Should one use smokeless tobacco in smoking cessation programs?

A rational addiction approach
  • Mikael BaskEmail author
  • Maria Melkersson
Original Papers


The rational addiction model is often used for empirical analysis of the demand for addictive goods. We propose an extension of the model to include two goods, cigarettes and Swedish moist snuff, locally known as snus. Demand equations are estimated using aggregated annual time series data (in first differences) for the period 1964–1997. The findings from the dataset used give some support to the rational addiction hypothesis. The cross-price elasticities are negative, which indicates that taking snus contributes to increased smoking. Thus it is not advisable to encourage the use of the less harmful snus in smoking cessation programs.


Rational addiction model Smoking cessation programs Smokeless tobacco Swedish moist snuff 



Valuable comments and suggestions from participants at seminars at Umeå University, Stockholm University (SOFI), and Luleå University of Technology are gratefully acknowledged. We are grateful to Sam Cameron for providing us with helpful comments and suggestions. Finally, we thank Suzanne Grahn at Swedish Match for providing the time series of snus prices. The usual disclaimer applies.


  1. 1.
    Becker GS, Murphy KM (1988) A theory of rational addiction. J Polit Econ 96:675–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Becker GS, Grossman M, Murphy KM (1994) An empirical analysis of cigarette addiction. Am Econ Rev 84:396–418Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bolinder GM, Ahlborg BO, Lindell JH (1992) Use of smokeless tobacco: blood pressure elevation and other health hazards found in a large-scale population survey. J Intern Med 232:327–334Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cameron S (1998) Estimation of the demand for cigarettes: a review of the literature. Econ Issues 3:51–71Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chaloupka FJ (1991) Rational addictive behavior and cigarette smoking. J Polit Econ 99:722–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chaloupka FJ, Warner KE (2000) The economics of smoking. In: Culyer AJ, Newhouse JP (eds) Handbook of health economics, chap 29. North Holland: AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dahlgren G (1997) Determinants of the burden of disease in the European Union. Report no F24. National Institute of Public Health: StockholmGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Enders W (1995) Applied econometric time series. Wiley: New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fagerström KO, Ramström L (1998) Can smokeless tobacco rid us of tobacco smoke? Am J Med 104:501–503CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Huhtasaari F, Asplund K, Lundberg V, Stegamayr B, Wester PO (1992) Tobacco and myocardial infarction: is snuff less dangerous than cigarettes? BMJ 305:1252–1256Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jiménez-Martín S, Labeaga JM, López A (1998) Participation, heterogeneity and dynamics in tobacco consumption: evidence from cohort data. Health Econ 7:401–414CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Melkersson M (2002) Smoking habits and quitting costs in the presence of a close substitute. SOFI, Stockholm University: StockholmGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schildt E-B, Eriksson M, Hardell L, Magnuson A (1998) Oral snuff, smoking habits and alcohol consumption in relation to oral cancer in a Swedish case-control study. Int J Cancer 77:341–346Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Suranovic SM, Goldfarb RS, Leonard TC (1999) An economic theory of cigarette addiction. J Health Econ 18:1–29Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tauras JA (1999) The transition to smoking cessation: evidence from multiple failure duration analysis. NBER working paper no 7412Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tilashalski K, Rodu B, Cole P (1998) A pilot study of smokeless tobacco in smoking cessation. Am J Med 104:456–459Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsUmeå UniversitySweden
  2. 2.SOFIStockholm UniversitySweden
  3. 3.Department of EconomicsUmeå UniversityUmeåSweden

Personalised recommendations