See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/330654739

About Lobbying

Preprint · January 2019

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28946.09927

CITATIONS READS

0 282

1 author:

Artur Victoria
Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa Luís de Camoes
330 PUBLICATIONS   3 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Forum Christianity and Democracy View project

Education View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Artur Victoria on 26 January 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

About Lobbying
Artur Victoria

The lobbying activity in four types, leading to issues such as the origin of the interests, the
type of interests represented organization of interests and origin of resources used.

The four types of lobbying are represented by the following professionals, entities or
departments:

(a) Parliamentary affairs advisory services or Social Communication of Ministries (public

lobbying);

b) Government relations executives located in departments corporate / institutional affairs

(lobbying institutional);

c) Class entities, (class-based lobbying); and

d) Lobbying and consulting offices (private lobbying).

Public lobbying refers to the activities of Ministries, Companies State, Municipalities,

Regulatory Agencies and other state bodies, the order to put pressure on the Executive and
Legislative branches with secure their rights or plead new ones.

Generally, all organs have the Parliamentary Advisory Departments with the to influence
decision makers on what is best for government itself, and this is because government often
advocate diverse and conflicting interests, acting as pressure on the dispute over funds or
skills.

Institutional lobbying refers to the performance of corporate or institutional affairs of

private companies, which are dedicated to relations with the different spheres and levels
governmental organizations.

Since the activity is not and due to the stigma of marginality that lobbying advertising
agencies, communication agencies, advertising agencies, Public Relations, Law Firms and
Political Consulting Act in the sector, but do not assume themselves as such. In this way, the
universe of consulting and lobbying offices is broad and at the same time very difficult to
grasp.

Usually these offices are run by a single lobbyist, who impresses his style on dealing with
clients, who, most of the time, are private national companies and in smaller number, class
entities.
It is noticed that the governmental lobby in the Legislative is, without shadow of prevailing
doubt, either through parliamentary advisory Presidency of the Republic, Ministries,
Municipalities and state enterprises, or through organs of the Judiciary and Public Ministry.

Entities of the business sector are the second group more numerous, followed by trade
union and professional representations.

In the Legislative organ, there are several lobbyists representing segments of organized civil
society, both from the public sphere, and of the private sphere; there are also private
institutions created specifically to provide lobbying services to groups who wish to hire
them.

Therefore, there is a high institutionalization of the Lobbying activities, although not

regulated. However, as we can see, the discussion about lobby is not a simple task. The
lack of knowledge about the activity, the and systematized analyzes of their exercise in the
country, and the negative bias that access to reliable data and its strategies and more
general.

The Relationship between State, Market and the Public Sector

It should be noted that the state has for a long time - there are some who maintain that
until today - had a dilemma about the promotion of the capacity of the market to promote
the effective search for social welfare, understood in the individual freedoms capable of
generating an increase in the wealth of society in which was inserted, so much is that
principles of classical economics in arguing in that sense remained unanswered.

Then, people began to look for a model of society and state, based on normative
assumptions that would lead everyone to the consummation of the longed for social welfare
without placing barriers to individual freedoms.

It was as a result of this search that theories were created placing solidarity as the
foundation and objective of public action, consolidating the notion of public service as an
instrument to resolve the questioning about which areas are strategic for social welfare and
that should be targeted state intervention and which sectors should be left to regulate the
market, and the State should ingest little, only in cases of obvious abuse.

It is not improbable to establish that public services are one of the answers, if not the most
important one, to the realization, with certainty to the liberal economists, of the
implausibility of individuals seeking the their interests tend to promote the general interest.

In this way it is possible to perceive the existence of a latent distancing between the role of
the State in offering and constituting social welfare. A model put into practice in some
countries based on competitive regulation was then created.
It can be affirmed that the public service was born from the need of the State to regulate
and offer services to the population, that is, the social self-preservation. Insofar as public
services are made available to the population, according to principles of equality they are
potentially, as instruments aimed at economic integration, according to a logic of
redistribution.

