Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21636611›Full record

ArticleTobacco control2012

Through tobacco industry eyes: civil society and the FCTC process from Philip Morris and British American Tobacco's perspectives.

Mariaelena Gonzalez, Lawrence W Green, Stanton A Glantz

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tobacco control, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Waterpipe Smoking and Regulation in the United States: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2015
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Research priorities for FCTC Articles 20, 21, and 22: surveillance/evaluation and information exchange.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2013
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mariaelena GonzalezCenter for Tobacco Control Research & Education, UCSF, 530 Parnassus Avenue, Box 1390, San Francisco, California 94143-1390, USA.
Lawrence W Green
Stanton A Glantz
University of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

ANALYSIS OF TOBACCO INDUSTRY DOCUMENTSR01CA087472 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI LING, PAMELA MAY · 2000 to 2018
$12.5M
Postdoctoral training in tobacco controlR25CA113710 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI GLANTZ, STANTON ARNOLD · 2006 to 2015
$5.4M
Postdoctoral training in tobacco controlT32CA113710 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI LING, PAMELA MAY · 2016 to 2020
$2.6M
NCI NIH HHS CA-113710NCI NIH HHS CA-87472NCI NIH HHS R01 CA087472NCI NIH HHS R25 CA113710NCI NIH HHS T32 CA113710
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo analyse the models Philip Morris (PM) and British American Tobacco (BAT) used internally to understand tobacco control non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and their relationship to the global tobacco control policy-making process that resulted in the Framework Convention for Tobacco Control (FCTC).

methodsAnalysis of internal tobacco industry documents in the Legacy Tobacco Document Library.

resultsPM contracted with Mongoven, Biscoe, and Duchin, Inc. (MBD, a consulting firm specialising in NGO surveillance) as advisors. MBD argued that because NGOs are increasingly linked to epistemic communities, NGOs could insert themselves into the global policy-making process and influence the discourse surrounding the treaty-making process. MBD advised PM to insert itself into the policy-making process, mimicking NGO behaviour. BAT's Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (CORA) department argued that global regulation emerged from the perception (by NGOs and governments) that the industry could not regulate itself, leading to BAT advocating social alignment and self-regulation to minimise the impact of the FCTC. Most efforts to block or redirect the FCTC failed.

conclusionsPM and BAT articulated a global policy-making environment in which NGOs are key, non-state stakeholders, and as a result, internationalised some of their previous national-level strategies. After both companies failed to prevent the FCTC, their strategies began to align. Multinational corporations have continued to successfully employ some of the strategies outlined in this paper at the local and national level while being formally excluded from ongoing FCTC negotiations at the global level.

Indexed as

International CooperationSmoking PreventionGlobal HealthHumansModels, OrganizationalOrganizations, NonprofitPolicy MakingTobacco IndustryWorld Health Organization

Identifiers

PMID21636611
PMCPMC3188334
OpenAlexW2142482235

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.