ArticlePLoS medicine2010
"Working the system"--British American tobacco's influence on the European union treaty and its implications for policy: an analysis of internal tobacco industry documents.
Article in PLoS medicine, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
39 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 108 citations in OpenAlex.
- How does the tobacco industry attempt to influence marketing regulations? A systematic review.PloS one · 2014Pooled it
- Global health governance and the commercial sector: a documentary analysis of tobacco company strategies to influence the WHO framework convention on tobacco control.PLoS medicine · 2012Pooled it
- Health and health equity in policymaking across sectors: Identifying opportunities and challenges in implementing Health in All Policies.Scandinavian journal of public health · 2025Article
- Constructing and contesting industry's role in multistakeholder governance: a qualitative analysis of responses to WHO consultations.Globalization and health · 2025Article
- Labelling the debate: a thematic analysis of alcohol industry submissions to the EU consultation on alcohol health warnings in Ireland.Globalization and health · 2025Article
- Navigating Challenges in Tobacco Control: A Systematic Review of Barriers to Implementing Article 5.3 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC).Addiction & health · 2025Review
- A missed opportunity for public health: How impact assessment shaped EU rules on the marketing of unhealthy commodities to children.SSM. Qualitative research in health · 2024Article
- Reflections from COP28: Resisting healthwashing in climate change negotiations.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Building a Systems Map: Applying Systems Thinking to Unhealthy Commodity Industry Influence on Public Health Policy.International journal of health policy and management · 2024Article
- Reconceptualising the commercial determinants of health: bringing institutions in.BMJ global health · 2023Review
- Why meta-regulation matters for public health: the case of the EU better regulation agenda.Globalization and health · 2023Article
- The case for developing a cohesive systems approach to research across unhealthy commodity industries.BMJ global health · 2021Article
- A hidden web of policy influence: The pharmaceutical industry's engagement with UK's All-Party Parliamentary Groups.PloS one · 2021Article
- The Science for Profit Model-How and why corporations influence science and the use of science in policy and practice.PloS one · 2021Article
- Article
- Normalizing Tobacco? The Politics of Trade, Investment, and Tobacco Control.The Milbank quarterly · 2019Article
- Tobacco and electronic nicotine delivery systems regulation.Translational lung cancer research · 2019Review
- European Union implementation of Article 5.3 of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.Globalization and health · 2018Article
- Corporate practices and health: a framework and mechanisms.Globalization and health · 2018Review
- Evidence Regarding the Impact of Conflicts of Interest on Environmental and Occupational Health Research.Current environmental health reports · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundImpact assessment (IA) of all major European Union (EU) policies is now mandatory. The form of IA used has been criticised for favouring corporate interests by overemphasising economic impacts and failing to adequately assess health impacts. Our study sought to assess how, why, and in what ways corporations, and particularly the tobacco industry, influenced the EU's approach to IA. METHODS AND
findingsIn order to identify whether industry played a role in promoting this system of IA within the EU, we analysed internal documents from British American Tobacco (BAT) that were disclosed following a series of litigation cases in the United States. We combined this analysis with one of related literature and interviews with key informants. Our analysis demonstrates that from 1995 onwards BAT actively worked with other corporate actors to successfully promote a business-oriented form of IA that favoured large corporations. It appears that BAT favoured this form of IA because it could advance the company's European interests by establishing ground rules for policymaking that would: (i) provide an economic framework for evaluating all policy decisions, implicitly prioritising costs to businesses; (ii) secure early corporate involvement in policy discussions; (iii) bestow the corporate sector with a long-term advantage over other actors by increasing policymakers' dependence on information they supplied; and (iv) provide businesses with a persuasive means of challenging potential and existing legislation. The data reveal that an ensuing lobbying campaign, largely driven by BAT, helped secure binding changes to the EU Treaty via the Treaty of Amsterdam that required EU policymakers to minimise legislative burdens on businesses. Efforts subsequently focused on ensuring that these Treaty changes were translated into the application of a business orientated form of IA (cost-benefit analysis [CBA]) within EU policymaking procedures. Both the tobacco and chemical industries have since employed IA in apparent attempts to undermine key aspects of European policies designed to protect public health.
conclusionsOur findings suggest that BAT and its corporate allies have fundamentally altered the way in which all EU policy is made by making a business-oriented form of IA mandatory. This increases the likelihood that the EU will produce policies that advance the interests of major corporations, including those that produce products damaging to health, rather than in the interests of its citizens. Given that the public health community, focusing on health IA, has largely welcomed the increasing policy interest in IA, this suggests that urgent consideration is required of the ways in which IA can be employed to undermine, as well as support, effective public health policies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.