Peter J. Adams School of Population Health
Description: Peter J. Adams School of Population Health Research Funding from addictive consumptions industries Issues concerns Addictive consumptions are special PROFIT NOT MUCH HEAPS NUMBER OF CONSUMERS LOW HIGH ADDICTIVE NON-ADDICTIVE When the
Related Topics
Download Presentation
"Peter J. Adams School of Population Health" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this website for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Presentation Transcript
slide1. Peter J. Adams
School of Population Health Research Funding from addictive consumptions industries Issues & concerns<br>
slide2. Addictive consumptions are special<br>
slide3. PROFIT NOT MUCH HEAPS NUMBER OF CONSUMERS LOW HIGH ADDICTIVE NON-ADDICTIVE<br>
slide4. When the money’s there…. Hard to resist
Money exchange establishes expectations & obligations
Reinforced by multiple exchanges<br>
slide7. Ostrich Response “I didn’t really see that!”
“We’ve done so much work already”
“Let’s just pretend”<br>
slide8. Bargaining Response “Maybe it’s not that bad”
“Gambling has its positive sides”
“Only a small number have problems”<br>
slide9. Missionary Response “Money is sitting there”
“This funding will save lives”
“If we don’t get it, somebody else less deserving will”<br>
slide10. Macho Response “Be realistic”
“To get things done you need to make some unpopular choices”
“You have to be in to win”<br>
slide11. Desire vs Values Messages favoured my ambitions
Ethical perspective minimised
Need an outside reference point to gauge my views<br>
slide12. SIMPLE
TRANSACTION FUNCTIONS IN A WIDER
ARENA<br>
slide13. Plugging in….<br>
slide14. Tobacco
Alcohol
Gambling
Industries Political Chain of Engagement Public
communication
strategies Lobbying
& PR
companies Producer
& retail
associations Relationship
building
activities Politicians<br>
slide15. Public Good Chain of Engagement Corporate social responsibility Health & community programs Social aspects & public relations organisations Media coverage Public consultation Tobacco
Alcohol
Gambling
Industries<br>
slide16. Knowledge Chain of Engagement Priority setting processes Researchers & research organizations Funding & commissioning processes Communication & dissemination Government officials Tobacco
Alcohol
Gambling
Industries<br>
slide17. Tobacco
Alcohol
Gambling
Industries Knowledge Chain Public Good Chain Political Chain Politicians Public
Consultation Government
Officials<br>
slide18. Receiving Industry Funds?<br>
slide19. Trying to do Good from sources that do Harm Benefiting from
Deprived & Addicted Exploiting Vulnerable
Groups Money Derived
From Harm<br>
slide20. 2 Contributory Risk How Industry Benefits from the Relationship Contributing to
Sales Improving
Public Profile Positive view of
Policy Makers<br>
slide21. 3 Reputational Risks How Others will Judge the Relationship Judgement of
Colleagues Judgement of
Funders Judgement of
Stakeholders<br>
slide22. 4 Governance Risks Threats to Independence & Sovereignty Creeping Funding
Reliance Perceived
Dependence Increasing Silence
& Compliance<br>
slide23. 5 Relationship Risks Conflict from Differences in Viewpoint Conflict between
Colleagues Conflict between
Sections Silencing &
Leaving<br>
slide24. How to work out when a relationship is too risky?<br>
slide25. MORAL JEOPARDY Accepting industry money generates conflicts of interest
Consuming profits contributes to increased demand
Once consumed once, more likely to consume again
On-going profit consumption could lead to dependency<br>
slide27. Intensity of Relationship Continuum of Moral Jeopardy<br>
slide28. OIL LOTTERIES ALCOHOL TOBACCO ARMAMENTS SLOTS PORN PHARMACEUTICALS<br>
slide30. Intensity Indicators Purpose
Extent
Relevant-harm
Identifiers
Link<br>
slide31. Purpose E R I L Degree to which purposes between funder and recipient diverge
How do purposes match?
E.g. smoking cessation researcher funded by tobacco company<br>
slide32. P Extent R I L Degree to which the recipient is reliant on this source
What percentage of funding?
E.g. Genetics researcher unwilling to question source when funding increases<br>
slide33. P E Relevant-harm I L Degree of harm associated with this form of consumption
Some products are less harmful than others
E.g. researcher accepts money from lotteries but not slots<br>
slide34. P E R Identifiers L Degree to which the recipient is visibly identified with the funder
Branding using names, logos, advertising & other promotional linkages
E.g. new laboratory with sign acknowledging brewery funding<br>
slide35. P E R I Link Nature and directness of the link between recipient & funder
Use of mediating bodies or contracts?
