Cigarette Affordability and Cigarette Consumption among Adult and Elderly Chinese Smokers: Evidence from A Longitudinal Study
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Data Source
2.2. Measures
2.2.1. Per Capita Disposable Income
2.2.2. Cigarette Affordability and Consumption
2.2.3. Covariates
2.3. Study Sample
2.4. Empirical Methodology
3. Results
3.1. Sample Characteristics
3.2. Cigarette Affordability and Cigarette Consumption
3.3. The Association between Cigarette Affordability and Cigarette Consumption
4. Discussion
4.1. Association between Affordability and Consumption, by Demographics and Socialeconomic Status
4.2. Association between Affordability and Consumption, by Geographic Locations
4.3. Association between Affordability and Consumption, by Cigarette Price Tiers
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Sample Information | RIP (%) | ∆RIP (pp) | Cigarette Consumption per Day (Sticks) | ∆Consumption (Sticks) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2011–2012 | 2015–2016 | 2011–2012 | 2015–2016 | |||
Overall | 7.52 | 9.36 | 1.84 | 17.5 | 17.0 | −0.5 |
Age group | ||||||
45–59 | 6.98 | 8.21 | 1.23 | 18.4 | 18.0 | −0.4 |
60+ | 8.25 | 10.50 | 2.25 | 16.2 | 15.9 | −0.3 |
Gender | ||||||
Male | 7.47 | 9.30 | 1.83 | 17.9 | 17.5 | −0.4 |
Female | 8.03 | 10.08 | 2.05 | 12.7 | 11.2 | -1.5 |
Education level | ||||||
Primary and below | 8.32 | 11.43 | 3.11 | 17.4 | 16.5 | −0.9 |
Middle and high school | 6.63 | 7.28 | 0.65 | 17.7 | 17.7 | 0.0 |
College and above | 6.35 | 6.35 | 0.00 | 15.4 | 14.5 | −0.9 |
Marital status | ||||||
Unmarried | 8.69 | 11.36 | 2.67 | 16.9 | 15.1 | -1.8 |
Married | 7.39 | 9.14 | 1.75 | 17.6 | 17.2 | −0.4 |
Economic region | ||||||
Eastern region | 6.79 | 7.49 | 0.70 | 18.5 | 18.0 | −0.5 |
Northeast region | 6.50 | 7.30 | 0.80 | 15.9 | 14.8 | -1.1 |
Central region | 7.67 | 10.15 | 2.48 | 18.0 | 17.9 | −0.1 |
Western region | 8.61 | 11.54 | 2.93 | 16.1 | 15.4 | −0.7 |
Residential zone | ||||||
Rural | 8.60 | 11.64 | 3.04 | 18.0 | 17.5 | −0.5 |
Urban | 6.43 | 7.28 | 0.85 | 17.0 | 16.5 | −0.5 |
Cigarette brands by price tier | ||||||
Tier I (luxury brands) | 12.57 | 11.19 | −1.38 | 13.3 | 15.1 | 1.8 |
Tier II (premium brands) | 9.91 | 9.01 | −0.9 | 16.3 | 14.0 | −2.3 |
Tier III (medium-priced brands) | 7.40 | 9.36 | 1.96 | 16.9 | 17.2 | 0.3 |
Tier IV (discount brands) | 7.73 | 9.51 | 1.78 | 17.5 | 17.3 | −0.2 |
Tier V (deep discount brands) | 6.35 | 7.17 | 0.82 | 18.6 | 18.3 | −0.3 |
Sample Information | Cigarette Price (RMB/PACK) | Relative Change of Price | Per Capita Household Disposable Income (RMB) | Relative Change of Income | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2011–2012 | 2015–2016 | 2011–2012 | 2015–2016 | |||
Overall | 5.87 | 7.90 | 35% | 13,944 | 16,725 | 20% |
Age group | ||||||
45–59 | 6.40 | 8.72 | 36% | 15,227 | 18,458 | 21% |
60 + | 5.14 | 7.09 | 38% | 12194 | 15,000 | 23% |
Gender | ||||||
Male | 5.98 | 8.13 | 36% | 14,175 | 17,013 | 20% |
Female | 4.61 | 5.33 | 16% | 11,338 | 13,489 | 19% |
Education level | ||||||
Primary and below | 4.93 | 6.61 | 34% | 11,301 | 12,478 | 10% |