With regard to the delegation of jurisdiction to entities external to the organs and their
advocates, the main point of the arguments used by them is the rapid evolution of the
services and products offered to the population and by the economic agents demanding
from the State quick action, which in practice is not due to the slowness of the legislative
process.

It is important to keep in mind the definition of public service in the objective aspect.

In order to achieve collective satisfaction, the State provides services and creates the
population. It is true that due to the modern relations and the crisis of the state apparatus
in having quality services and efficiency, the company chose to delegate, in a broad sense,
the execution of several services to private entities.

As the service, by legal definition is instituted and exercised by the State in search of the
achievement of the collective welfare, is subject to the legal regime of public law.

Lobby as a Pressure Instrument – Origin and Concept

The word Lobby, originating in the English language and referring to the lobby in a public
building, adopted the conception of a particular group of people who represent a particular
interest in persuading, influencing, government decisions.

The word lobby was adopted etymologically as lobbyists stood in the lobby of the American
Congress in search of those who would be able to approve or reject measures that would
benefit or harm the interests of a particular group.

Historically, the first (or one of the first) document found to make mention of the word
lobby is dated 1820, found in England. However the origin of the lobby practice refers to the
United States.

Thus, three theories about the origin of lobbyist practice are adopted.

- The first one states that the most organized and professional practice occurred in
Washington, DC, during the term of office of President Ulysses Grant, who went down to
the Willard Hotel Lobby at the end of the day to smoke cigars and found people who tried to
persuade him of important demands.
- The second argues that the lobby began in the nineteenth century as a result of a group of
farmers from the state of Virginia, USA, who sent representatives of their interests to try to
influence the congressmen.

- The third theory adopted as to origin goes back to the post-1896 period in which the
United States reorganized itself politically and began to expand its interests around the
world.

That is, regardless of the theory adopted, either of the accepted theories teaches that the
origin of the practice of persuasion of parliamentarians, later denominated lobby, originated
in the United States and expanded to the rest of the world.

Governmental relations have a set of actions aimed at achieving objectives, based on the
ongoing dialogue with government spheres in an organized, transparent and legal manner,
aiming to inform him about the business activities practiced and to collect information for
the management of the enterprises, endowing themselves with knowledge that will allow
them to defend interests and influence government decisions.

Thus, for those who similarly adopt the concepts of lobbying and "government relations",
we seek to have an active voice on issues of interest. However, there are criticisms
regarding the nomenclature, considering that government relations can be considered as
the search for the orientation of congressmen in the exercise of their typical activities as
well as in the regulatory activities of regulatory agencies, for example, whose method used
would be the lobby as a means of dialogue of the subjects involved.

Another argument used is that this nomenclature would be related to the activity of
information between the public entities, excluding the private ones.

As for the word advocacy - public support for an idea, plan or medium to do something
refers to the meaning of advocating causes or ideas through the awareness of society, with
a view to influencing the formatting of public policies.

The term advocacy is endowed with the conception of social control, in which society
organizes itself to try to control the behaviour of the government, as asserted in popular
councils. Therefore, that this term is not appropriate to replace the expression lobby
considering advocacy if it is a kind of control and control as the gender of activity and lobby
as a species.

Groups of Interest and Pressure Groups

In a democratic State of law, people with congruent interests and objectives seek to unite
by seeking to gain strength in the defence of the ideals common to that group in the various
sectors of society, trying to persuade the various state entities, whether regulatory agencies
or one of the powers of the Republic. It is necessary to differentiate the concept of interest
group and pressure group since they are not often used adopting similar meanings, resulting
in an error and making it difficult to conceive how lobbying works in the various sectors of
the State.

It is also important to bear in mind that the term "interest groups" has no similar
connotation to the social classes considering that it is possible to have an interest group
formed by people from different social strata who wish, for example, sector regulation
favouring a group.

