Corporate Philanthropy, Political Influence, and Health Policy

Overview

Journal PLoS One

Specialties General Medicine
Science

Date 2013 Dec 7

PMID 24312249

Citations 24

Authors

Gary J Fooks

Anna B Gilmore

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: The Framework Convention of Tobacco Control (FCTC) provides a basis for nation states to limit the political effects of tobacco industry philanthropy, yet progress in this area is limited. This paper aims to integrate the findings of previous studies on tobacco industry philanthropy with a new analysis of British American Tobacco's (BAT) record of charitable giving to develop a general model of corporate political philanthropy that can be used to facilitate implementation of the FCTC.

Method: Analysis of previously confidential industry documents, BAT social and stakeholder dialogue reports, and existing tobacco industry document studies on philanthropy.

Results: The analysis identified six broad ways in which tobacco companies have used philanthropy politically: developing constituencies to build support for policy positions and generate third party advocacy; weakening opposing political constituencies; facilitating access and building relationships with policymakers; creating direct leverage with policymakers by providing financial subsidies to specific projects; enhancing the donor's status as a source of credible information; and shaping the tobacco control agenda by shifting thinking on the importance of regulating the market environment for tobacco and the relative risks of smoking for population health. Contemporary BAT social and stakeholder reports contain numerous examples of charitable donations that are likely to be designed to shape the tobacco control agenda, secure access and build constituencies.

Conclusions And Recommendations: Tobacco companies' political use of charitable donations underlines the need for tobacco industry philanthropy to be restricted via full implementation of Articles 5.3 and 13 of the FCTC. The model of tobacco industry philanthropy developed in this study can be used by public health advocates to press for implementation of the FCTC and provides a basis for analysing the political effects of charitable giving in other industry sectors which have an impact on public health such as alcohol and food.

Citing Articles

Building a Systems Map: Applying Systems Thinking to Unhealthy Commodity Industry Influence on Public Health Policy.

Bertscher A, Nobles J, Gilmore A, Bondy K, van den Akker A, Dance S Int J Health Policy Manag. 2024; 13:7872.

PMID: 39099529 PMC: 11607592. DOI: 10.34172/ijhpm.2024.7872.

Combatting tobacco industry lobbyists in public health.

Matheny J, Tegen A, Berkman M, Gray N, Verhagen B, Sree V Tob Induc Dis. 2023; 21:137.

PMID: 37869613 PMC: 10588373. DOI: 10.18332/tid/172140.

National Public Health Surveillance of Corporations in Key Unhealthy Commodity Industries - A Scoping Review and Framework Synthesis.

Bennett E, Topp S, Moodie A Int J Health Policy Manag. 2023; 12:6876.

PMID: 37579395 PMC: 10425693. DOI: 10.34172/ijhpm.2023.6876.

Corporate Political Activity: Taxonomies and Model of Corporate Influence on Public Policy.

Ulucanlar S, Lauber K, Fabbri A, Hawkins B, Mialon M, Hancock L Int J Health Policy Manag. 2023; 12:7292.

PMID: 37579378 PMC: 10462073. DOI: 10.34172/ijhpm.2023.7292.

Typology of how 'harmful commodity industries' interact with local governments in England: a critical interpretive synthesis.

McKevitt S, White M, Petticrew M, Summerbell C, Vasiljevic M, Boyland E BMJ Glob Health. 2023; 8(1).

PMID: 36690378 PMC: 9872461. DOI: 10.1136/bmjgh-2022-010216.

References

Fooks G, Gilmore A, Smith K, Collin J, Holden C, Lee K . Corporate social responsibility and access to policy élites: an analysis of tobacco industry documents. PLoS Med. 2011; 8(8):e1001076. PMC: 3160341. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001076. View

Warner K . The economics of tobacco: myths and realities. Tob Control. 2000; 9(1):78-89. PMC: 1748316. DOI: 10.1136/tc.9.1.78. View

Jahiel R . Corporation-induced diseases, upstream epidemiologic surveillance, and urban health. J Urban Health. 2008; 85(4):517-31. PMC: 2443251. DOI: 10.1007/s11524-008-9283-x. View