Middle and high school | 6.44 | 8.77 | 36% | 16,277 | 20,158 | 24% |
College and above | 13.84 | 15.43 | 11% | 26,155 | 33,885 | 30% |
Marital status | ||||||
Unmarried | 5.14 | 6.14 | 19% | 12,275 | 12,729 | 4% |
Married | 5.95 | 8.10 | 36% | 14,123 | 17,173 | 22% |
Economic region | ||||||
Eastern region | 7.14 | 8.68 | 22% | 16,694 | 20,139 | 21% |
Northeast region | 5.95 | 6.63 | 11% | 15,109 | 17,175 | 14% |
Central region | 4.88 | 7.72 | 58% | 12,034 | 14,161 | 18% |
Western region | 5.23 | 7.45 | 42% | 12,049 | 14,856 | 23% |
Residential zone | ||||||
Rural | 4.38 | 6.35 | 45% | 10,708 | 11,374 | 6% |
Urban | 7.35 | 9.32 | 27% | 17,172 | 21,620 | 26% |
Cigarette brands by price tier | ||||||
Tier I (luxury brands) | 25.92 | 25.17 | −3% | 25,102 | 32,527 | 30% |
Tier II (premium brands) | 15.63 | 14.99 | −4% | 22,891 | 23,534 | 3% |
Tier III (medium-priced brands) | 8.95 | 8.63 | −4% | 19,120 | 19,760 | 3% |
Tier IV (discount brands) | 4.53 | 4.35 | −4% | 12,524 | 11,316 | −10% |
Tier V (deep discount brands) | 2.39 | 2.28 | −5% | 9689 | 7603 | −22% |
Variable | A. Gender | B. Marital Status | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Male | Female | Married | Unmarried | |
ln(RIP) | −0.172 *** | −0.095 ** | −0.159 *** | −0.224 *** |
(−0.204 to −0.139) | (−0.177 to −0.014) | (−0.192 to −0.127) | (−0.308 to −0.139) | |
Other variables | Control | Control | Control | Control |
Observations | 6082 | 570 | 6019 | 633 |
Appendix B
Variable | Model 6a Coef. (S.E.) | Model 6b Coef. (S.E.) | Model 6c Coef. (S.E.) | Model 6d Coef. (S.E.) | Model 6e Coef. (S.E.) | Model 6f Coef. (S.E.) | Model 6g Coef. (S.E.) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
−0.158 *** | −0.232 *** | −0.052 | −0.264 *** | −0.256 *** | −0.253 *** | −0.269 *** | |
(0.030) | (0.017) | (0.098) | (0.045) | (0.030) | (0.018) | (0.033) | |
Interaction terms | |||||||
−0.113 *** | |||||||
(0.034) | |||||||
0.033 | |||||||
(0.050) | |||||||
−0.221 ** | |||||||
(0.100) | |||||||
−0.122 | |||||||
(0.101) | |||||||
0.038 | |||||||
(0.047) | |||||||
0.121 ** | |||||||
(0.054) | |||||||
0.028 | |||||||
(0.037) | |||||||
0.032 | |||||||
(0.038) | |||||||
0.052 * | |||||||
(0.030) | |||||||
−0.248 * | |||||||
(0.128) | |||||||
−0.052 | |||||||
(0.137) | |||||||
0.047 | |||||||
(0.036) | |||||||
0.122 *** | |||||||
(0.040) | |||||||
Other variables | Control | Control | Control | Control | Control | Control | Control |
Wald | 557.66 | 522.19 | 546.80 | 511.06 | 538.14 | 552.74 | 545.54 |
Number of observations | N = 4257 | ||||||
Number of groups | N = 3505 |
Characteristic | Observations | 95% CIs | Other Variables | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Age group | ||||
45–59 | 2292 | −0.167 *** | (−0.227 to −0.108) | Control |
60 + | 1965 | −0.281 *** | (−0.316 to −0.245) | Control |
Gender | ||||
Male | 4009 | −0.230 *** | (−0.264 to −0.197) | Control |
Female | 248 | −0.169 *** | (−0.269 to −0.068) | Control |
Education level | ||||
Primary and below | 2089 | −0.280 *** | (−0.320 to −0.240) | Control |
Middle and high school | 2010 | −0.173 *** | (−0.232 to −0.115) | Control |
College and above | 158 | −0.106 | (−0.322 to 0.110) | Control |