The basic difference between interest groups and pressure groups is the transience of the
posture adopted by the two groups. Anything can stimulate behavioural change.

Starting from the definition of interest group, it is the group of individuals organized and
gathered that, sharing common interest, whether concerned with regulating a sector or not
with state intervention, seeks to influence government policies in their favour.

It urges to point out that originally the interest groups used to act more recently to the
national congress, by the broad legislative power capable of transforming a social
conjuncture, however, nowadays, with the advent of the regulatory agencies, the actions
began to divide in two fronts: agencies have adopted forms (popular consultation and public
hearings) that encourage, even if the scope of popular participation is discussed, the
participation of interest groups even if formed in a transitory manner in the debate of a
given topic.

Not always the popular manifestation is moved desiring the public good, being able to be
manifestations attempting the increase of power or obtain material goods. With the
advancement of technologies and, consequently, the approximation of people leaving aside
the distance between they have made it easier to identify social problems, to analyze legal
provisions (broad sense) and to convince people about certain topics, thus, for good or ill, a
facility for greater interaction of interest groups.

Interest groups, can be episodic, formed from the mobilization of society for or against
determined government action, or can be organized, non-episodically, linked to some legal
entity that can be philanthropic or aim at acquisition of profits.

Pressure groups would be species of the interest group, endowed with organization and
resources that actively act towards the achievement of objectives, being able to act in a
more ostensive or discreet way, depending on the position they defend with regulatory
agencies or legislative.

Thus pressure groups would be temporary groups that may or may not use lobbying (tend
to use this technique) to achieve the government's intended goals and then dissolve.
Thus there is basic difference in the engagement inherent in each group. Pressure groups
seek power to politically influence the conduct of society without being directly in power -
which differentiates them from political parties - while interest groups seek to have a voice
in politics.

In the sense that lobbies would be nothing more than actions of pressure groups that
organize capital, material and information, in an attempt to influence governmental
decisions, without becoming political parties.

Therefore, while groups of interest are the gender and the initial state of the societal
disposition in search of voice in politics, pressure groups is the most advanced state of
functional organization that makes use of an instrument to give the demands, which is the
lobby.

Formation of the Lobby in the Public Scenario

It is important to keep in mind how pressure groups are formed from three theories (group
theory, rational choice theory, and agency theory) fostered by American researchers.

The first theory is the group theory that for a better understanding of the theme we will
adopt the concept of which group is equivalent to the sum of activities elaborated by people
who aim to reach a common goal.

They are people who jointly expend their efforts in achieving a satisfactory result of what
they have set out to do. In the field of political science, the first systematic organization of
group theory occurred in the early twentieth century, around 1908, after Arthur Bentley
published the book entitled "The Process of Government".

For Bentley, man would be an animal with rational interests and life is for this animal as a
set of conflicting interests in which it becomes necessary to use techniques to give security
to everyday human relations.

He goes on to say that works derived from analyzes from the work of Arthur Bentley have
endeavoured to convince that the meaning and organization of a society can be understood
as a mosaic of interest groups in reciprocal interaction.

This would lead to constant conflicts between groups seeking to maximize interests. The
Government, in this complex panorama of the existence of groups that seek to maximize
their interests, often leaving aside the reasonableness of nearby groups, is also composed of
groups of different origins and interests that are submitted to the electoral panorama in
cyclical periods, regulator of the struggles of corporate groups.
That is, in group theory, pressure groups present themselves as a range of behaviours
motivated to solve problems of a group, general or specific, influencing the decision-making
power in the pursuit of collective lawsuits.

The theory of groups is based on the association of people. It is important to affirm the need
to articulate the groups in search of favourable outcomes to the needs presented, in view of
the inherent set of interests in the political world.

The second theory regarding the formation of pressure groups is the Theory of Rational
Choice.

