Intimidation against advocates and researchers in the tobacco, alcohol and ultra-processed food spaces: a review.

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Health Promotion International Pub Date : 2024-12-01 DOI:10.1093/heapro/daae153
Karen A Evans-Reeves, Britta K Matthes, Phil Chamberlain, Nino Paichadze, Anna B Gilmore, Melissa Mialon
{"title":"Intimidation against advocates and researchers in the tobacco, alcohol and ultra-processed food spaces: a review.","authors":"Karen A Evans-Reeves, Britta K Matthes, Phil Chamberlain, Nino Paichadze, Anna B Gilmore, Melissa Mialon","doi":"10.1093/heapro/daae153","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Unhealthy commodity industries (UCIs) engage in corporate political activity, using diverse practices, including intimidatory tactics, to thwart, delay and dilute regulations that threaten their businesses. While examples of such intimidation exist across multiple sectors, no attempt has been made to synthesize these. Furthermore, much of the literature focuses on intimidation of policy-makers. Less is known about the types of intimidation experienced by advocates and researchers and their responses to this intimidation. This scoping review explores the literature across the tobacco, alcohol and ultra-processed food spaces for instances of intimidation and categorizes them inductively and deductively based on a framework of intimidation types. Similarly, responses to intimidation were mapped onto a pre-existing framework. We found intimidatory tactics towards advocates and researchers in every sector. Public discreditation, followed by legal threats and action, complaints and freedom of information requests were most frequently mentioned and often attributed to UCIs or their third parties. Surveillance, threats of violence, violence, burglary and bribery were less prevalent in the literature and their perpetrators were unknown. Those intimidated reported carrying on as normal, defensive action (changing/adapting work, taking security precautions) or, as was most reported, offensive action (exposing intimidation, correcting misinformation, taking legal action). The similarity of intimidation across sectors suggests that UCIs engage in similar intimidatory tactics regardless of sector. Understanding more about the scale of intimidation and how it impacts the work and wellbeing of those affected is essential, as is learning more about the ways researchers and advocates can effectively pre-empt and respond.</p>","PeriodicalId":54256,"journal":{"name":"Health Promotion International","volume":"39 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11579607/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Promotion International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daae153","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Unhealthy commodity industries (UCIs) engage in corporate political activity, using diverse practices, including intimidatory tactics, to thwart, delay and dilute regulations that threaten their businesses. While examples of such intimidation exist across multiple sectors, no attempt has been made to synthesize these. Furthermore, much of the literature focuses on intimidation of policy-makers. Less is known about the types of intimidation experienced by advocates and researchers and their responses to this intimidation. This scoping review explores the literature across the tobacco, alcohol and ultra-processed food spaces for instances of intimidation and categorizes them inductively and deductively based on a framework of intimidation types. Similarly, responses to intimidation were mapped onto a pre-existing framework. We found intimidatory tactics towards advocates and researchers in every sector. Public discreditation, followed by legal threats and action, complaints and freedom of information requests were most frequently mentioned and often attributed to UCIs or their third parties. Surveillance, threats of violence, violence, burglary and bribery were less prevalent in the literature and their perpetrators were unknown. Those intimidated reported carrying on as normal, defensive action (changing/adapting work, taking security precautions) or, as was most reported, offensive action (exposing intimidation, correcting misinformation, taking legal action). The similarity of intimidation across sectors suggests that UCIs engage in similar intimidatory tactics regardless of sector. Understanding more about the scale of intimidation and how it impacts the work and wellbeing of those affected is essential, as is learning more about the ways researchers and advocates can effectively pre-empt and respond.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
恐吓烟草、酒精和超加工食品领域的倡导者和研究人员:综述。
不健康的商品行业(UCIs)参与企业政治活动,利用各种手段,包括恐吓策略,来阻挠、拖延和淡化对其业务构成威胁的法规。虽然多个行业都有此类恐吓的例子,但没有人试图对这些例子进行综合。此外,大部分文献都侧重于对政策制定者的恐吓。至于倡导者和研究人员所经历的恐吓类型以及他们对恐吓的反应,则知之甚少。本范围界定综述探讨了烟草、酒精和超加工食品领域的恐吓文献,并根据恐吓类型框架对其进行了归纳和演绎分类。同样,对恐吓的反应也被映射到一个预先存在的框架中。我们发现每个领域都有针对倡导者和研究人员的恐吓策略。最常被提及的是公开谴责,其次是法律威胁和行动、投诉和信息自由申请,而且往往归咎于 UCI 或其第三方。监视、暴力威胁、暴力、入室盗窃和贿赂在文献中较少出现,其实施者也不为人知。受恐吓者报告说,他们照常工作,采取了防御行动(改变/调整工作,采取安全防范措施),或 者采取了进攻行动(揭露恐吓行为,纠正错误信息,采取法律行动)。各部门恐吓行为的相似性表明,无论在哪个部门,UCI 都会采取类似的恐吓策略。更多地了解恐吓的规模及其如何影响受影响者的工作和福祉至关重要,更多地了解研究人员和倡导者如何有效地预先防范和应对也同样重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health Promotion International
Health Promotion International Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
7.40%
发文量
146
期刊介绍: Health Promotion International contains refereed original articles, reviews, and debate articles on major themes and innovations in the health promotion field. In line with the remits of the series of global conferences on health promotion the journal expressly invites contributions from sectors beyond health. These may include education, employment, government, the media, industry, environmental agencies, and community networks. As the thought journal of the international health promotion movement we seek in particular theoretical, methodological and activist advances to the field. Thus, the journal provides a unique focal point for articles of high quality that describe not only theories and concepts, research projects and policy formulation, but also planned and spontaneous activities, organizational change, as well as social and environmental development.
期刊最新文献
Non-government advocacy for health equity: evidence from Australia. A mixed-methods study among adolescents and teachers in Bogotá, Colombia: adapting the OurFutures Alcohol Program. Adding sugar to children's beverages: a theory of planned behavior study of Lebanese mothers. Intimidation against advocates and researchers in the tobacco, alcohol and ultra-processed food spaces: a review. Resisting industry narratives: guidance to avoid tobacco and nicotine industry framing.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1