Marital status | ||||
Unmarried | 383 | −0.257 *** | (−0.346 to −0.167) | Control |
Married | 3874 | −0.224 *** | (−0.257 to −0.191) | Control |
Economic Region | ||||
Eastern region | 1509 | −0.257 *** | (−0.317 to −0.197) | Control |
Northeast region | 331 | −0.121 *** | (−0.210 to −0.031) | Control |
Central region | 1307 | −0.227 *** | (−0.278 to −0.175) | Control |
Western region | 1110 | −0.218 *** | (−0.268 to −0.168) | Control |
Residential zone | ||||
Rural | 2163 | −0.250 *** | (−0.287 to −0.214) | Control |
Urban | 2094 | −0.199 *** | (−0.251 to −0.146) | Control |
Cigarette price tier | ||||
Tier I | 180 | −0.392 *** | (−0.636 to −0.148) | Control |
Tier II | 166 | −0.334 *** | (−0.577 to −0.091) | Control |
Tier III | 1459 | −0.279 *** | (−0.344 to −0.213) | Control |
Tier IV | 1937 | −0.217 *** | (−0.255 to −0.180) | Control |
Tier V | 515 | −0.156 *** | (−0.220 to −0.093) | Control |
References
- World Health Organization. China Country Assessment Report on Ageing and Health; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA). World Population Prospects 2019; UN DESA, Population Division: New York, NY, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- The Xinhua News Agency. By 2050, the Elderly Will Account for about One Third of China’s Population. Available online: http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2018-07/19/content_5307839.htm (accessed on 21 September 2019).
- Zhou, M.; Wang, H.; Zeng, X.; Yin, P.; Zhu, J.; Chen, W.; Li, X.; Wang, L.; Wang, L.; Liu, Y. Mortality, morbidity, and risk factors in China and its provinces, 1990–2017: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gerber, Y.; Myers, V.; Goldbourt, U. Smoking Reduction at Midlife and Lifetime Mortality Risk in Men: A Prospective Cohort Study. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2012, 175, 1006–1012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pisinger, C.; Godtfredsen, N.S. Is There a Health Benefit of Reduced Tobacco Consumption? A Systematic Review. Nicotine Tob. Res. 2007, 9, 631–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shiffman, S.; Hughes, J.R.; Ferguson, S.G.; Pillitteri, J.L.; Gitchell, J.G.; Burton, S.L. Smokers’ Interest in Using Nicotine Replacement to Aid Smoking Reduction. Nicotine Tob. Res. 2007, 9, 1177–1182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hughes, J.R.; Carpenter, M.J. Does Smoking Reduction Increase Future Cessation and Decrease Disease Risk? A qualitative Review. Nicotine Tob. Res. 2006, 8, 739–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asfar, T.; Ebbert, J.O.; Klesges, R.C.; Relyea, G.E. Do smoking reduction interventions promote cessation in smokers not ready to quit? Addict. Behav. 2011, 36, 764–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chinese Center for Diease Control and Prevention. Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATS) China 2015 Report; People’s Medical Publishing House: Beijing, China, 2015.
- Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATS) China 2018 Report; People’s Medical Publishing House: Beijing, China, 2019.
