Entering our 16th year

Background and objective

British American Tobacco (BAT) has historically enjoyed a monopoly position in Kenya. Analysis of recent tobacco control debates and a case study of BAT''s response to the emergence of competition in Kenya are used to explore the company''s ability to shape public policy and its treatment of tobacco farmers.

Design

Analysis of internal industry documents from BAT''s Guildford depository, other relevant data and interviews with key informants.

Results

BAT enjoys extensive high‐level political connections in Kenya, including close relationships with successive Kenyan presidents. Such links seems to have been used to influence public policy. Health legislation has been diluted and delayed, and when a competitor emerged in the market, BAT used its contacts to have the government pass legislation drafted by BAT that compelled farmers to sell tobacco to BAT rather than to its competitor. BAT was already paying farmers less than any other African leaf‐growing company, and the legislation entrenched poor pay and a quasi‐feudal relationship. BAT''s public relation''s response to the threat of competition and the ministers'' public statements extolling the economic importance of tobacco growing suggest that BAT has manipulated tobacco farming as a political issue.

Conclusions

The extent of BAT''s influence over public policy is consistent with the observations that, despite ratifying the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, progress in implementing tobacco control measures in Kenya has been limited. The benefits of tobacco farming seem to be deliberately exaggerated, and an analysis of its true cost benefits is urgently needed. Tobacco farmers must be protected against BAT''s predatory practices and fully informed about its activities to help them have an informed role in policy debates. As image, particularly around the importance of tobacco farming, seems key to BAT''s ability to influence policy, the truth about its treatment of farmers must be publicised.Driven by the recent expansion of transnational tobacco corporations (TTCs) across many low‐ and middle‐income countries, the burden of tobacco''s health effect is shifting. It is predicted that, by 2030, 70% of the estimated 10 million global deaths from tobacco will occur in developing countries.¹ In this context, sub‐Saharan Africa (SSA) offers an opportunity for global health, being the only region in the world where primary prevention of the tobacco epidemic remains possible.² However, with TTCs investing heavily in the region during the last decade and with evidence of rapidly rising consumption, particularly among youth,³ this window of opportunity is closing rapidly.Implementation of comprehensive regulatory measures is required to prevent further escalation of the epidemic in SSA, and the World Health Organisation''s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) provides excellent opportunities in this regard. The African nations recognised this in pressing unanimously for a comprehensive treaty while simultaneously acknowledging the need to find an alternative income for countries dependent on tobacco farming, notably Zimbabwe and Malawi.^2,3 Tobacco farming represents a unique dimension to the tobacco control debate in SSA, and previous analyses of tobacco industry documents suggest that the tobacco industry has attempted to hijack such debates by presenting tobacco control as a “first world” concern that would lead to economic destabilisation and exacerbate poverty and malnutrition among tobacco‐growing countries.⁴ By contrast, a growing body of evidence suggests that tobacco farmers face considerable financial and health risks from growing tobacco.^{5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12}As African nations seek to implement the provisions of the FCTC, tobacco control legislation will have to be developed and enacted, providing opportunities for the tobacco industry to influence policy. The fact that Kenya has signed and ratified the FCTC¹³ while (as detailed below) efforts to implement legislation consistent with the treaty have been unsuccessful amid persistent reports of BAT influence¹⁴ highlights the possible barriers. Hence, there is an urgent need to understand the tobacco control policy environment in Africa, including the relationships between tobacco farmers and TTCs, which are clearly integral to this. However, there remains a dearth of research in this area. This paper seeks to address this gap by examining British American Tobacco''s (BAT) policy influence in Kenya.BAT merits particular attention as it is the dominant player in SSA, with a market share of over 90% in 11 countries.³ The selection of Kenya reflects its significance to BAT''s operations in Africa, the role it seems to have in BAT''s efforts to influence policy regionally¹⁵ and the nature of Kenyan tobacco politics.After an introduction to the origins and character of BAT''s political influence in Kenya and an overview of recent tobacco control debates in the country, this paper uses a case study of the company''s response to an emergent competitor, Mastermind Tobacco Kenya (referred to in the documents as MTK or MTCo), to examine BAT''s influence on policymaking. The paper therefore aims to shed important light on issues critical to the development of tobacco control across SSA.