Opportunities for corporations to protect the public's health by choosing to do no harm: A legal analysis

Corporations can promote or harm the public's health through their products and business practices relative to trade. For example, many corporations, including numerous pharmaceutical manufacturers, donate their products to under-resourced countries, providing materials to cure or prevent diseases. On the other hand, some corporations manufacture cigarettes, which are associated with excess morbidity and mortality. Motor vehicle manufacturers have revolutionized transportation, yet their products are annually associated with hundreds of thousands of injuries and deaths. The legal system can incentivize particular corporate practices and discourage others, with important ramifications for trade and public health. For instance, the maximization of profits is often portrayed as a legal mandate, which of course would affect corporations' decisions and actions, some of which may be harmful to the public. But without a legal imperative to maximize profits, corporations can legally forego profitable activities that may endanger the public. Neither courts nor legislative bodies have directly identified a corporate obligation to maximize profits that could justify the infliction of harm. We used legal research and analysis to identify instances in which corporations may legally engage in practices that protect or enhance the public's health, even if profits are not maximized. We discuss the ramifications of these practices for public health and trade policy. By understanding how corporations can legally follow a path of “do no harm,” even if this results in a partial sacrifice of profits, practitioners can better capitalize on opportunities to encourage corporations to protect, rather than harm, the public's health.