- Chaloupka, F.J.; Straif, K.; Leon, M.E. Effectiveness of tax and price policies in tobacco control. Tob. Control 2011, 20, 235–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marquez, P.V.; Moreno-Dodson, B. Tobacco Tax Reform: At the Crossroads Health and Development: A Multisectoral Perspective; World Bank Group: Washington, DC, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Blecher, E.H.; van Walbeek, C.P. An international analysis of cigarette affordability. Tob. Control 2004, 13, 339–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, Y.; Shang, C.; Chaloupka, F.J. The association between cigarette affordability and consumption: An update. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0200665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zheng, R.; Wang, Y.; Hu, X.; Marquez, P.V. Cigarette Affordability in China: 2001–2016; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Russell, S.; Sturua, L.; Li, C.; Morgan, J.; Topuridze, M.; Blanton, C.; Hagan, L.; Salyer, S.J. The burden of non-communicable diseases and their related risk factors in the country of Georgia, 2015. BMC Public Health 2019, 19, 479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, Y.; Hu, Y.; Smith, J.P.; Strauss, J.; Yang, G. Cohort profile: The China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS). Int. J. Epidemiol. 2014, 43, 61–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wawrzyniak, A.; Furaiji, F.; Łatuszyńska, M. An Empirical Study of the Factors Influencing Consumer Behaviour in the Electric Appliances Market. Contemp. Econ. 2012, 6, 76–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, F.; Huang, L. Household Characteristic and Resident Consumption—Based on CFPS Data. J. Appl. Stat. Manag. 2019, 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- National Bureau of Statistics of China. Available online: http://data.stats.gov.cn/easyquery.htm?cn=C01 (accessed on 21 September 2019).
- Ramsey, P.H.; Ramsey, P.P. Optimal trimming and outlier elimination. J. Mod. Appl. Stat. Methods 2007, 6, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pan, W. Akaike’s information criterion in generalized estimating equations. Biometrics 2001, 57, 120–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cui, J. QIC Program and Model Selection in GEE Analyses. Stata J. 2007, 7, 209–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, J.D.; Zheng, R.; Chaloupka, F.J.; Fong, G.T.; Jiang, Y. Differential Responsiveness to Cigarette Price by Education and Income among Adult Urban Chinese Smokers. Tob. Control 2015, 24, 76–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nargis, N.; Zheng, R.; Xu, S.S.; Fong, G.T.; Feng, G.; Jiang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Hu, X. Cigarette Affordability in China, 2006–2015: Findings from International Tobacco Control China Surveys. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 1205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elshatarat, R.A.; Yacoub, M.I.; Khraim, F.M.; Saleh, Z.T.; Afaneh, T.R. Self-efficacy in treating tobacco use: A review article. Proc. Singap. Healthc. 2016, 25, 243–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dom, G.; Samochowiec, J.; Evans-Lacko, S.; Wahlbeck, K.; Van Hal, G.; McDaid, D. The Impact of the 2008 Economic Crisis on Substance Use Patterns in the Countries of the European Union. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2016, 13, 122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McKee, S.A.; Sinha, R.; Weinberger, A.H.; Sofuoglu, M.; Harrison, E.L.; Lavery, M.; Wanzer, J. Stress decreases the ability to resist smoking and potentiates smoking intensity and reward. J. Psychopharmacol. 