Howrah, 86.7% to 65.8% in

Medinipur and 62.6% to 32.5% in Purulia between the

Baseline Vs. End line: Presence of Section 6a signages at POS

En

dlin

e

Total

8.7

6.8

0.4

4.9

Fig.17:Baseline

Fig.18: Baseline Vs. End line: Visible tobacco products and availability

0.3

6.2

1.6

4.8

0.8

0

4.9

0.3

2.4

0.3

0

4.3

0.3

3.5

0.3

0

4.3

0.5

4

0.3

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Ba

selin

e

En

dlin

e

Ba

selin

e

En

dlin

e

Ba

selin

e

Bankura Howrah Kolkata

Baseline Vs. Endline Specification of signages at POS

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Baseline Endline Baseline Endline

Bankura Howrah

66

.8

53

.3

98

.4

89

.1

58

.7

45

.9

89

.7

Baseline Vs. Endline Visible tobacco product and availability

Visible tobacco product


Baseline Vs. End line: Visible tobacco products and availability

4.3

1.1

6.1

0.9

4.2

0.8

5.1

3.5

0

4.8

0.3

3.9

0.2

3.9

0.3

2.7

0

4.5

0.3

3.9

0.2

3.9

0.3

4.3

0.3

4.5

0.3

3.9

0.3

3.9

En

dlin

e

Ba

selin

e

En

dlin

e

Ba

selin

e

En

dlin

e

Ba

selin

e

En

dlin

e

Kolkata Paschim

Medinipur

Purulia Total


Indian language

50% pic

50% text

COTPA wise text

Endline Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Baseline


Medinipur

Purulia Total

89

.1 96

.3

87

.5

77

.8

67

.6 75

.1

42

.3

82

.9

84

.5

86

.7

65

.8

62

.8

46

.8

62

.6

32

.5

74


Visible tobacco product Product easily accessible

30

Vs. Endline Specification of signages at POS

Baseline Vs. End line: Visible tobacco products and availability

Indian language

50% pic

50% text

COTPA wise text

Baseline Endline

Total

67

.874

54

.9


31

3.4. Compliance of Section 6B of COTPA:

Table-12: Presence of Signages at educational institution and presence of tobacco shop

District Signage COTPA

wise text

Signage in white

background

Shop with

in campus

shop present

within 100

yards

Bankura Baseline 1.4 0 0.3 0.3 42.8

Endline 58.5 53.6 51.1 0.3 11.3

Howrah Baseline 1.7 0 0.6 0.3 87.3

Endline 60.1 51 49.3 0.3 78.9

Kolkata Baseline 2 0.3 0.7 2.4 94.9

Endline 33.1 22.3 20.6 1.7 85.1

PaschimMedinipur Baseline 1.3 0.3 1.3 0.3 48.7

Endline 29.3 23.9 23.1 0 46.2

Purulia Baseline 1.5 0.3 0.6 2.6 57.3

Endline 24.7 32.4 20.3 2.6 50.1

Total Baseline 1.6 0.2 0.7 1.2 65.2

Endline 41.6 37.5 33.5 0.98 53.1

Over all sig. 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.525 0.000

The above table-12 represents the increase of the number of signages put at the visible places

in school buildings. The number of schools having section 6(b) signage have increased from

1.4% to 58.5% in Bankura, 1.7% to 60.1% in Howrah, 2% to 33.1% in kolkata, 1.3% to

29.3% in PaschimMedinipur and 1.5% to 24.7% in Purulia between the period of base line

and end line. And there is a significant increase of section 6(b) signage put in schools.

There is increase in the use of COTPA specific signage in schools which increased from 0%

to 53.6% in Bankura, 0% to 51% in Howrah, 0.3% to 22.3% in Kolkata, 0.3% to 23.9% in

paschimMedinipur, 0.3% to 22.4% in Purulia between the period of Base line and end line.

The test of significance reveals significant increase of COTPA specific signage.

In schools the signage displaying white background has increased remarkably. This has

increased from 0.3% to 51.1% in Bankura, 0.6% to 49.3% in Howrah, 0.7% to 20.6% in

Kolkata, 1.3% to 23.1% in PaschimMedinipur, 0.6% to 20.3% in Purulia between the period

of Base line & end line. There is also overall significant increase in the signage with white

boards.

The presence of shops within the campus was found to be negligible in both the time period

of survey in the districts of Bankura, Howrah and PaschimMednipur. But in the districts of

kolkata and Purulia, 2% & 2.5% of the tobacco shops respectively are found to be within the

campus of the schools.

