The marketing potential of corporate social responsibility activities: the case of the alcohol industry in Latin America and the Caribbean
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: The aims were to: (1) identify, monitor and analyse the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) practices of the alcohol industry in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) and (2) examine whether the alcohol industry is using these actions to market their products and brands. METHODS: Nine health experts from Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay conducted a content analysis of 218 CSR activities using a standardized protocol. A content rating procedure was used to evaluate the marketing potential of CSR activities as well as their probable population reach and effectiveness. The LEAD procedure (longitudinal, expert and all data) was applied to verify the accuracy of industry-reported descriptions. RESULTS: A total of 55.8% of the actions were found to have a marketing potential, based on evidence that they are likely to promote brands and products. Actions with marketing potential were more likely to reach a larger audience than actions classified with no marketing potential. Most actions did not fit into any category recommended by the World Health Organization; 50% of the actions involving classroom and college education for young people were found to have marketing potential; 62.3% were classified as meeting the definition of risk management CSR. CONCLUSION: Alcohol industry Corporate Social Responsibility activities in Latin America and the Caribbean appear to have a strategic marketing role beyond their stated philanthropic and public health purpose.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".