PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Concern is growing over the power, influence, and threats to health and equity from the operations of large global consultancy firms. Collectively, these firms support a neoliberal policy environment promoting business interests ahead of public health. Global consultancy firms act as commercial determinants of health, an evolving area of research over recent years. However, this research mainly focuses on specific corporations or industry sectors, especially those which produce harmful products, including ultra-processed food, alcohol, and fossil fuels. It is therefore important to expand the focus to include large global consultancy firms and place a public health and equity lens over their operations.
METHODS: Global consultancy firms have wide-ranging conflicts of interest. These arise from the \'revolving door\' employment strategies between their own staff and those from government and regulatory bodies. These firms also advise governments on taxation and other matters while concurrently advising corporate clients on ways to minimise taxation. They advise fossil fuel corporations while also advising governments on climate and health policies. These firms undermine the capabilities of the public sector through the outsourcing of traditional public sector roles to these private interests. Consultancy firms foster private interests through their engagement with the higher education sector, and thereby weaken the tradition of transparent management of university affairs by accountable university councils. While private consultancies cannot be blamed for all the negative consequences for health and equity caused by the problems associated with globalisation and advanced capitalism, they have played a role in amplifying them.
CONCLUSIONS: Addressing the negative impacts of global consultancy firms will require strengthening the public sector, enforcing greater transparency, accountability, and minimising conflicts of interest. It will also demand critical thought, counter discourses, and activism to reframe the narratives supporting neo-liberal ideas of governance that are promoted in both government and business arenas.
METHODS: Global consultancy firms have wide-ranging conflicts of interest. These arise from the \'revolving door\' employment strategies between their own staff and those from government and regulatory bodies. These firms also advise governments on taxation and other matters while concurrently advising corporate clients on ways to minimise taxation. They advise fossil fuel corporations while also advising governments on climate and health policies. These firms undermine the capabilities of the public sector through the outsourcing of traditional public sector roles to these private interests. Consultancy firms foster private interests through their engagement with the higher education sector, and thereby weaken the tradition of transparent management of university affairs by accountable university councils. While private consultancies cannot be blamed for all the negative consequences for health and equity caused by the problems associated with globalisation and advanced capitalism, they have played a role in amplifying them.
CONCLUSIONS: Addressing the negative impacts of global consultancy firms will require strengthening the public sector, enforcing greater transparency, accountability, and minimising conflicts of interest. It will also demand critical thought, counter discourses, and activism to reframe the narratives supporting neo-liberal ideas of governance that are promoted in both government and business arenas.
摘要：
背景：人们对权力的关注与日俱增，影响力，以及大型全球咨询公司的运营对健康和公平的威胁。总的来说，这些公司支持新自由主义的政策环境，在公共卫生之前促进商业利益。全球咨询公司是健康的商业决定因素，近年来不断发展的研究领域。然而,这项研究主要集中在特定的公司或行业部门，尤其是那些生产有害产品的产品，包括超加工食品，酒精,和化石燃料。因此，重要的是将重点扩大到包括大型全球咨询公司，并将公共卫生和公平视角置于其运营之上。
方法：全球咨询公司存在广泛的利益冲突。这些源于他们自己的员工与政府和监管机构之间的“旋转门”就业策略。这些公司还就税收和其他事项向政府提供建议，同时向企业客户提供减少税收的方法。他们为化石燃料公司提供建议，同时也为政府提供气候和健康政策方面的建议。这些公司通过将传统的公共部门角色外包给这些私人利益来破坏公共部门的能力。咨询公司通过与高等教育部门的接触来促进私人利益，从而削弱了负责任的大学理事会对大学事务进行透明管理的传统。虽然不能将全球化和先进资本主义相关问题对健康和公平造成的所有负面影响归咎于私人咨询公司，它们在放大它们方面发挥了作用。
结论：解决全球咨询公司的负面影响将需要加强公共部门，加强透明度，问责制,尽量减少利益冲突。它还需要批判性思维，反话语，和行动主义重新构建支持新自由主义治理思想的叙述，这些思想在政府和商业领域都得到了推广。
方法：全球咨询公司存在广泛的利益冲突。这些源于他们自己的员工与政府和监管机构之间的“旋转门”就业策略。这些公司还就税收和其他事项向政府提供建议，同时向企业客户提供减少税收的方法。他们为化石燃料公司提供建议，同时也为政府提供气候和健康政策方面的建议。这些公司通过将传统的公共部门角色外包给这些私人利益来破坏公共部门的能力。咨询公司通过与高等教育部门的接触来促进私人利益，从而削弱了负责任的大学理事会对大学事务进行透明管理的传统。虽然不能将全球化和先进资本主义相关问题对健康和公平造成的所有负面影响归咎于私人咨询公司，它们在放大它们方面发挥了作用。
结论：解决全球咨询公司的负面影响将需要加强公共部门，加强透明度，问责制,尽量减少利益冲突。它还需要批判性思维，反话语，和行动主义重新构建支持新自由主义治理思想的叙述，这些思想在政府和商业领域都得到了推广。