Initially, it tends to emphasize that it tends to justify how the interaction of individuals
construct models of social action and the interactions of these models explain the diversity
of the diverse groups. Institutions of greater importance, forming the foundation of society,
since the interaction of institutions and economic theories would result in rules to be
obeyed by society establishing relations of balance to the economic and social system,
giving human interactions.

The relationships presented come from the oppositions in the positions and preferences of
each individual that with dialogue create values that allow the creation of diverse social
groupings.

In this way, individuals would have their behaviour affected by institutions, but they would
also influence political situations.

In the confrontation between bureaucrats, political agents and pressure groups, institutions
would play a primary role in designing thematic areas of dispute, in which they would define
winners and losers. The Rational Choice theory has increasingly conquered space, given the
simplicity of its axioms based on individualism and collectivism, where the person seeks to
satisfy their needs in order to achieve their well-being.

At that moment the lobby is inserted as a mechanism of associative organization in which

the pressure groups take the opportunity to insert them.

The third theory of lobby formation is the Agency Theory which aims to demonstrate the
relationship between private and public interest.

The agency contributes to unravel the behaviour of politicians and public agents in decision-
making regarding public policies. For him the main axis is the desire to potentiate the
person usefulness.

Public conduct focuses on the role of "agents" who are the "top" delegates who run a
business. The interest of the subjects falls on the contracts that can be signed between the
agent (= principal) and the executor (= delegate). After elucidating the roles of each subject
in the contractual relationship, it is clear the existence of an asymmetry in the relation
between them because it is not always obtained what is contracted, since it deals with
human conduct subject to unethical, perhaps criminal behaviour.

Certain deviations from conducts can be perceived in situations involving Powers of the
Republic, considering the regulatory power of the Executive before what was legislated by
the National Congress.

Public and political agents, given the opening of the law issued, may distort the function of
the norm in the legal system. Of course, in situations of issuance of decrees and regulations,
in which the executive branch (regulatory agencies) exceed its jurisdiction, there is a
possibility of suspending acts in pursuit of the preservation of the public interest.

In this context, the theory of analysis is extremely important in view of the fact that the
lobbyist is an agent that acts within the "main" subject, which are the pressure groups.
Despite having similarities with the representative of the people, the relationship between
public servants and main subject has differences, since there is no contract established
between them.

The political agent is expected to represent the interests of citizens who have placed their
trust in that person for an elective term, while lobbyists seek to interfere in the decision-
making process.

Lobbying X Corruption X Influence Traffic

It is important to delimit ethical and penal limits of the practice of pressure groups. Despite
the confusion and criminal types, it is stated that the lobby, if used properly, does not make
use of these criminal actions for the influence of the public agent.

Nonetheless, it would be immature to turn a blind eye to the factual reality by stating that
there are no criminal practices of lobbyists with political agents.

Elements to prevent the collapse of the system of pressures in anarchy and corruption.

- The first factor presented is that lobbying is different from practicing corruption. That is
the reproduction of thematic inclinations aiming at the achievement of a specific purpose,
with specific clients and targets and companies respected by the practicing world.

- The second factor of differentiation is that the activity is a result of freedom of expression,
or even the right of petition to public agencies.

- The third factor stems from legal regulation and institutionalization in countries such as
the United States and Belgium (Brussels region).
- The fourth factor stems from the lobby as an employment bond between the lobbyist and
the company that politically represents their interests.

- The fifth factor stems from mechanisms of social regulation coming from associations.

Finally, the last factor to avoid the collapse of society is that lobbying is not just pressure.
Pressure is the ultimate factor in practice.

The great problem occurs when one does not discover the use of dark means to influence
the holders of the power. There is often no news of employees who have been "pleased" to
follow up on private interests or the drafting of bills or interim measures that are presented
as a solution to a social problem but actually tend to solve problems in a particular sector.

Another negative point concerns the large financial amount invested by companies that try
to legitimately influence the decision-making process of the Republic's powers, because in
the face of the amount of money invested in this process it is expected that there will be a
return in the future.

