Search

Capitalist economies depend on private business investment, and all governments in similar states compete to induce businesses to invest through various policy interventions. In so doing, they compete with other governments to retain current investors and to encourage new ones from elsewhere. The implications for policy-making and, by extension, citizens, are huge. The pressure on governments to capture new investment has an impact on taxation policies, workplace regulations, legal protections, public infrastructure and social policies. However, not all governments compete for investment in the same way at the same time, and not all businesses are attracted by the same inducements offered by states, highlighting the possibility that public policies shape investment strategies, just as investment strategies also shape public policies. It is its development of relatively unique and aggressive strategies to capture new investment that places the UK in a vulnerable position post-Brexit. It has successfully attracted mobile corporations to its shores, in part because it has offered a particularly favourable gateway into Europe for foreign capital. This raises questions about how the country will seek to compete for capital investment in future. This paper examines these questions with reference to both theoretical and empirical evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The opening of the Thai tobacco market, following action brought by the US Trade Representative under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, is seen as a key case study of the tensions between trade and health policy. Interpretations of the dispute cast it, either as an example of how trade agreements undermine national policy-making, or how governments can adopt effective public health protections compliant with international trade rules. As a UK-based company, British American Tobacco has been regarded as peripheral to this dispute. This paper argues that its close monitoring of the illegal trade during this period, the role of smuggling in the company's global business strategy, and its management of the relative supply and pricing of legal and illegal products after market opening provide a fuller understanding of the interests and roles of transnational tobacco companies and the government in this dispute. The findings have important policy implications, notably the role of effective governance in countries facing pressure to open their tobacco sectors, need to better understand corporate-level activities within an increasingly globalised tobacco industry, and need to address the intertwined legal and illegal trade in implementing the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]