32

However, there is huge decline in shops situated within the distance of 100 Yards of the

boundary of schools. The percentage of schools having shops within the 100 yards have

declined from 42.8% to 11.8% in Bankura, 87.3% to 78.9% in Howrah, 94.9% to 85.1% in

Kolkata, 48.7% to 46.2% in PaschimMedinipur and 57.3% to 50.1% in Purulia between the

period of base line & end line. There is a significant decline of schools having tobacco shops

within the 100 yards.

Fig.-19:Baseline Vs. End line:Presence of Section 6b signages at educational institutions

Fig.20: Baseline Vs. End line: Presence of COTPA specific Section 6b signages

1.4

58.5

1.7

60.1

2

33.1

1.3

29.3

1.5

24.7

1.6

41.6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Bankura Howrah Kolkata Paschim

Medinipur

Purulia Total

Presence of Section 6b signages at educational institutions

0

53.6

0

51

0.3

22.3

0.3

23.9

0.3

22.4

0.2

37.5

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Bankura Howrah Kolkata Paschim

Medinipur

Purulia Total

Presence of COTPA specific Section 6b signages

Fig.21: Baseline Vs. End line:

Fig.22: Baseline Vs. End line:

0.3

51.1

0.60

10

20

30

40

50

60B

ase

lin

e

En

dli

ne

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Bankura Howrah

Presence of Section 6b signage in white background

0

20

40

60

80

100

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Ba

seli

ne

Bankura Howrah

Presence of tobacco shops within 100 yards of

Baseline Vs. End line: Presence of Section 6b signage in white background

Baseline Vs. End line: Presence of tobacco shops within 100 yards of


49.3

0.7

20.6

1.3

23.1

0.6

20.3

En

dli

ne

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne


Medinipur

Purulia


En

dli

ne

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Ba

seli

ne


Medinipur

Purulia Total



33



20.3

0.7

33.5

Ba

seli

ne

En

dli

ne

Total


En

dli

ne

Total

34

Chapter-4

Discussion and Conclusion 4.1.DISCUSSION

After long two years of promotion of anti-tobacco campaign done by MANT with the support

of The Union, an end line survey has been conducted to evaluate the compliance of different

sections of COTPA, 2003. Despite the fact that West Bengal is the home of a huge number of

smokers and the people are very much fond of smoking here, the support to enforcement

against the tobacco consumption in the public places appeared to be successful, which is

observed at the time of end line.

Earlier, only about 16% of the public places were found with 'No Smoking' signages in which

negligible signages are observed to be COTPA specific. But now, public places with signages

have increased tremendously (56.2%) of which 47.2% of the signages are specific to

COTPA,2003. This might indicate that the authorities in the designated public places have

become more aware of the side effects of smoking. Moreover, decrease of active smoking

(76.3% to 83.4%) and absence of smoking aids in the premises of public places reveal the

active participation of the members to demote smoking inside the premises.

Results of compliance rate to section 5 reveals a significant decline in the presence of

advertisement, presence of advertisement board, promotional message, presence of brand

names at the PoS during the time of end line. But there is also decline in the presence of

health warning and display of products in white background board. This is perhaps a result of

successful governance by the local authorities, in whom the awareness of anti-tobacco has

been generated.

The compliance to section 6(a) at POS level has perhaps been made successful by the local

authority. During the time of end line, there is increase in the presence of section 6(a)

signages (from 1.4% to 8.7% of the shops) and it is observed that most of the signages are put

in the shops properly. This may imply that the shop owners have become aware about the ill

effects of the tobacco consumption by the minors. At the same time, local authorities have

enacted their power to put as much of section 6 (a) signages at the shops as possible.

35

The minors are mostly attracted by tobacco consumptions and they learn to consume tobacco

eventually at the school premises. So, signage of section 6 (b) must be present at the entrance

of school premises and during the time of end line it is observed that increasing number of

schools (from 1.4% to 58.5%) became aware in putting the section 6 (b) signages. Moreover,

the school authorities were found to be aware to remove shops from the premises of the

schools. This might be the result of growing awareness about the anti-tobacco campaign

among the authorities in schools.

4.2. Conclusion:

Overall, it could be safely said that Programme activities impacted positively as evidenced

from the above-mentioned section. However, though there is a significant decrease in active

smoking in Public places but the prevalence of the same is still a matter of great concern and

need immediate action. It is also immensely important to address the non-compliance to

Section 5 by debarring tobacco advertisement at the point of sale to reduce the exposure of

young adults to the tobacco brands. It is really a remarkable achievement that there is more

than 50% increase in section 6 (b) compliance. Conversely the findings of the present study

related to the presence of tobacco selling shops within 100 yards radius (about 42%) highlight

the importance of the further attention of the concerned authorities to stop the inflow of the

young adults into the domain of tobacco users.

