Corporate Philanthropy, Political Influence, and Health Policy

Abstract

BackgroundThe 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.MethodAnalysis of previously confidential industry documents, BAT social and stakeholder dialogue reports, and existing tobacco industry document studies on philanthropy.ResultsThe 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 RecommendationsTobacco 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.

Corporate Political Activity: An Integrated Model

“…(Wang & Qian, 2011) argue that corporate philanthropy enhances sociopolitical legitimacy, and help evoke positive responses from stakeholders and help gain political access. (Fooks & Gilmore, 2013) demonstrate the use of corporate philanthropy to influence health policy related to tobacco using confidential documents.…”

Exposing and addressing tobacco industry conduct in low-income and middle-income countries

“…,14,67–69,90,91 Many initiatives do both by exploiting LMICs’ acute need for investment in social projects. Thus, BAT sponsored community water projects and PMI sponsored education projects in tobacco farming areas of Sri Lanka, East Africa and Colombia, for example, build and maintain alliances with farming communities while simultaneously emphasising the value of the industry to social and economic development.…”

Social determinants of tobacco use: towards an equity lens approach

“…Dominant tobacco companies with subsidiaries in over sixty developing countries directly monopolize or control shares in tobacco monopolies 49,50 . In this manner, they exercise significant power on local political systems, influencing policymaking on tobacco control interventions or other regulatory schemes, which deeply impacts on child labour, hazardous occupational risks, and price setting for tobacco crops 51 . The policies of these companies allegedly comply with International Conventions such as the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention in 1999 and the UN Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights.…”

“…For example, the industry has aimed to project an environmentally friendly profile through CSR, according to which contracted farmers were required to plant Eucalyptus for their tobacco curing needs to avoid aggravating deforestation. Ironically, this tree is particularly water consuming, rapidly depleting water tables and scorching the soil 51 . In addition, recent work by Ulucanlar et al 62 has very pointedly shed light on how "industry, working through different constituencies, constructs a metanarrative to argue that proposed policies will lead to a dysfunctional future of policy failure and widely dispersed adverse social and economic consequences.…”