ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
Institutional investment in addictive industries: an important commercial determinant of health.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The production of addictive commodities is subject to a range of commercial determinants. There has nevertheless been a gap in understanding how investments into addictive commodities may function as commercial determinants. Institutional investors can yield important financial power with their investment decisions. Many investors apply responsible investment (RI) policies to address environmental, social, and governance concerns. Negative screening is used to exclude certain sectors or companies from investment portfolios, mainly for ethical concerns. Negative screening also affects investment into tobacco and other addictive industries. This article investigates RI policies toward addictive industries among institutional investors that are signatories of the Tobacco-Free Finance Pledge (TFFP; Methods: The mixed-method study uses descriptive statistics to quantify the extent and scope of exclusion policies as well as institutional and geographical profiles of investors, and a qualitative analysis of the justifications for these exclusion policies. Results: Some TFFP signatories apply negative screening to other addictive industries (gambling: 35%; alcohol: 24%; cannabis 12% of signatories). There are important differences in the applied exclusion thresholds, with only 47% of TFFP signatories applying a zero-tolerance policy to tobacco. Thresholds are higher for other addictive industries. Signatories also differ in terms of their geographical and investor profiles. Justifications pertaining to compliance with international standards and reputational risks were the most common. Conclusion: Addictive industries, such as tobacco, alcohol, gambling, and recreational cannabis, are increasingly excluded by investors. However, different understandings of RI influence how sector exclusions are implemented. Divesting from tobacco and other addictive industries is a crucial step toward a public health approach that prioritizes population health over financial profits. Prominent institutional investors are influential opinion leaders who can change the behavior of other investors and de-normalize controversial industries and reduce or prevent harm.
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.