Thus, an unbalanced battle between capitalized pressure groups and lobbying groups such
as unions is set in motion.

These are endowed "only" with the strength of the worker and constant threats of strike,
which is sometimes not enough to avoid the adverse positioning of public agents against
rights and guarantees of the category.

Faced with the association of criminal conduct or harmful to the interests of workers and
society in general, lobbyists have long struggled for the change of nomenclature attributed
to their class, in which many have come to be called agents of government or institutional
relations.

The Profile of the Assessors - Advisers

This type of professional exercises the activity who has the characteristics necessary to the
activity itself and not who holds a specific academic formation, that is, what determines
whether a person is capable of activity is their ability to absorb, organize and redirect
information their academic background.

There are many cases of advisors who began to act almost by chance, in an attempt to give
another course to the professional career or because they have an easy way of dealing with
the public and because they have a high persuasion.

Many of these professionals previously in public agencies usually use their contacts,
influence and friendships to carry out their work. However, it requires more than good
contacts, because "there is no use having good contacts, if not there is anything to
communicate to the decision maker.

As information is the point of lobbying, he must know how to manage it and present it
trustworthy, impartial and well structured, so that its objective can be fulfilled

It should act credibly, offering reliable information, representative of broad sectors of

interest, having knowledge of of the legislative process. In addition, you must be discreet,
honest, ethical, good communication skills and persuasion, should maintain a good network
have a good academic background and be objective in the defence of the interests.

The characteristics of a good listed lobbyist:

• Good knowledge of the legislative process and the decision-making process;

• Discretion;

• Understanding of the political scenario;

• Understanding of the client's goals;

• Honesty and ethics;

• Qualified information;

• Provide reliable and well structured information;

• Power of communication and persuasion;

• Have good contacts;

• Serenity;

• Strong academic background; and

• Work the information in defence of your client and know how and where forward them.

Conclusion
It was also concluded that, despite being an instrument of social participation legitimizing
and expanding the democratic process by articulating visions of different sectors, subsidize
the formulation of public policies and guide state actions, the lobby suffers with the
prejudice and the stigma of marginality when being associated, in a way corruption, and
influence peddling.

However, it is undeniable that the lobby, exercised within the law and ethics, with clear and
defined objectives in the influence of the decision-making process and the definition of the
governmental agenda, imposes relations between the State, private entities and civil
society, strengthening and thus perfecting democracy.

Its regulations, must contain greater clarity and scrutiny of negotiations between interest
groups and pressure, and politicians, putting an end to clandestine and discrediting the
activity and giving rise to the true lobby.

Establish binding principles, prerogatives and forecasting of sanctions is important and

necessary in the various ways of the Power which often lacks the data and information
definition of public policies, state actions and legislative and normative activity.

With the regulation of lobbying activity, professionals in the area would have rules of
practice defined in relation to matters such as receipt of gifts, payment of personal
expenses, electoral donations, as well as procedures to be followed by meetings between
lobbyists and decision-makers and, therefore, a margin of performance with unequal
advantages.

In this way, citizens would have greater access to information on negotiations and the
decision-making process, influence in the search for insider information considerably.

It is therefore for decision-makers and society to legitimate defence of interests is a

fundamental element of the exercise of democracy representative and participatory
approach and good governance. Strong institutions are those that know how to listen to the
interests of different sectors and take political and regulatory decisions based on the public
interest.

Bibliography
BOOKS

BALANYA, BELEN & al 2000: Europe Inc.; Regional & Global Restructuring and the Rise of
Corporate Power, London: Pluto Press, January 2000.

CARPENTER, DANIEL/ MOSS, DAVID (eds.) 2013: Preventing Regulatory Capture, Special
Interest Influence and How to Limit It, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

DEMORTAIN, DAVID 2011: Scientists and the Regulation of Risk, Standardising Control, EE
Glos, UK: Edward Elgar.

