Implications of international trade and investment agreements on policy space for restricting marketing of unhealthy food and beverages to children: lessons from inter-disciplinary expert interviews

Protecting children from unhealthy food marketing: a comparative policy analysis in Australia, Fiji and Thailand

Restrictions on marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages to children is a globally recommended policy measure to improve diets and health. The aim of the analysis was to identify opportunities to enable policy learning and shift beliefs of relevant actors, to engender policy progress on restrictions on marketing of unhealthy foods to children. We drew on the Advocacy Coalition Framework to thematically analyse data from qualitative policy interviews conducted Australia (n = 24), Fiji (n = 10) and Thailand (n = 20). In all three countries two clear and opposing advocacy coalitions were evident within the policy subsystem related to regulation of unhealthy food marketing, which we termed the 'strengthen regulation' and 'minimal/self regulation' coalitions. Contributors to policy stasis on this issue were identified as tensions between public health and economic objectives of government, and limited formal and informal spaces for productive dialogue. The analysis also identified opportunities for policy learning that could enable policy progress on restrictions on marketing of unhealthy foods to children as: taking an incremental approach to policy change, defining permitted (rather than restricted) foods, investing in new public health expertise related to emerging marketing approaches and scaling up of monitoring of impacts. The insights from this study are likely to be relevant to many countries seeking to strengthen regulation of marketing to children, in response to recent global recommendations.

Overpromoted and underregulated: National binding legal measures related to commercially produced complementary foods in seven Southeast Asian countries are not fully aligned with available guidance

The market for commercially produced complementary foods (CPCF) is rapidly expanding in Southeast Asia; however, the existence and content of mandatory national policies, standards and legislation (binding legal measures) for CPCF in the region is unclear. To assess the status of national binding legal measures for CPCF in Southeast Asia, a legal and policy desk review was conducted in seven countries (Cambodia, Laos People's Democratic Republic, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand and Viet Nam). The alignment of the national binding legal measures relevant to CPCF was assessed against guidance on CPCF nutrient composition and labelling requirements provided by Codex Alimentarius and the World Health Organization (WHO). Each of the seven countries had at least two national binding legal measures related to the nutrient composition or labelling of CPCF; however, there was limited alignment with the guidance from Codex and WHO. No country was fully aligned with the three CPCF-specific Codex standards/guidelines and only one country was in full alignment with the recommendations related to the protection of breastfeeding from the 'WHO Guidance on ending the inappropriate promotion of foods for infants and young children'. The findings of the review indicate that the existing national binding legal measures are insufficient to ensure that the CPCF sold as suitable for older infants and young children are nutritionally adequate and labelled in a responsible manner that does not mislead caregivers. Improved and enforced national binding legal measures for CPCF, in alignment with global guidance, are required to ensure that countries protect, promote and support optimal nutrition for children 6-36 months of age.

Brexit, trade and the governance of non-communicable diseases: a research agenda

BACKGROUND

The UK's post-Brexit trade strategy has potentially important implications for population health and equity. In particular, it will impact on the structural risk factors for non-communicable diseases (NCDs), including the consumption of health-harming commodities such as tobacco, alcohol and ultra-processed food and beverages. This article catalogues recent developments in UK trade policy. It then presents a narrative review of the existing research literature on trade and health and previous, prospective studies on the health impacts of Brexit. In so doing it identifies key questions and foci for a future research agenda on the implications of UK's emerging trade regime for NCD prevention.

MAIN TEXT

We identify five key areas for future research. (1) Additional scholarship to document the health effects of key trade agreements negotiated by the UK government; (2) The implications of these agreements for policy-making to address health impacts, including the potential for legal challenges under dispute settlement mechanisms; (3) The strategic objectives being pursued by the UK government and the extent to which they support or undermine public health; (4) The process of trade policy-making, its openness to public health interests and actors and the impact of the political and ideological legacy of Brexit on outcomes; (5) The impact of the UK's post-Brexit trade policy on partner countries and blocs and their cumulative impact on the global trade regime.

CONCLUSIONS

Further research is urgently need to understand the ways in which the UK's post-Brexit trade strategy will impact on NCDs and policy responses to address these, including the openness of the trade policy architecture to health issues. The outcomes of this process will have wider systemic effects on the global trade regime with implications for health. Researchers must be cognizant of the ideological components of the policy debate which have been absent from previous analysis of Brexit, trade and health.

Who influences nutrition policy space using international trade and investment agreements? A global stakeholder analysis

Background

Regulation of food environments is needed to address the global challenge of poor nutrition, yet policy inertia has been a problem. A common argument against regulation is potential conflict with binding commitments under international trade and investment agreements (TIAs). This study aimed to identify which actors and institutions, in different contexts, influence how TIAs are used to constrain policy space for improving food environments, and to describe their core beliefs, interests, resources and strategies, with the objective of informing strategic global action to preserve nutrition policy space.

Methods

We conducted a global stakeholder analysis applying the Advocacy Coalition Framework, based on existing academic literature and key informant interviews with international experts in trade and investment law and public health nutrition policy.

Results

We identified 12 types of actors who influence policy space in the food environment policy subsystem, relevant to TIAs. These actors hold various beliefs regarding the economic policy paradigm, the nature of obesity and dietary diseases as health problems, the role of government, and the role of industry in solving the health problem. We identified two primary competing coalitions: 1) a ‘public health nutrition’ coalition, which is overall supportive of and actively working to enact comprehensive food environment regulation; and 2) an ‘industry and economic growth’ focussed coalition, which places a higher priority on deregulation and is overall not supportive of comprehensive food environment regulation. The industry and economic growth coalition appears to be dominant, based on its relative power, resources and coordination. However, the public health nutrition coalition maintains influence through individual activism, collective lobbying and government pressure (e.g. by civil society), and expert knowledge generation.

Conclusions

Our analysis suggests that industry and economic growth-focussed coalitions are highly capable of leveraging networks, institutional structures and ideologies to their advantage, and are a formidable source of opposition acting to constrain nutrition policy space globally, including through TIAs. Opportunities for global public health nutrition coalitions to strengthen their influence in the support of nutrition policy space include strategic evidence generation and coalition-building through broader engagement and capacity-building.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12992-021-00764-7.