36

Chapter-5

References 1. WHO. Report on the Global Tobacco Epidemic, 2008: The MPOWER package. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2008 2. The World Bank. Curbing the Epidemic: Governments and the Economics of Tobacco Control. Washington, DC: World Bank Publications; 1999 3. About youth and tobacco. Geneva, World Health Organization; [cited 2014, December 2]; Available from: http://www.who.int/tobacco/research/youth/about/en/index.html#. 4. Mattias Ö, Maritta SJ, Alistair W, Armando P, Annette P-U. Worldwide burden of disease from exposure to second-hand smoke: a retrospective analysis of data from 192 countries. The Lancet. 2011;377(9760):139-46 5. Mathers CD, Loncar D. Projections of global mortality and burden of disease from 2002 to 2030. PLoS Medicine, 2006, 3(11):e442. 6. Kaur j, Rinkoo AV, Arora S. Operationalizing evidence into action for providing viable crop diversification options to tobacco farmers in India - a compelling case for change. International Journal of Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies (IJIMS), 2014, Vol 2, No.2, 148-156 7. Government of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATS) India Report: 2009-2010. New Delhi. MOH&FW; 2010 8. Vijayan VK, Kumar R. Tobacco Cessation in India. Indian J Chest Dis Allied Sci. 2005; 47: 4-8 9. International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS) and Macro International. 2007. National Family Health Survey (NFHS-3), 2005–06: India: Volume I. Mumbai: IIPS. 10. WHO. Global Youth Tobacco Survey: India Fact Sheet. [cited 2014, December 2]; Available from: http://www.searo.who.int/entity/noncommunicable_diseases/data/ind_gyts_fs_2009.pdf?ua=1 11. Sen, U., Sankarnarayanan, R., Mandal, S. Ramankumar, AV., Parkin, DM., and Siddiqui M. Cancer Patterns in Eastern India: The First Report of the Kolkata Cancer Registry. Int. J. Cancer: 2002, 100, 86-91 12. Biswas J., Bandyopadhyay, MN., Dutta, K., Basu PS., and Mondal S. Population Based Cancer Registry, Kolkata. Individual Registry Write-up 2006-2007. CNCI and CCWH&RI, Thakurpukur, Kolkata. 13. WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2003. World Health Organization.

37

14. The Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003; An Act enacted by the Parliament of Republic of India by Notification in the Official Gazette. (Act 32 of 2003) 15. Yong HH, Foong K, Borland R, Omar M, Hamann S, Sirirassamee B, et al. Support for and reported compliance among smokers with smokefree policies in airconditioned hospitality venues in Malaysia and Thailand: Findings from the international tobacco control South East Asia survey. Asia Pac J Public Health. 2010;22:98–109 16. Goel, S., Kumar, R., Lal P., Tripathi, JP., Singh, RJ., Rathinam, A. , and Christian, A. How Compliant are Tobacco Vendors to India’s Tobacco Control Legislation on Ban of Advertisments at Point of Sale? A Three Jurisdictions Review: Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, Vol 15, 2014; 10637- 10642 17. Barnoya J, Mejia R, Szeinman D, Kummerfeldt CE. Tobacco point-of-sale advertising in Guatemala City, Guatemala and Buenos Aires, Argentina. 2010 Tobacco Control, 19, 338-41. 18. Henriksen L, Feighery E, Schleicher N, Haladjian H, Fortmann S. Reaching youth at the point of sale: cigarette marketing is more prevalent in stores where adolescents shop frequently. 2004 Tobacco Control, 13, 315-8. 19. Patel D., Kassim S., Croucher, R. Tobacco Promotion and Availability in School Neighborhoods in India: a Cross-sectional Study of their Impact on Adolescent Tobacco Use. Asian Pacific J Cancer Prev, 13, 4173-4176 20. Salaam Bombay Foundation. http://www.salaambombay.org/stories-of-change.php (accessed on 27th May, 2015). 21. Chapman Simon. Public Health Advocacy and Tobacco Control: Making Smoking History. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, 2007. 22. Fichtenberg CM, Glantz SA. Effect of smokefree workplaces on smoking behaviour: Systematic review. BMJ. 2002;325:188 23. Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, GoI, WHO-India and TISS. (2017). GATS-2: Fact Sheet- 2016-17.

i

Annexture-I

PART- I: INFORMATION ABOUT LOCATION/PUBLIC PLACE 1. Name of the District:

2. Name of the Block:

3. Name of the Public place:

4. Address :

5. Type of Public place Category 1: Accommodation facilities such as

( Please Mark√ ) lodge/hotel/rest house/sarai

Category 2: Eateries such as Restaurant/bars/dhaba/ tea

stall/ahata

Category 3: Educational establishments

Category 4: Offices (Government/office)

Category 5: Health care facility (Govt. /Pvt.)