FOUCART, Stéphane 2013: La Fabrique du mensonge. Comment les industriels manipulent la

science et nous mettent en danger, Paris: Denoël.

GOLDACRE, BEN 2012: Bad Pharma, How Drug Companies mislead doctors and harm
patients, London: Fourth Estate.
GOTZSCHE, PETER 2013: Deadly Medicines and Organised Crime: How Big Pharma Has
Corrupted Healthcare, Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press.

HOREL, STEPHANE 2015: Intoxication : perturbateurs endocriniens, lobbyistes et eurocrates

: une bataille d'influence contre la santé, La Découverte, Paris (à paraître, 01/10/215)

KRIMSKY, Sheldon 2004: Science in the Private Interest: Has the Lure of Profits Corrupted
Biomedical Research? Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

LAURENS, SYLVAIN 2015: Les Courtiers du capitalisme, Milieux d’affaires et bureaucrates à

Bruxelles, Marseille: Agone.

MARKOWITZ, GERALD & ROSNER DAVID 2003: Deceit and Denial, The Deadly Politics of
Industrial Pollution, Oakland: University of California Press.

MICHAELS, DAVID 2008: Doubt is Their Product, How Industry's Assault on Science
Threatens Your Health, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

NESTLE, Marion 2007: Food Politics. How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health,
Oakland: University of California Press.

ORESKES, NAOMI/ CONWAY, ERIK M. 2010: Merchants of Doubt, How a Handful of

Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming, NY/
London: Bloomsbury.

PROCTOR, ROBERT N. 2012: Golden Holocaust - Origins of the Cigarette Catastrophe and the
Case for Abolition, University of California Press

STAUBER, JOHN, RAMPTON, SHELDON, 1995: Toxic Sludge Is Good For You: Lies, Damn Lies
and the Public Relations Industry, Common Courage Press, Monroe, Maine

WAGNER EMILY E., MCGARITY THOMAS O, 2008, Bending Science: How Special Interests
Corrupt Public Health Research, Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press

ARTICLES

ASHFORD, NICOLAS A./ HALL, RALPH P. 2011: Regulation-Induced Innovation for Sustainable
Development , In: Administrative & Regulatory Law News, Section of Adminitrative Law &
Regulatory Practice, American Bar Association, Vol. 37, No. 3, Spring 2012,
http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/administrative_regulatory_la
w_newsl etters/alnews_spr2012.authcheckdam.pdf

ASHFORD, NICOLAS A. 2006: The Legacy of the Precautionary Principle in US Law: The Rise
of Cost-Benefit Analysis and Risk Assessment as Undermining Factors in Health, Safety and
Environment Protection, In: Ashford, Nicolas A. 2006: Implementing the Precautionary
Principle: Approaches from the Nordic Countries, the EU and the United States, Earthscan.
http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/38469

ASHFORD, NICOLAS A./ KOCH, LARS 2005: Rethinking the Role of Information in Chemicals
Policy: Implications for TSCA and REACH , Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 14/ 2006, pp.
31-46 , http://sage-
bcgc.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/press/docs/Koch%20%26%20Ashford
%202006%20Rethinking%20the%20role%20of%20information%20in%20chemicals
%20policy.pdf

BONINI SERGIO & al 2014: Transparency and the European Medicines Agency — Sharing of
Clinical Trial Data, New England Journal of Medicine
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1409464

CORPORATE EUROPE OBSERVATORY 2014: How to improve scientific advice to the European
Commission?, Principles for Transparency, excellence and independence, 19 November
2014, http://corporateeurope.org/power-lobbies/2014/11/how-improve-scientific-advice-
europeancommission

CORPORATE EUROPE OBSERVATORY 2012: Agribusiness CAPturing EU research money?, 26

June 2012, http://corporateeurope.org/agribusiness/2012/06/agribusiness-capturing-
euresearch-money

