• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
The corporate influence on food charity and aid: The "Hunger Industrial Complex" and the death of welfare.企业对食品慈善和援助的影响:“饥饿工业综合体”与福利的消亡。
Front Public Health. 2022 Aug 19;10:950955. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.950955. eCollection 2022.
2
Food for thought? Potential conflicts of interest in academic experts advising government and charities on dietary policies.引人深思?学术专家在为政府和慈善机构提供饮食政策建议时可能存在的利益冲突。
BMC Public Health. 2016 Aug 5;16:735. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3393-2.
3
Public Meets Private: Conversations Between Coca-Cola and the CDC.公众与私人会面:可口可乐公司与疾病预防控制中心的对话。
Milbank Q. 2019 Mar;97(1):74-90. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12368. Epub 2019 Jan 29.
4
Are industry-funded charities promoting "advocacy-led studies" or "evidence-based science"?: a case study of the International Life Sciences Institute.行业资助的慈善机构是在推动“倡导主导的研究”还是“基于证据的科学”?——以国际生命科学学会为例。
Global Health. 2019 Jun 3;15(1):36. doi: 10.1186/s12992-019-0478-6.
5
Big food and drink sponsorship of conferences and speakers: a case study of one multinational company's influence over knowledge dissemination and professional engagement.大型食品和饮料公司对会议和演讲者的赞助:以一家跨国公司对知识传播和专业参与的影响为例。
Public Health Nutr. 2023 May;26(5):1094-1111. doi: 10.1017/S1368980022002506. Epub 2022 Dec 1.
6
The alcohol industry, charities and policy influence in the UK.英国的酒精行业、慈善机构与政策影响
Eur J Public Health. 2014 Aug;24(4):557-61. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/cku076. Epub 2014 Jun 9.
7
Strategies used by the soft drink industry to grow and sustain sales: a case-study of The Coca-Cola Company in East Asia.软饮料行业的增长和维持销售策略:以可口可乐公司在东亚的案例研究为例。
BMJ Glob Health. 2022 Dec;7(12). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2022-010386.
8
Long-Term Food Insecurity, Hunger and Risky Food Acquisition Practices: A Cross-Sectional Study of Food Charity Recipients in an Australian Capital City.长期食物不安全、饥饿和危险的食物获取行为:对澳大利亚首都城市食物慈善接受者的横断面研究。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Aug 1;16(15):2749. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16152749.
9
Charity preferences and perceived impact moderate charitable giving and associated neural response.慈善偏好和感知影响会调节慈善捐赠行为及其相关的神经反应。
Neuropsychologia. 2021 Sep 17;160:107957. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2021.107957. Epub 2021 Jul 14.
10
Corporate interest groups and their implications for global food governance: mapping and analysing the global corporate influence network of the transnational ultra-processed food industry.企业利益集团及其对全球粮食治理的影响:跨国超加工食品行业全球企业影响力网络的绘制和分析。
Global Health. 2024 Feb 22;20(1):16. doi: 10.1186/s12992-024-01020-4.

引用本文的文献

1
Nutritional adequacy of charitable food aid packages to the needs of different household-types: a case study in Spain.慈善食品援助包对不同家庭类型需求的营养充足性:西班牙的一个案例研究。
BMC Nutr. 2025 Jul 5;11(1):133. doi: 10.1186/s40795-025-01122-1.

本文引用的文献

1
"Part of the Solution": Food Corporation Strategies for Regulatory Capture and Legitimacy.“解决方案的一部分”:食品公司的监管俘获和合法性策略。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2021 Dec 1;10(12):845-856. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2021.111.
2
Is Obesity Policy in England Fit for Purpose? Analysis of Government Strategies and Policies, 1992-2020.英国的肥胖政策是否达到目的?1992-2020 年政府策略与政策分析。
Milbank Q. 2021 Mar;99(1):126-170. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12498. Epub 2021 Jan 19.
3
The Consequences of Neoliberalism in the Current Pandemic.当前大流行病中,新自由主义的后果。
Int J Health Serv. 2020 Jul;50(3):271-275. doi: 10.1177/0020731420925449. Epub 2020 May 7.
4
Correction to: Are industry-funded charities promoting "advocacy-led studies" or "evidence-based science"?: a case study of the International Life Sciences Institute.对《行业资助的慈善机构是在推广“倡导性研究”还是“循证科学”?:国际生命科学研究所案例研究》的更正
Global Health. 2019 Nov 6;15(1):61. doi: 10.1186/s12992-019-0512-8.
5
Conflict of Interest and the Role of the Food Industry in Nutrition Research.利益冲突与食品行业在营养研究中的作用
JAMA. 2017 May 2;317(17):1755-1756. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.3456.
6
Role of Leaders in Fostering Meaningful Collaborations Between Academic Medical Centers and Industry While Also Managing Individual and Institutional Conflicts of Interest.领导者在促进学术医疗中心与行业之间开展有意义的合作同时管理个人和机构利益冲突方面的作用。
JAMA. 2017 May 2;317(17):1729-1730. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.2573.
7
How Should Journals Handle the Conflict of Interest of Their Editors?: Who Watches the "Watchers"?期刊应如何处理其编辑的利益冲突?:谁来监督“监督者”?
JAMA. 2017 May 2;317(17):1757-1758. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.2207.
8
Funding, Institutional Conflicts of Interest, and Schools of Public Health: Realities and Solutions.资金、机构利益冲突与公共卫生学院:现实与解决方案
JAMA. 2017 May 2;317(17):1735-1736. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.1659.
9
Food Industry Funding of Nutrition Research: The Relevance of History for Current Debates.食品行业对营养研究的资助:历史对当前辩论的相关性。
JAMA Intern Med. 2016 Nov 1;176(11):1685-1686. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.5400.
10
All in this together: the corporate capture of public health.一切皆关联:企业对公共卫生的掌控。
BMJ. 2012 Dec 17;345:e8082. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e8082.