Category 6: Bus stand/taxi stand/ rain

shelter/mall/market/cinema ghar/amusement

park/museum/water parks

Category 7: Public transport: bus/taxi/maxi cab/three

wheeler

6. Date of visit: / /2017

7. Time of visiting the Public place ( Please Mark√ )

9:00 am-1:00 pm

1:00 pm-3:00 pm

3:00 pm-5:00 pm

5:00 pm-7:00 pm

7:00 pm-9:00 pm

8. Name of Field Investigator

1……………………………..

2……………………………

PART-II: OBSERVATION INFORMATION

1. Whether “No smoking signage” is displayed? YES NO

1.1 If yes, whether signages are displayed at YES NO NA

entrance and other conspicuous places?

1.2 If yes, whether signages are as per the YES NO NA

specification of COTPA-2003 in size, text and

design?

1.3 If yes, whether contact details of reporting YES NO NA

Person written?

2. Whether someone is found smoking at the time YES NO

of visit?

ii

3. Whether the smoking aids such as matchboxes

and lighters etc. are visible? YES NO

4. Whether someone has done smoking recently in YES NO

this public place- as evident from the smell?

5. Whether some cigarettes butts or bidi stubs/ash YES NO

are found?

Next questions only applicable to three categories 1. Accommodation facility 2. Eateries 3. Airport

6. Whether any Smoking zone/space/area is YES NO NA

designated for the smokers in the hotel/

restaurant/airport?

6.1 If yes, what is the sitting/accommodation capacity of a restaurant/hotel……………………................

6.2 If yes, whether smoking area/zone/ space is as YES NO NA

per specification of the act

(location/built/exhaust to outside/automatic

closing door etc.)?

6.3 If yes, whether this smoking area/space/zone is YES NO NA

used only for the purposes of smoking and no

service(s) are allowed therein.

Next question only applicable to one category (Accommodation facility)

7. Whether Designated smoking rooms are YES NO

available in an accommodation facility.

7.1 If yes, what is total number of rooms in an accommodation facility………………….....

7.2 If yes, what is total number of designated smoking rooms in an accommodation facility

7.3 If yes, whether such rooms are distinctively YES NO NA

marked as “Smoking Room” in English and the

local language.

7.4 If yes, whether these designated smoking rooms YES NO NA

are in separate section in same wing or floor.

8. Any photographs taken YES NO

9. Any other observation:

Signature of Field investigator

iii

Annexure II: Checklist II for Survey on Section 6(b)

Part I: Background Checklist

State/ District Name

Name and address of an educational

Institute

Whether institute is in government or Government sector

private sector (Please tick√) Private sector

Category of educational institute Primary school (Up to 5th

) University study centres

(Please tick√) Middle school (Up to 8th

) Medical college

High school (Up to 10th

) Engineering college

Senior secondary school (Up Education college

to 12th

) Computer education

Degree college centre

University Others (Please specify)

Total no. of students studying in the

Institute

Total no. of staff (both teaching and

non-teaching) working in the

Institute

Time of visit

Part II: Observation checklist

Sl. No Indicators Observation Yes / No

Please mark (√ )

1. Display of signage as mandated in the law-section 6 Yes No

(b) of COTPA

If yes, whether it is as per the specification mandated by law

1.1 Text is as per law Yes No NA

1.2 Background colour of the board is White Yes No NA

2. Sale of tobacco products inside the campus Yes No

2.1 If yes, please mention the total no. of PoS …………………..

2.2. If yes please mention the type and number of POS

No of permanent shop/kiosk:

Temporary/movable kiosk:

NA

3. Sale of tobacco products within 100 yards of radial Yes No

distance from the institute’s main gate or boundary

3.1 If Yes, please mention the total no. of PoS …………………………

3.2 If yes, please mention the type and number of No of Permanent shop:

PoS Temporary/movable kiosk:

NA

……………………………………………………………Name of the field investigator/signature/date

iv

Annexure III: Checklist III for Survey on Section 6(a), Section 5, and Section7, 8 & 9

Part 1: Background Information

District/ Block Name

Complete address

Type of the shop Temporary /movable kiosk Permanent/fixed

(Please tick √) shop

Type of the shop Exclusive Mainly Tobacco sale is

(Business) tobacco shop tobacco not a major

(Please tick √) shop but business

also sells

other things

Date of observation DD/MM/YYYY

Name of the investigator

Part-2: Observational Information for Section 6(a)