2011, 25, 490–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- World Health Organization Western Pacific Region and University of Waterloo, ITC Project. Smoke-Free Policies in China: Evidence of Effectiveness and Implications for Action; World Health Organization Regional Office for the Western Pacific: Manila, Philippines, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, G.; Wang, Y.; Wu, Y.; Yang, J.; Wan, X. The road to effective tobacco control in China. Lancet 2015, 385, 1019–1028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gupta, B.; Kumar, N. A cross-country comparison of knowledge, attitudes and practices about tobacco use: Findings from the global adult tobacco survey. Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. 2014, 15, 5035–5042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Xu, S.S.; Gravely, S.; Meng, G.; Elton-Marshall, T.; O’Connor, R.J.; Quah, A.C.K.; Feng, G.; Jiang, Y.; Hu, G.J.; Fong, G.T. Impact of China National Tobacco Company’s ‘Premiumization’ Strategy: Longitudinal findings from the ITC China Surveys (2006–2015). Tob. Control 2019, 28, s68–s76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Verguet, S.; Gauvreau, C.L.; Mishra, S.; MacLennan, M.; Murphy, S.M.; Brouwer, E.D.; Nugent, R.A.; Zhao, K.; Jha, P.; Jamison, D.T. The consequences of tobacco tax on household health and finances in rich and poor smokers in China: An extended cost-effectiveness analysis. Lancet Glob. Health 2015, 3, e206–e216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Denisova, I.; Kuznetsova, P. The Effects of Tobacco Taxes on Health: An Analysis of the Effects by Income Quintile and Gender in Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation, and Ukraine; World Bank Group: Washington, DC, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Wu, F.; Narimatsu, H.; Li, X.; Nakamura, S.; Sho, R.; Zhao, G.; Nakata, Y.; Xu, W. Non-communicable diseases control in China and Japan. Glob. Health 2017, 13, 91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, F.; Guo, Y.; Chatterji, S.; Zheng, Y.; Naidoo, N.; Jiang, Y.; Biritwum, R.; Yawson, A.; Minicuci, N.; Salinas-Rodriguez, A. Common risk factors for chronic non-communicable diseases among older adults in China, Ghana, Mexico, India, Russia and South Africa: The study on global AGEing and adult health (SAGE) wave 1. BMC Public Health 2015, 15, 88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, P.; Li, F.; Harmer, P. Healthy China 2030: Moving from blueprint to action with a new focus on public health. Lancet Public Health 2019, 4, e447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Sample Information | Wave 1 (2011–2012) | Wave 3 (2015–2016) | Pooled | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N | % | N | % | N | % | |
Overall | 3018 | 100% | 3634 | 100% | 6652 | 100% |
Age group | ||||||
45–59 | 1687 | 56% | 1817 | 50% | 3504 | 53% |
60+ | 1331 | 44% | 1817 | 50% | 3148 | 47% |
Gender | ||||||
Male | 2760 | 91% | 3322 | 91% | 6082 | 91% |
Female | 258 | 9% | 312 | 9% | 570 | 9% |
Education level | ||||||
Primary and below | 1685 | 56% | 1945 | 54% | 3630 | 55% |
Middle and high school | 1260 | 42% | 1594 | 44% | 2854 | 43% |
College and above | 73 | 2% | 95 | 3% | 168 | 3% |
Marital status | ||||||
Unmarried | 265 | 9% | 368 | 10% | 633 | 10% |
Married | 2753 | 91% | 3266 | 90% | 6019 | 90% |
Economic Region | ||||||
Eastern region | 959 | 32% | 1157 | 32% | 2116 | 32% |
Northeast region | 220 | 7% | 283 | 8% | 503 | 8% |
Central region | 963 | 32% | 1128 | 31% | 2091 | 31% |
Western region | 876 | 29% | 1066 | 29% | 1942 | 29% |
Residential zone | ||||||
Rural | 1760 | 58% | 2101 | 58% | 3861 | 58% |