企业对食品慈善和援助的影响:“饥饿工业综合体”与福利的消亡。

The corporate influence on food charity and aid: The "Hunger Industrial Complex" and the death of welfare.

机构信息

Centre for Food Policy, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom.

Department of Hospitality & Tourism Management, Ulster University, Coleraine, United Kingdom.

出版信息

Front Public Health. 2022 Aug 19;10:950955. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.950955. eCollection 2022.

DOI:10.3389/fpubh.2022.950955
PMID:36062087
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9437921/
Abstract

There is an existing literature on how food companies, including the unhealthy food commodity industries, influence policy through a number of approaches. Direct approaches include lobbying and funding of research. Backdoor or indirect tactics used by food companies to demonstrate engagement include funding community groups, tactics previously used by the tobacco industry. Food industry support for food charities engaged in food donations is an area that has not received attention. This is another backdoor approach and one which may compromise more general public health policy. It is no surprise that the companies that engage in this can be largely fall under the rubric of unhealthy food commodity industries. This link is sometimes referred to as the " and is based on the argument that an alliance exists between the food industry and the food banking movement. With rising levels of food insecurity there is pressure on the food system to donate food to charitable enterprises such as food banks and soups kitchens, which is often encouraged by government policy such as ". Food businesses contribute surplus food and often promote it as part of their corporate social responsibility agenda. The argument presented here is not an anti-food charity one but one which challenges the development of charitable food aid as a system and a replacement for public policy. The reasons for this can be summarized under three headings: (1) such donation systems compromise the wider application of public food welfare and give the impression that food poverty is being addressed; (2) the links with food corporations provide a backdoor for influence on wider food policies; and (3) researchers taking money from food charities may be compromised by the direct and indirect relationships with companies. The focus in this paper is on the latter two issues; the first will be established as a context with work we have published elsewhere. This article draws on examples from the UK of how charities have linked with chocolate and soft drink companies. Examples include: " a Coca-Cola initiative in December 2021 "e"; and an October 2021 initiative where ". These relationships go beyond companies donating surplus food to food charities such as food banks and pantries to encouraging consumers to buy their products with the promise that the company will contribute products to such charities or provide cash donations in return for the purchase of their product.

摘要

现有文献探讨了食品公司(包括不健康食品行业)如何通过多种途径影响政策。直接途径包括游说和资助研究。食品公司用来展示其参与度的后门或间接策略包括资助社区团体,这是烟草行业以前使用的策略。食品行业对从事食品捐赠的食品慈善机构的支持是一个尚未受到关注的领域。这是另一种后门策略,可能会损害更广泛的公共卫生政策。从事这种活动的公司大多属于不健康食品商品行业也就不足为奇了。这种联系有时被称为“食品行业-食品银行联盟”,其依据是食品行业与食品银行运动之间存在联盟。随着食品不安全程度的上升,食品系统面临着向食品银行和施粥所等慈善企业捐赠食品的压力,而政府政策(如“食品券计划”)经常鼓励这种做法。食品企业会捐赠剩余食品,并经常将其作为企业社会责任议程的一部分进行宣传。这里提出的观点不是反对食品慈善机构,而是对慈善食品援助作为一种制度和公共政策替代物的发展提出挑战。可以从以下三个方面总结提出这种观点的原因:(1)这种捐赠系统会损害更广泛的公共食品福利应用,并给人一种食品贫困正在得到解决的印象;(2)与食品公司的联系为更广泛的食品政策提供了后门影响力;(3)从食品慈善机构获得资金的研究人员可能会因为与公司的直接和间接关系而受到影响。本文的重点是后两个问题;第一个问题将作为我们在其他地方发表的工作的背景来建立。本文借鉴了英国慈善机构如何与巧克力和软饮料公司建立联系的例子。例如:“可口可乐公司 2021 年 12 月的‘好邻居计划’”;以及 2021 年 10 月的一项倡议,其中“……”。这些关系不仅限于公司向食品银行和食品储藏室等食品慈善机构捐赠剩余食品,还包括鼓励消费者购买其产品,并承诺公司将向这些慈善机构捐赠产品或提供现金捐款,以换取购买其产品。