Sl. Indicator Observation (Yes / No/NA)

No Please mark (√ )

1 Display of signage as mandated in law - 6 Yes No

(a) of COTPA

1.1 If yes, whether placed at prominent Yes No NA

place/clearly visible

1.2 If yes, whether as per specification of law

i. Size i.e. 30cms x 60cms Yes No NA

ii. Indian Language Yes No NA

iii. Size of picture area (50% of the board) Yes No NA

iv. Size of text Size (50% of the board) Yes No NA

v. Text as per law

Yes

No

NA

2 Sale of tobacco products by a minor Yes No

3 Sale of tobacco products to the minors Yes No

4 Whether vendors enquire or see age-proof in Yes No

under-age/youth (borderline case)

5 Tobacco products are prominently displayed Yes No

and visible

6 Tobacco products are easily accessible to Yes No

minors

7 Tobacco products are sold through vending Yes No

machines

v

Part 3: Observational Information for Section 5 (PoS)

Sr. Parameter of evaluation Observation (Yes /

No. No/NA)

Please mark (√ )

1. Whether tobacco products advertisements are present at the PoS? Yes No

1.1 If yes, what kind of advertisements

1.1.1 Boards Yes No NA 1.1.2 Posters Yes No NA

1.1.3.Banners Yes No NA

1.1.4 Stickers Yes No NA

1.1.5 LCD/video screening Yes No NA

1.1.6 Dangles Yes No NA

1.1.7 Promotional gifts/offers Yes No NA

1.1.8 Products showcases Yes No NA

1.1.9 Any others ( please describe) 2.1 If an advertisement board is displayed, whether Yes No NA its size exceeds 60X45 cm

2.2 Number of advertisement boards at the PoS …..please write

2.3 Whether advertisement board is illuminated or Yes No NA back lit

2.4 Whether advertisement board displays brand Yes No NA packshot or brand name of tobacco products

2.5 Whether advertisement board shows any Yes No NA promotional message or picture

2.6 Whether the particular colour and layout and or Yes No NA presentation is used in an advertisement board

that is associated to particular tobacco products

2.7 Whether, besides the boards, advertisements are extended to full body of PoS

Yes No NA

3.1 Whether advertisement board displays a health warning

Yes No NA

3.2 Whether health warning is in white background with black letters

Yes No NA

3.3 Whether size of health warning is more than 20 X 15 cm

Yes No NA

3.4 Whether health warning is on uppermost portion of a board

Yes No NA

3.5 Whether health warning is written in any local Indian language (as applicable)

Yes No NA

4. Whether tobacco products are sold by a vending machines

Yes No NA

5. Whether display of tobacco products is visible to minors

Yes No NA

6. Tobacco products are sold by minors Yes No NA

Any photographs taken: Yes/No

vi

Annexure IV: Protocol and timeline for visiting and making observations at different sampled places

Type of Public places Standard Time of observation Specific places within the jurisdiction

Educational institutions School hours At least two classrooms; teachers’ common room; office room; students’ common room; one toilet, Canteens (if any) for Section 4. Whole campus and 100 yards radius from outer boundary of the institute for Section 6

Accommodation facilities Any time between Reception; waiting lounge, at least two

9:30 am to rooms in different floors, lobby areas; 9:00 pm one toilet; at least one back Corridor (if any)

Eating facilities 1:00 - 3:00 pm & 6:00 - 9:00 The entire premises pm (meal times)

Offices (both private and Office time Reception; common waiting room; at government) 9:00 am-5:00pm least two office rooms; employee

retiring/common room (if any), one toilet; meeting room; lobby (if any), at least one back corridor or balcony (if any); canteen (if any)

Health care facilities Any time between Reception; at least one male and one 9:30 am to female ward (wherever applicable); 4:00 pm one office room; one doctors’ room; one toilet; one patients’ waiting area; Canteen

Frequently visited places Bus stand, Taxi stand, Railway Main entrance area; central core area; with maximum

accessibility station, Cinema hall, Petrol at least two public toilets; information . pump: 9:30 am to 9:00 pm area; waiting area

Shopping mall, Shopping (wherever applicable) market:

2:00 pm to 8:00 pm (busiest

hours)

Public Transport Facilities 9:00am to 9:00 pm Entire Vehicle

Points of Sale Peak business hours Entire PoS

report of endline survey for assessing the current level ... report_0.pdfbiswajit pal and with...

Documents