Urban | 1258 | 42% | 1533 | 42% | 2791 | 42% |
Cigarette brands by price tier | ||||||
Tier I (luxury brands) | 56 | 2% | 164 | 5% | 220 | 3% |
Tier II (premium brands) | 42 | 1% | 156 | 4% | 198 | 3% |
Tier III (medium-priced brands) | 531 | 18% | 1481 | 41% | 2012 | 30% |
Tier IV (discount brands) | 1577 | 52% | 1599 | 44% | 3176 | 48% |
Tier V (deep discount brands) | 812 | 27% | 234 | 6% | 1046 | 16% |
Characteristic | RIP | Cigarettes Consumed Per Day |
---|---|---|
Age ≥ 60 (vs. Age 45–59) | 1.603 *** | −2.407 *** |
(0.301) | (0.391) | |
Female (vs. male) | 0.820 | −5.873 *** |
(0.504) | (0.527) | |
Primary and below (vs. college and above) | 4.320 *** | 1.020 |
(0.776) | (1.186) | |
Middle and high school (vs. college and above) | 1.827 ** | 1.156 |
(0.727) | (1.146) | |
Married (vs. unmarried) | −1.098 * | 0.318 |
(0.637) | (0.538) | |
Northeast region (vs. Eastern region) | 0.776 * | −2.533 *** |
(0.440) | (0.743) | |
Central region (vs. Eastern region) | 2.198 *** | −0.801 |
(0.353) | (0.558) | |
Western region (vs. Eastern region) | 3.029 *** | −3.103 *** |
(0.408) | (0.546) | |
Urban (vs. rural) | −3.484 *** | −0.262 |
(0.317) | (0.418) | |
Tier I (vs. tier III) | 4.633 *** | −2.905 *** |
(0.875) | (0.957) | |
Tier II (vs. tier III) | 1.047 | −3.665 ** |
(0.966) | (1.560) | |
Tier IV (vs. tier III) | −1.893 *** | 1.110 ** |
(0.360) | (0.468) | |
Tier V (vs. tier III) | −4.890 *** | 2.546 *** |
(0.487) | (0.664) | |
Wave 3 (vs. wave 1) | 0.610** | 0.520 |
(0.278) | (0.381) | |
Constant | 6.794 *** | 18.080 *** |
(1.013) | (1.393) | |
Number of observations | N = 6652 | |
Number of groups | N = 5077 |
Variable | Measure #1 | Measure #2 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model 1 Coef. (S.E.) | Model 2 Coef. (S.E.) | Model 3 Coef. (S.E.) | Model 4 Coef. (S.E.) | Model 5 Coef. (S.E.) | Model 6 Coef. (S.E.) | |
Number of observations | N = 6652 | N = 4257 | ||||
Number of groups | N = 5077 | N = 3505 | ||||
Ln (RIP) | −0.178 *** | −0.180 *** | −0.184 *** | −0.165 *** | −0.165 *** | −0.230 *** |
(0.016) | (0.016) | (0.016) | (0.015) | (0.016) | (0.016) | |
Age ≥60 (age 45–59 = 0) | −0.138 *** | −0.142 *** | −0.157 *** | −0.164 *** | −0.205 *** | |
(0.031) | (0.031) | (0.029) | (0.029) | (0.038) | ||
Female (male = 0) | −0.479 *** | −0.463 *** | −0.483 *** | −0.487 *** | −0.384 *** | |
(0.051) | (0.052) | (0.052) | (0.052) | (0.076) | ||
Primary and below (college and above = 0) | 0.294 *** | 0.244 *** | 0.177 * | 0.172 * | 0.225 ** | |
(0.090) | (0.091) | (0.096) | (0.096) | (0.091) | ||
Middle and high school (college and above = 0) | 0.244 *** | 0.207 ** | 0.154 * | 0.150 | 0.226 *** | |
(0.090) | (0.090) | (0.093) | (0.094) | (0.086) | ||
Married (unmarried = 0) | −0.003 | 0.001 | 0.005 | 0.005 | −0.030 | |
(0.045) | (0.044) | (0.044) | (0.045) | (0.060) | ||
Northeast region (Eastern region = 0) | −0.096 * | −0.114 ** | −0.117 ** | −0.153 ** | ||
(0.055) | (0.054) | (0.053) | (0.062) | |||
Central region (Eastern region = 0) | 0.009 | −0.014 | −0.018 | −0.063 | ||
(0.039) | (0.037) | (0.037) | (0.043) | |||
Western region (Eastern region = 0) | −0.133 *** | −0.152 *** | −0.156 *** | −0.104 ** | ||
(0.039) | (0.037) | (0.036) | (0.043) | |||
Urban (rural = 0) | −0.094 *** | −0.064 ** | −0.059 ** | −0.102 *** | ||
(0.031) | (0.029) | (0.029) | (0.035) | |||
Tier I (Tier III = 0) | −0.130 | −0.133 * | −0.085 | |||
(0.079) | (0.079) | (0.091) | ||||
Tier II (Tier III = 0) | −0.160 | −0.168 | −0.086 | |||
(0.106) | (0.108) | (0.133) | ||||
Tier IV (Tier III = 0) | 0.048 | 0.064 * | 0.072 ** | |||
(0.032) | (0.034) | (0.036) | ||||
Tier V (Tier III = 0) | 0.101 *** | 0.134 *** | 0.222 *** | |||