E.g. Earmarked alcohol funding channelled through government departmen<br>
slide36. Group 1: A public health researcher receiving funds directly from a tobacco company in publicly visible way Group 2: A genetics project receiving half its funds from a brewery Group 3: Research equipment funded partially from donations from a gambling machine trust Group 4: A symposium funded by a small grant anonymously from lotteries<br>
slide37. Traffic Light of Risk Class C
Pornography, Plastic Surgery, Oil Class B
Psychotropics, Lotteries, Fast Food Class A
Tobacco, Armaments, Slots, Alcohol<br>
slide38. Final Thoughts Learnt much from tobacco
Easy to plug-in without realizing wider consequences
Promoting open dialogue about sources is key
Need ethical benchmarks & codes of practice<br>
School of Population Health Research Funding from addictive consumptions industries Issues & concerns<br>
slide2. Addictive consumptions are special<br>
slide3. PROFIT NOT MUCH HEAPS NUMBER OF CONSUMERS LOW HIGH ADDICTIVE NON-ADDICTIVE<br>
slide4. When the money’s there…. Hard to resist
Money exchange establishes expectations & obligations
Reinforced by multiple exchanges<br>
slide7. Ostrich Response “I didn’t really see that!”
“We’ve done so much work already”
“Let’s just pretend”<br>
slide8. Bargaining Response “Maybe it’s not that bad”
“Gambling has its positive sides”
“Only a small number have problems”<br>
slide9. Missionary Response “Money is sitting there”
“This funding will save lives”
“If we don’t get it, somebody else less deserving will”<br>
slide10. Macho Response “Be realistic”
“To get things done you need to make some unpopular choices”
“You have to be in to win”<br>
slide11. Desire vs Values Messages favoured my ambitions
Ethical perspective minimised
Need an outside reference point to gauge my views<br>
slide12. SIMPLE
TRANSACTION FUNCTIONS IN A WIDER
ARENA<br>
slide13. Plugging in….<br>
slide14. Tobacco
Alcohol
Gambling
Industries Political Chain of Engagement Public
communication
strategies Lobbying
& PR
companies Producer
& retail
associations Relationship
building
activities Politicians<br>
slide15. Public Good Chain of Engagement Corporate social responsibility Health & community programs Social aspects & public relations organisations Media coverage Public consultation Tobacco
Alcohol
Gambling
Industries<br>
slide16. Knowledge Chain of Engagement Priority setting processes Researchers & research organizations Funding & commissioning processes Communication & dissemination Government officials Tobacco
Alcohol
Gambling
Industries<br>
slide17. Tobacco
Alcohol
Gambling
Industries Knowledge Chain Public Good Chain Political Chain Politicians Public
Consultation Government
Officials<br>
slide18. Receiving Industry Funds?<br>
slide19. Trying to do Good from sources that do Harm Benefiting from
Deprived & Addicted Exploiting Vulnerable
Groups Money Derived
From Harm<br>
slide20. 2 Contributory Risk How Industry Benefits from the Relationship Contributing to
Sales Improving
Public Profile Positive view of
Policy Makers<br>
slide21. 3 Reputational Risks How Others will Judge the Relationship Judgement of
Colleagues Judgement of
Funders Judgement of
Stakeholders<br>
slide22. 4 Governance Risks Threats to Independence & Sovereignty Creeping Funding
Reliance Perceived
Dependence Increasing Silence
& Compliance<br>
slide23. 5 Relationship Risks Conflict from Differences in Viewpoint Conflict between
Colleagues Conflict between
Sections Silencing &
Leaving<br>
slide24. How to work out when a relationship is too risky?<br>
slide25. MORAL JEOPARDY Accepting industry money generates conflicts of interest
Consuming profits contributes to increased demand
Once consumed once, more likely to consume again
On-going profit consumption could lead to dependency<br>
slide27. Intensity of Relationship Continuum of Moral Jeopardy<br>
slide28. OIL LOTTERIES ALCOHOL TOBACCO ARMAMENTS SLOTS PORN PHARMACEUTICALS<br>
slide30. Intensity Indicators Purpose
Extent
Relevant-harm
Identifiers
Link<br>
slide31. Purpose E R I L Degree to which purposes between funder and recipient diverge
How do purposes match?
E.g. smoking cessation researcher funded by tobacco company<br>
slide32. P Extent R I L Degree to which the recipient is reliant on this source
What percentage of funding?
E.g. Genetics researcher unwilling to question source when funding increases<br>
slide33. P E Relevant-harm I L Degree of harm associated with this form of consumption
Some products are less harmful than others
E.g. researcher accepts money from lotteries but not slots<br>
slide34. P E R Identifiers L Degree to which the recipient is visibly identified with the funder
Branding using names, logos, advertising & other promotional linkages
E.g. new laboratory with sign acknowledging brewery funding<br>
slide35. P E R I Link Nature and directness of the link between recipient & funder
Use of mediating bodies or contracts?
E.g. Earmarked alcohol funding channelled through government departmen<br>
slide36. Group 1: A public health researcher receiving funds directly from a tobacco company in publicly visible way Group 2: A genetics project receiving half its funds from a brewery Group 3: Research equipment funded partially from donations from a gambling machine trust Group 4: A symposium funded by a small grant anonymously from lotteries<br>
slide37. Traffic Light of Risk Class C
Pornography, Plastic Surgery, Oil Class B
Psychotropics, Lotteries, Fast Food Class A
Tobacco, Armaments, Slots, Alcohol<br>
slide38. Final Thoughts Learnt much from tobacco
Easy to plug-in without realizing wider consequences
Promoting open dialogue about sources is key
Need ethical benchmarks & codes of practice<br>