Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32847604›Full record

ArticleGlobalization and health2020

Non-communicable disease governance in the era of the sustainable development goals: a qualitative analysis of food industry framing in WHO consultations.

Kathrin Lauber, Rob Ralston, Mélissa Mialon, Angela Carriedo, Anna B Gilmore

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Globalization and health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. "Part of the Solution": Food Corporation Strategies for Regulatory Capture and Legitimacy.International journal of health policy and management · 2021
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Kathrin LauberTobacco Control Research Group, University of Bath, Bath, UK. kl580@bath.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-0073-3004
Rob RalstonGlobal Health Policy Unit, School of Social and Political Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Mélissa MialonSchool of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Angela CarriedoWorld Public Health Nutrition Association, London, UK.
Anna B GilmoreTobacco Control Research Group, University of Bath, Bath, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/S037519/1UK Prevention Research Partnership MR/S037519/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe UN system's shift towards multistakeholder governance, now embedded in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), invites a broad range of actors, including the private sector, to the policymaking table. Although the tobacco industry is formally excluded from engagement, this approach provides opportunities for other unhealthy commodity industries to influence the World Health Organization's (WHO's) non-communicable disease (NCD) agenda. Focusing on the food industry, this research maps which actors engaged with WHO consultations, and critically examines actors' policy and governance preferences as well as the framing they employ to promote these preferences in the global context.

methodsAll written responses from food industry actors to publicly available NCD-relevant WHO consultations held between September 2015 and September 2018 were identified, totalling forty-five responses across five consultations. A qualitative frame analysis was conducted to identify policy positions expressed by respondents, as well as arguments and frames used to do so.

resultsThough no individual companies responded to the consultations, the majority of participating business associations had some of the largest multinational food corporations as members. Respondents overarchingly promoted non-statutory approaches and opposed statutory regulation and conflict of interest safeguards. To this purpose, they framed the food industry as a legitimate and necessary partner in policymaking, differentiating themselves from the tobacco industry and referencing a history of successful collaboration, while also invoking multistakeholder norms and good governance principles to portray collaboration as required. Respondents contrasted this with the limits of WHO's mandate, portraying it as out of step with the SDGs and framing NCD decision-making as a matter of national sovereignty.

conclusionWe observed that the UN's call for partnerships to support the SDGs is invoked to defend corporate access to NCD policy. This highlights the need for more cautious approaches which are mindful of the commercial determinants of health. Systematic opposition to regulation and to governance approaches which may compromise commercial actors' insider role in global health by food industry actors shown here, and the strategic use of the Sustainable Development agenda to this purpose, raises questions about the value of collaboration from the perspective of international health agencies such as WHO.

Indexed as

Food IndustryNoncommunicable DiseasesSustainable DevelopmentWorld Health OrganizationCommerceGlobal HealthGovernmentHealth PolicyHumansPolicy MakingPrivate SectorPublic HealthReferral and ConsultationTobacco IndustryCommercial determinants of healthCorporate political activityFood industryGlobal health governanceNon-communicable diseases

Identifiers

PMID32847604
PMCPMC7448499

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.