(0.038) | (0.045) | (0.048) | ||||
Wave 3 (wave 1 = 0) | 0.060 ** | 0.043 | ||||
(0.027) | (0.034) | |||||
Constant | 2.086 *** | 1.923 *** | 2.042 *** | 2.133 *** | 2.097 *** | 1.846 *** |
(0.047) | (0.109) | (0.113) | (0.115) | (0.116) | (0.132) | |
Wald | 124.91 | 252.27 | 332.89 | 374.99 | 395.56 | 510.55 |
Variable | Model 5a Coef. (S.E.) | Model 5b Coef. (S.E.) | Model 5c Coef. (S.E.) | Model 5d Coef. (S.E.) | Model 5e Coef. (S.E.) | Model 5f Coef. (S.E.) | Model 5g Coef. (S.E.) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
−0.099 *** | −0.170 *** | 0.069 | −0.207 *** | −0.163 *** | −0.193 *** | −0.185 *** | |
(0.023) | (0.017) | (0.102) | (0.043) | (0.035) | (0.017) | (0.034) | |
Interaction terms | |||||||
−0.126 *** | |||||||
(0.029) | |||||||
0.046 | |||||||
(0.043) | |||||||
−0.269 *** | |||||||
(0.104) | |||||||
−0.193 * | |||||||
(0.105) | |||||||
0.048 | |||||||
(0.046) | |||||||
0.093 * | |||||||
(0.056) | |||||||
−0.012 | |||||||
(0.042) | |||||||
−0.017 | |||||||
(0.043) | |||||||
0.064 ** | |||||||
(0.032) | |||||||
−0.291 *** | |||||||
(0.109) | |||||||
0.022 | |||||||
(0.196) | |||||||
ln(RIP) × Tier IV | 0.023 | ||||||
(0.040) | |||||||
ln(RIP) × Tier V | 0.074 * | ||||||
(0.042) | |||||||
Other variables | Control | Control | Control | Control | Control | Control | Control |
Wald | 439.94 | 396.19 | 410.22 | 395.51 | 412.75 | 442.23 | 413.23 |
Number of observations | N = 6652 | ||||||
Number of groups | N = 5077 |
Characteristic | Observations | 95% CIs | Other Variables | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Age group | ||||
45–59 | 3504 | −0.109 *** | (−0.154 to −0.064) | Control |
60 + | 3148 | −0.218 *** | (−0.258 to −0.178) | Control |
Education level | ||||
Primary and below | 3630 | −0.194 *** | (−0.232 to −0.156) | Control |
Middle and high school | 2854 | −0.129 *** | (−0.179 to −0.079) | Control |
College and above | 168 | 0.048 | (−0.205 to- 0.301) | Control |
Economic Region | ||||
Eastern region | 2116 | −0.171 *** | (−0.234 to −0.107) | Control |
Northeast region | 503 | −0.084 * | (−0.174 to 0.005) | Control |
Central region | 2091 | −0.167 *** | (−0.213 to −0.121) | Control |
Western region | 1942 | −0.183 *** | (−0.233 to −0.133) | Control |
Residential zone | ||||
Rural | 3861 | −0.191 *** | (−0.224 to −0.158) | Control |
Urban | 2791 | −0.130 *** | (−0.186 to −0.075) | Control |
Cigarette brands by price tier | ||||
Tier I | 220 | −0.499 *** | (−0.728 to −0.270) | Control |
Tier II | 198 | −0.136 | (−0.380 to 0.107) | Control |
Tier III | 2012 | −0.192 *** | (−0.255 to −0.130) | Control |
Tier IV | 3176 | −0.153 *** | (−0.193 to −0.113) | Control |
Tier V | 1046 | −0.118 *** | (−0.169 to −0.068) | Control |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Hu, X.; Wang, Y.; Huang, J.; Zheng, R. Cigarette Affordability and Cigarette Consumption among Adult and Elderly Chinese Smokers: Evidence from A Longitudinal Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 4832. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16234832
Hu X, Wang Y, Huang J, Zheng R. Cigarette Affordability and Cigarette Consumption among Adult and Elderly Chinese Smokers: Evidence from A Longitudinal Study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2019; 16(23):4832. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16234832
Chicago/Turabian StyleHu, Xiao, Yang Wang, Jidong Huang, and Rong Zheng. 2019. "Cigarette Affordability and Cigarette Consumption among Adult and Elderly Chinese Smokers: Evidence from A Longitudinal Study" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 16, no. 23: 4832. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16234832