ArticleThe Milbank quarterly2024
Mapping the Lobbying Footprint of Harmful Industries: 23 Years of Data From OpenSecrets.
Article in The Milbank quarterly, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Addressing the commercial determinants of unhealthy beverage exposure: a systems thinking approach.Globalization and health · 2026Article
- Are commercial determinants of health addressed in Australian health policies?Health promotion international · 2026Article
- A cognitive dissonance-based intervention to reduce ultra-processed food intake: Protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial.Contemporary clinical trials · 2026Article
- Rethinking revolving door research: a scoping review of methods and datasets used by non-academics to examine the revolving door.Globalization and health · 2026Article
- Food industry degrowth as a public health strategy: the case of ultra processed baked goods.Globalization and health · 2025Article
- Lobbying in the Shadows: A Comparative Analysis of Government Lobbyist Registers.The Milbank quarterly · 2025Article
- 'Industry still has too loud a voice': expert views on government policy consultations about gambling marketing.Health promotion international · 2025Article
- Alcohol lobbying in Canada: a quantitative analysis of the federal registry of lobbyists.Health promotion international · 2025Article
- Toward Monitoring and Addressing the Commercial Determinants of Health: Where Can We Go From Here?The Milbank quarterly · 2025Article
- Financing food environments: who has the power to drive healthier food investment in Australia?Health promotion international · 2025Article
- Why do my patients still have early childhood caries? a critical appraisal.Brazilian oral research · 2025Review
- Lobbying in the Sunlight: A Scoping Review of Frameworks to Measure the Accessibility of Lobbying Disclosures.International journal of health policy and management · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Policy Points Our research reveals the similarities and differences among the lobbying activities of tobacco, alcohol, gambling, and ultraprocessed food industries, which are often a barrier to the implementation of public health policies. Over 23 years, we found that just six organizations dominated lobbying expenses in the tobacco and alcohol sectors, whereas the gambling sector outsourced most of their lobbying to professional firms. Databases like OpenSecrets are a useful resource to monitor the commercial determinants of health. CONTEXT: Commercial lobbying is often a barrier to the development and implementation of public health policies. Yet, little is known about the similarities and differences in the lobbying practices of different industry sectors or types of commercial actors. This study compares the lobbying practices of four industry sectors that have been the focus of much public health research and advocacy: tobacco, alcohol, gambling, and ultraprocessed foods.
methodsData on lobbying expenditures and lobbyist backgrounds were sourced from the OpenSecrets database, which monitors lobbying in the United States. Lobbying expenditure data were analyzed for the 1998-2020 period. We classified commercial actors as companies or trade associations. We used Power BI software to link, analyze, and visualize data sets.
findingsWe found that the ultraprocessed food industry spent the most on lobbying ($1.15 billion), followed by gambling ($817 million), tobacco ($755 million), and alcohol ($541 million). Overall, companies were more active than trade associations, with associations being least active in the tobacco industry. Spending was often highly concentrated, with two organizations accounting for almost 60% of tobacco spending and four organizations accounting for more than half of alcohol spending. Lobbyists that had formerly worked in government were mainly employed by third-party lobby firms.
conclusionsOur study shows how comparing the lobbying practices of different industry sectors offers a deeper appreciation of the diversity and similarities of commercial actors. Understanding these patterns can help public health actors to develop effective counterstrategies.
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.