Gilmore A, Savell E, Collin J . Public health, corporations and the new responsibility deal: promoting partnerships with vectors of disease?. J Public Health (Oxf). 2011; 33(1):2-4. DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdr008. View

McDaniel P, Malone R . British American Tobacco's partnership with Earthwatch Europe and its implications for public health. Glob Public Health. 2011; 7(1):14-28. PMC: 3134627. DOI: 10.1080/17441692.2010.549832. View

Mamudu H, Hammond R, Glantz S . Tobacco industry attempts to counter the World Bank report Curbing the Epidemic and obstruct the WHO framework convention on tobacco control. Soc Sci Med. 2008; 67(11):1690-9. PMC: 2662513. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.09.062. View

Savell E, Gilmore A, Fooks G . How does the tobacco industry attempt to influence marketing regulations? A systematic review. PLoS One. 2014; 9(2):e87389. PMC: 3914831. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087389. View

Malone R, Balbach E . Tobacco industry documents: treasure trove or quagmire?. Tob Control. 2000; 9(3):334-8. PMC: 1748361. DOI: 10.1136/tc.9.3.334. View

Freudenberg N, Galea S, Fahs M . Changing corporate practices to reduce cancer disparities. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2008; 19(1):26-40. DOI: 10.1353/hpu.2008.0012. View

10.

Gonzalez M, Green L, Glantz S . Through tobacco industry eyes: civil society and the FCTC process from Philip Morris and British American Tobacco's perspectives. Tob Control. 2011; 21(4):e1. PMC: 3188334. DOI: 10.1136/tc.2010.041657. View

11.

KOOP C, Kessler D . Final report of the Advisory Committee on Tobacco Policy and Public Health. Tob Control. 1997; 6(3):254-61. PMC: 1759569. DOI: 10.1136/tc.6.3.254. View

12.

Otanez M, Muggli M, Hurt R, Glantz S . Eliminating child labour in Malawi: a British American Tobacco corporate responsibility project to sidestep tobacco labour exploitation. Tob Control. 2006; 15(3):224-30. PMC: 2564665. DOI: 10.1136/tc.2005.014993. View

13.

Lee K, Gilmore A, Collin J . Looking inside the tobacco industry: revealing insights from the Guildford Depository. Addiction. 2004; 99(4):394-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2004.00718.x. View

14.

Tesler L, Malone R . Corporate philanthropy, lobbying, and public health policy. Am J Public Health. 2008; 98(12):2123-33. PMC: 2636524. DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2007.128231. View

15.

Jha P, Chaloupka F . The economics of global tobacco control. BMJ. 2000; 321(7257):358-61. PMC: 1118333. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.321.7257.358. View

16.

Weishaar H, Collin J, Smith K, Gruning T, Mandal S, Gilmore A . Global health governance and the commercial sector: a documentary analysis of tobacco company strategies to influence the WHO framework convention on tobacco control. PLoS Med. 2012; 9(6):e1001249. PMC: 3383743. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001249. View

17.

Gilmore A, Fooks G . Global Fund needs to address conflict of interest. Bull World Health Organ. 2012; 90(1):71-2. PMC: 3260581. DOI: 10.2471/BLT.11.098442. View

18.

Fooks G, Gilmore A, Collin J, Holden C, Lee K . The Limits of Corporate Social Responsibility: Techniques of Neutralization, Stakeholder Management and Political CSR. J Bus Ethics. 2013; 112(2):283-299. PMC: 3755635. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-012-1250-5. View

19.

Dorfman L, Cheyne A, Friedman L, Wadud A, Gottlieb M . Soda and tobacco industry corporate social responsibility campaigns: how do they compare?. PLoS Med. 2012; 9(6):e1001241. PMC: 3378589. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001241. View

20.

Muggli M, Lee K, Gan Q, Ebbert J, Hurt R . "Efforts to Reprioritise the Agenda" in China: British American Tobacco's Efforts to Influence Public Policy on Secondhand Smoke in China. PLoS Med. 2008; 5(12):1729-69. PMC: 2605899. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0050251. View