Content Analysis of the Corporate Social Responsibility Practices of 9 Major Cannabis Companies in Canada and the US

Abstract

IMPORTANCEThe cannabis industry has sought to normalize itself and expand its markets in the 21st century. One strategy used by companies to generate positive public relations is corporate social responsibility (CSR). It is critical to understand these efforts to influence the public and politicians given the risks of increased cannabis use. OBJECTIVESTo analyze cannabis industry CSR behaviors, determine their characteristics, and compare their practices with those of the tobacco industry. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This qualitative study of CSR activities conducted betweenJanuary 1, 2012, and December 31, 2021, evaluated 9 of the 10 largest publicly traded cannabis companies in the US and Canada. Data were collected from August 1 to December 31, 2021. The 10th company was excluded because it engaged in cannabis-based pharmaceutical sales but not CSR. A systematic review of corporate websites and Nexis Uni was performed, resulting in collection of 153 news articles, press releases, and Web pages. Charitable and philanthropic actions were included.Themes were identified and interpreted using modified grounded theory. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES CSR activities and spending.RESULTS Nine major cannabis companies in the US and Canada engaged in CSR activities that encouraged increased consumption and targeted marginalized communities. Companies claimed these activities would mitigate the harms of cannabis prohibition, promote diversity, expand access to medical cannabis, and support charitable causes. They developed educational programs, sustainability initiatives, and voluntary marketing codes and used strategies similar to those used by tobacco companies to recruit public interest organizations as allies.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE These findings suggest that cannabis companies developed CSR strategies comparable to those used by the tobacco industry to influence regulation, suggesting that cannabis companies should be included when addressing commercial determinants of health.

Medicinal Cannabis Use for Rheumatic Conditions in the US Versus Canada: Rationale for Use and Patient–Health Care Provider Interactions

“…Open communication with health care professionals may promote safer use, as demonstrated by a nationally representative survey of American adults that reported protection against cannabis‐related falsehoods (eg, cannabis is not at all addictive) when there was physician input and interaction around cannabis (41). Given the strong advertising presence of the MC industry and use of techniques similar to those used by the tobacco industry (42), as well as consistent unfounded health claims made about CBD products by CBD manufacturers (43), there is a strong need for clear, evidence‐based, and thoughtful messaging by health care professionals about MC. Such communication and dialogue may have contributed to the use practices among Canadian participants that were more aligned with expert opinion in the scientific literature (39,44).…”

Corporate activities that influence population health: A scoping review and qualitative synthesis to develop the HEALTH-CORP typology

“…This domain consists of activities that shape preferences for products and/or influence perceptions about products and their healthrelated harms [6] Corporate Social Responsibility Practices This domain consists of activities undertaken with the stated intention to contribute to society and/or offset environmental, social, or health impacts of previous activities [27].…”

“…CSR initiatives mentioned in the literature include corporate involvement in health promotion programs and contributions to health charities and causes (e.g., tobacco industry's funding of HIV initiatives [44]; alcohol industry's involvement in road safety [37]) [18,19,27,37,39,42,44,51,67,72,91,97,106], some of which had limited evidence of effectiveness [18,27,39,44,72]. Others described CSR initiatives that have implications for health (e.g., diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts) [19,27,39,44,67,68]. Corporations were sometimes reported to exploit existing social movements (e.g., women's rights [61]) to sell products [27,50,61] or engage in product reformulation (e.g., 'light' cigarettes [48]) to suggest that the company is taking action on product-related harms [12,18,36,51,68,92].…”

“…Overall, CSR was perceived critically and was seen as being closely related to political practices and preference and perception shaping practices. That is, CSR efforts were seen as attempts to distract from corporate harms [12,18,27,44,48,75,107], shift blame [68,75], enhance brand image and credibility [19,36,44,67,84], influence policymaking [19,37,44,48,68,71], and/or preemptively address threats to business practices [55]. In some cases, these strategic uses of CSR were described by corporations in leaked company documents [48].…”

“…Corporations were reported to push for privatization, which was seen as widening inequities [62,127]. In some cases, initiatives ostensibly undertaken to improve equity (i.e., efforts to diversify cannabis industry employment) were seen as self-serving attempts to advance industry interests (e.g., increase consumption) [27]. Some articles also described corporate influences on global inequities, including the 'downward pressure' on working conditions via corporations' use of low-wage havens [40,41,113,114], exploitation of the weaker regulatory structures of LMICs, the extraction of wealth from LMICs to HICs [108,114], and the identification of LMICs as 'emerging markets' by unhealthy commodity producers (e.g., tobacco) to replace declines in consumption in HICs [36,40,43,72,128].…”