This article is based on a study that aimed to shed light on the “cultures of action” of Irish health advocacy organizations, and particularly their modes of engagement with pharmaceutical corporations. Debates about what some interpret as the “corporate colonization” of health activism provide the backdrop for the analysis. The empirical dimension of the study involved a survey of 112 organizations and in-depth study of a small number of organizations that manifest diverse modes of engagement with the pharmaceutical industry. The varying modes of interaction are plotted along a continuum and characterized as corporatist, cautious cooperation, and confrontational. Evidence is presented of a strong and growing cultural tendency in Irish health advocacy organizations to frame pharmaceutical corporations as allies in their quests for better health. The analysis of four constitutive dimensions of organizations' cultures of action can reveal the legitimating logics underlying their diverging positions around pharmaceutical industry sponsorship. While the research shows that pharmaceutical corporations have largely succeeded in defining themselves as a philanthropic force and rightful players in Irish health activism, it cautions against a simplistic conclusion that this is evidence of corporate colonization.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
KlawiterM.Racing for the cure, walking with women, and toxic touring: Mapping cultures of action within the Bay Area terrain of breast cancer. Soc. Probl.46:104–126, 1999.
2.
CrossleyN.Working utopias and social movements: An investigation using case study materials from radical mental health movements in Britain. Sociology33:809–830, 1999.
3.
BrouwerD.ACT-ing UP in Congressional hearings. In Counterpublics and the State, ed. AsenR. and BrouwerD.. State University of New York Press, New York, 2001.
4.
LandzeliusK.Introduction: Patient organization movements and new metamorphoses in patienthood. Soc. Sci. Med.62:529–537, 2006.
5.
Centre for Media and Democracy. Astroturf Groups Give Drug Industry Even More Clout. PR Watch, 2002. www.prwatch.org/node/1584 (October 2005).
6.
AngellM.The Truth About Drug Companies—How They Deceive Us and What to Do About It.Random House, New York, 2004.
7.
HerxheimerA.Relationships between the pharmaceutical industry and patients' organizations. BMJ326:1208–1210, 2003.
8.
MedawarC., and HardonA.Medicines out of Control? Antidepressants and the Conspiracy of Goodwill.Aksant, Amsterdam, 2004.
9.
Health Action International Europe. Does the European Patients' Forum Represent Patient or Industry Interests? A Case Study in the Need for Mandatory Financial Disclosure. Amsterdam, 2005.
10.
KelleherD.New social movements in the health domain. In Habermas, Critical Theory and Health, ed. ScamblerG.. Routledge, London, 2001.
11.
KingS.Pink Ribbons Inc: Breast cancer activism and the politics of philanthropy. Int. J. Qual. Stud. Educ.17:473–492, 2004.
12.
PezzulloP.Resisting “National Breast Cancer Awareness Month”: The rhetoric of counterpublics and their cultural performances. Q. J. Speech89:345–365, 2003.
13.
BenfordR., and SnowD.Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annu. Rev. Sociol.26:611–639, 2000.
14.
CrossleyN.The field of psychiatric contention in the UK, 1960–2000. Soc. Sci. Med.62:552–563, 2006.
15.
MillsC. W.Situated actions and vocabularies of motive. Am. Sociol. Rev.5:904–913, 1940.
16.
O'CarrollP.Culture lag and democratic deficit in Ireland or: “Dat's outside de terms of d'agreement.”Community Dev. J.37:10–19, 2002.
17.
KirbyP.GibbonsL., and CroninM. (eds.). Reinventing Ireland: Culture, Society and the Global Economy.Pluto Press, London, 2002.
18.
AllenK.The Celtic Tiger: The Myth of Social Partnership in Ireland.Manchester University Press, Manchester, 2000.
19.
Irish Pharmaceutical Healthcare Association. Pharma Ireland: An Industry Report. Dublin, 2005.
20.
Medical Research Charities Group. Building a Network of Irish Research Charities. Dublin, 2005.
RabeharisoaV.The struggle against neuromuscular diseases in France and the emergence of the “partnership model” of patient organization. Soc. Sci. Med.57:2127–2136, 2003.
26.
European Platform for Patients' Organizations, Science and Industry. Fifth Workshop on Partnering for Serious Disease Therapy Development: A Responsible System for Healthcare Innovation and Access to Care, Berlin, November 23–24, 2004. www.epposi.org/frameconferences.html (February 2005).
27.
Irish Platform for Patients' Organizations, Science and Industry. Advantages of IPPOSI. Document presented to the Minister for Trade, Enterprise and Employment, Dublin, June 2004.
28.
Diabetes Federation of Ireland CEO. Interview with the author, Dublin, July 22, 2005.
29.
Asthma Society of Ireland CEO. Interview with the author, Dublin, July 22, 2005.
30.
BarringtonK.Drug prices: Is there a cure?Sunday Business Post, June 1, 2003.
31.
Irish Cancer Society Communications Manager. Interview with the author, Dublin, July 26, 2005.
