Literature DB >> 25646389

Corporate coalitions and policy making in the European Union: how and why British American Tobacco promoted "Better Regulation".

Katherine Elizabeth Smith1, Gary Fooks2, Anna B Gilmore3, Jeff Collin, Heide Weishaar1.   

Abstract

Over the past fifteen years, an interconnected set of regulatory reforms, known as Better Regulation, has been adopted across Europe, marking a significant shift in the way that European Union policies are developed. There has been little exploration of the origins of these reforms, which include mandatory ex ante impact assessment. Drawing on documentary and interview data, this article discusses how and why large corporations, notably British American Tobacco (BAT), worked to influence and promote these reforms. Our analysis highlights (1) how policy entrepreneurs with sufficient resources (such as large corporations) can shape the membership and direction of advocacy coalitions; (2) the extent to which "think tanks" may be prepared to lobby on behalf of commercial clients; and (3) why regulated industries (including tobacco) may favor the use of "evidence tools," such as impact assessments, in policy making. We argue that a key aspect of BAT's ability to shape regulatory reform involved the deliberate construction of a vaguely defined idea that could be strategically adapted to appeal to diverse constituencies. We discuss the theoretical implications of this finding for the Advocacy Coalition Framework, as well as the practical implications of the findings for efforts to promote transparency and public health in the European Union.
Copyright © 2015 by Duke University Press.

Entities:  

Keywords:  European Union; ideational theory; public health policy; regulatory reform; think tanks

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25646389      PMCID: PMC4668595          DOI: 10.1215/03616878-2882231

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Health Polit Policy Law        ISSN: 0361-6878            Impact factor:   2.265


  22 in total

1.  Second hand smoke and risk assessment: what was in it for the tobacco industry?

Authors:  N Hirschhorn; S A Bialous
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 7.552

2.  Health impact assessment in relation to other forms of impact assessment.

Authors:  Jennifer Mindell; Michael Joffe
Journal:  J Public Health Med       Date:  2003-06

3.  Cost-benefit analysis: an ethical critique.

Authors:  S Kelman
Journal:  Regulation       Date:  1981 Jan-Feb

4.  Better regulation in troubled times.

Authors:  Robert Baldwin
Journal:  Health Econ Policy Law       Date:  2006-07

5.  A review of the strengths and weaknesses of quantitative methods used in health impact assessment.

Authors:  E O'Connell; F Hurley
Journal:  Public Health       Date:  2009-03-26       Impact factor: 2.427

6.  Is health recognized in the EU's policy process? An analysis of the European Commission's impact assessments.

Authors:  Timo P Ståhl
Journal:  Eur J Public Health       Date:  2009-06-23       Impact factor: 3.367

7.  New EU tobacco legislation is delayed after health commissioner resigns amid claims of knowledge of bribery attempt.

Authors:  Rory Watson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2012-10-23

Review 8.  The unequal health of Europeans: successes and failures of policies.

Authors:  Johan P Mackenbach; Marina Karanikolos; Martin McKee
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2013-03-30       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  The perils of ignoring history: Big Tobacco played dirty and millions died. How similar is Big Food?

Authors:  Kelly D Brownell; Kenneth E Warner
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 4.911

10.  The Limits of Corporate Social Responsibility: Techniques of Neutralization, Stakeholder Management and Political CSR.

Authors:  Gary Fooks; Anna Gilmore; Jeff Collin; Chris Holden; Kelley Lee
Journal:  J Bus Ethics       Date:  2013-01
View more
  12 in total

1.  Better Health Faster: The 5 Essential Public Health Law Services.

Authors:  Scott Burris; Marice Ashe; Doug Blanke; Jennifer Ibrahim; Donna E Levin; Gene Matthews; Matthew Penn; Martha Katz
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  2016-10-13       Impact factor: 2.792

2.  The World Health Organization, Corporate Power, and the Prevention and Management of Conflicts of Interest in Nutrition Policy Comment on "Towards Preventing and Managing Conflict of Interest in Nutrition Policy? An Analysis of Submissions to a Consultation on a Draft WHO Tool".

Authors:  Gary Jonas Fooks; Charlotte Godziewski
Journal:  Int J Health Policy Manag       Date:  2022-02-01

3.  Standardised tobacco packaging: a health policy case study of corporate conflict expansion and adaptation.

Authors:  Jenny L Hatchard; Gary J Fooks; Anna B Gilmore
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-10-07       Impact factor: 2.692

4.  Hard to Avoid but Difficult to Sustain: Scotland's Innovative Health Tax on Large Retailers Selling Tobacco and Alcohol.

Authors:  Mark Hellowell; Katherine E Smith; Alexandra Wright
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 4.911

5.  Tobacco industry attempts to frame smoking as a 'disability' under the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act.

Authors:  Yvette van der Eijk; Stanton A Glantz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-11-27       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Controlling corporate influence in health policy making? An assessment of the implementation of article 5.3 of the World Health Organization framework convention on tobacco control.

Authors:  Gary Jonas Fooks; Julia Smith; Kelley Lee; Chris Holden
Journal:  Global Health       Date:  2017-03-08       Impact factor: 4.185

7.  Brussels Declaration: a vehicle for the advancement of tobacco and alcohol industry interests at the science/policy interface?

Authors:  Jim McCambridge; Mike Daube; Martin McKee
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2018-06-25       Impact factor: 7.552

8.  Corporations' use and misuse of evidence to influence health policy: a case study of sugar-sweetened beverage taxation.

Authors:  Gary Jonas Fooks; Simon Williams; Graham Box; Gary Sacks
Journal:  Global Health       Date:  2019-09-25       Impact factor: 4.185

9.  The case for developing a cohesive systems approach to research across unhealthy commodity industries.

Authors:  Cécile Knai; Mark Petticrew; Simon Capewell; Rebecca Cassidy; Jeff Collin; Steven Cummins; Elizabeth Eastmure; Patrick Fafard; Niamh Fitzgerald; Anna B Gilmore; Ben Hawkins; Jørgen Dejgård Jensen; Srinivasa Vittal Katikireddi; Nason Maani; Nicholas Mays; Modi Mwatsama; Rima Nakkash; Jim F Orford; Harry Rutter; Natalie Savona; May C I van Schalkwyk; Heide Weishaar
Journal:  BMJ Glob Health       Date:  2021-02

10.  Non-communicable disease governance in the era of the sustainable development goals: a qualitative analysis of food industry framing in WHO consultations.

Authors:  Kathrin Lauber; Rob Ralston; Mélissa Mialon; Angela Carriedo; Anna B Gilmore
Journal:  Global Health       Date:  2020-08-26       Impact factor: 4.185

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.