The debate over collaborations between higher education institutions in French-speaking Switzerland and the tobacco industry has resurfaced following revelations about a 2021 engagement between HEPIA in Geneva and Philip Morris. According to RTS’s investigative desk, discussions reportedly concerned agronomic research tests and viability in product development, though details remain opaque.
Context and What Is Known
The American tobacco company told RTS that the collaboration did not progress beyond a preliminary evaluation. In contrast, HEPIA declined to comment, citing a confidentiality clause in the contract binding the institution to the multinational. This combination of limited public information and university silence has intensified questions about transparency in applied research partnerships.
Legal Route and Public Accountability
OxySuisse, an association advocating against tobacco industry influence, sought full access to the contract through the Geneva judiciary. The Administrative Chamber of the Court of Geneva sided with OxySuisse, allowing the association to obtain the contract postdecision. HEPIA also provided the convention signed with Philip Morris to RTS, but the document contains no substantive details about the discussions and instead appears to restrict further communication on the topic.
Such confidentiality agreements are not unusual in applied research, yet they raise concerns about openness when science intersects with industry priorities that can affect public health outcomes.
Integrity Framework in Romandy’s Higher Education
Beyond HEPIA, RTS findings show that several Romand higher education institutions maintain partnerships with tobacco and nicotine producers. The spokesperson for the HES-SO, the umbrella body for western Switzerland’s universities of applied sciences, emphasizes a formal Code of Scientific Integrity. The code rests on four core principles: reliability, honesty, respect, and responsibility, intended to safeguard the environment and public health while supporting responsible innovation.
Ethical Tensions and Governance
Critics argue that confidentiality and industry ties can undermine scientific independence, while supporters contend that industry partnerships can fund valuable applied research. In this debate, the ethical balance hinges on robust governance, transparent funding disclosures, and clear conflict-of-interest policies that protect public health and academic credibility.
Industry Perspective
Philip Morris has defended its collaborations as part of a broader research program aimed at developing products that could be less harmful for adult smokers. The company encourages openness to data and constructive debate rather than dismissing the entire concept of risk-reduction research outright.
What Happens Next
In response to the attention generated, the HES-SO management board has ordered a legal and ethical review to clarify the framework governing industry partnerships and to draft common guidelines. The aim is to reconcile the needs of applied research with stringent safeguards and transparency where possible, ensuring consistent standards across Romandy’s higher education landscape.
Why This Matters for Public Health and Science
As public universities increasingly engage with industry, questions about transparency, governance, and the protection of health become central. The Geneva case could influence policy across Romandy and beyond, shaping how researchers disclose funding sources, manage conflicts of interest, and communicate results to the public in a way that preserves trust in science.
Source attribution: RTS Investigations Desk