FUNTOWICZ, SILVIO O., RAVETZ, JEROME R., 1994: Uncertainty, Complexity and Post-
Normal Science, Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry - vol. 13, no. 12, 1994

FUNTOWICZ, SILVIO O., Innovation, sustainability and the political economy of science,
Presentation at the New Narratives for Innovation Workshop, JRC, European Commission,
Feb 2015 https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/event/workshop/new-narratives-innovation

GLOVER, ANNE, 2014: 1000 Days in the Life of a Chief Scientific Advisor (presentation)
http://www.slideshare.net/SciAdvice14/1000-days-in-the-life-of-a-science-advisor38529597

EUROPEAN MEDICINES AGENCY 2013: Access to Patient-Level Trial Data — A Boon to Drug
Developers, New England Journal of Medicine
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1310771

KITMAN, JAMIE LINCOLN 2000: The Secret History of Lead, March 2000, In: The Nation, 03
July 2000, http://www.thenation.com/article/secret-history-lead/

KOENIG, FRANZ & al 2015: Sharing clinical trial data on patient level: Opportunities and
challenges, Biometrics journal
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bimj.201300283/full
 LIPTON, ERIC, 2015: Food Industry Enlisted Academics in G.M.O. Lobbying War, Emails
Show, New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/06/us/food-industry-enlisted-
academics-ingmo-lobbying-war-emails-show.html

LIPTON, ERIC, 2014: Rival Industries Sweet-Talk the Public, New York Times,
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/12/business/rival-industries-sweet-talk-the-public.html

MILLSTONE ERIC, Van Zwanenberg P., 2001, Politics of expert advice: lessons from the early
history of the BSE saga, Science and public policy 28 (2), 99-112
http://spp.oxfordjournals.org/content/28/2/99.abstract

NESTLE, MARION, 2013: Conflicts of Interest in the Regulation of Food Safety, A Threat to
Scientific Integrity, JAMA Internal Medicine 2013;
http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx? articleid=1725122

SALTELLI, ANDREA/ GIAMPIETRO, MARIO 2015: The fallacy of evidence based policy, Draft,
Submitted for a special issue on FUTURES, January 2015,
https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/sites/default/files/PaperPolicyCartesianDream.pdf

SALTELLI, ANDREA 2015: Evidence based policy: handle with care, Presentation Bergen
Summer Research School: Sustainable Development Goals to meet Global Development
Challenges, June 23, 2015,
www.andreasaltelli.eu/file/repository/Saltelli_Bergen_June2015_Quantitative.pdf

SATELLI, ANDREA 2015a: Evidence based policy: Significant Digits, Responsible Use of
Quantitative Information, Workshop of the Joint Research Centre of the European
Commission Brussels, Fondation Universitaire , 9-10 June 2015,
www.andreasaltelli.eu/file/repository/Saltelli_3_Brussels_SD_RU_June2015.pdf

SMITH, KATHERINE & al 2015: Corporate Coalitions and Policy Making in the European
Union: How and Why British American Tobacco Promoted ‘‘Better Regulation’’, Journal of
Health Politics, Policy and Law, Vol. 40, No. 2, April 2015
http://jhppl.dukejournals.org/content/early/2015/01/22/03616878-2882231.abstract

KATHERINE E. SMITH ET AL. 2010, “Working the system”. British American Tobacco’s
influence on the European Union treaty and its implications for policy: an analysis of internal
tobacco industry documents, PLoS Medicine, vol. 7, nº 1, 12 January 2010, p. e1000202
http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1000202

SMITH, KATHERINE & al, 2009: Is the increasing policy use of Impact Assessment in Europe
likely to undermine efforts to achieve healthy public policy? Journal of Epidemiology and
Community Health, 2010; 64:478e487.
http://www.sps.ed.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/58740/Smith_impact_assessment_JE
CH_ 2010.pdf

View publication stats