A bottoms-up approach to alcohol policy
India’s alcohol consumption has increased by 38 per cent between 2010 and 2017, a recent Lancet study has shown. Today, the consumption stands at 5.9 litres per adult per year, compared to 4.3 litres earlier. The study, interestingly, observed that while the consumption was increasing in low and middle-income countries, it remained stable in high-income nations. Eastern European nations have largely reduced their intake, but countries such as India, China and Vietnam have recorded vast increases.
Alcohol is causally linked to over 200 diseases, mostly non-communicable ones. A big chunk of India’s non-communicable disease burden is linked to alcohol and tobacco consumption, which is likely to increase in light of the current trend.
In India, alcohol kills 2.6 lakh people a year, in the form of diseases or accidents, according to WHO. To combat the problem, WHO had set a target to reduce the ‘harmful use’ of alcohol by 10 per cent by 2025. Experts say this target is unlikely to be met.
In economic terms, alcoholism is set to cost India 1.45 per cent of GDP by 2050, according to AIIMS-Delhi researchers.
The only arrow in the quiver for policymakers combating the issue seems to be prohibition, which has been written off as a failure by nations that experimented with it. Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh experimented with prohibition in the seventies and nineties. It did not last for more than a couple of years in either of the states. Today, these state governments reap the benefits of alcohol-related revenues.
TN earns close to Rs 30,000 crore from alcohol-related revenues—highest in the country—and AP around 13,000 crore. The fund crunch caused by prohibition to state exchequers and free flow of illicit liquor have ensured the failure of prohibition, time and again. Today, only Gujarat, Bihar and Mizoram have prohibition in place.
Recently, US-based MIT conducted a study among cycle-rickshaw drivers in Chennai which presents an interesting insight on alcohol consumption. The experiment conducted among 230-odd drivers showed financial incentives had a positive impact on abstinence. Will policymakers want to ponder over this?