Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33820589›Full record

ArticlePublic health nutrition2022

Sugary drinks taxation: industry's lobbying strategies, practices and arguments in the Brazilian Legislature.

Aline Brandão Mariath, Ana Paula Bortoletto Martins

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public health nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
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

2 authors.

Aline Brandão MariathChamber of Deputies, Brasília, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-4694-6486
Ana Paula Bortoletto MartinsCenter for Epidemiological Studies in Health and Nutrition, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-3560-4472

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the strategies, practices and arguments used by the industry to lobby legislators against sugary drinks taxation in Brazil.

designWe performed a content analysis of arguments put forward by sugary drink and sugar industries against sugary drinks taxation, using the framework developed by the International Network for Food and Obesity/Non-Communicable Diseases Research, Monitoring and Action Support to assess corporate political activity of the food industry.

settingTwo public hearings held in 2017 and 2018 in the Brazilian Legislature.

participantsRepresentatives from two prominent industry associations - one representing Big Soda and the other representing the main sugar, ethanol and bioelectricity producers.

resultsThe 'Information and messaging' and 'Policy substitution' strategies were identified. Five practices were identified in the 'Information and messaging' strategy (four described in the original framework and an additional practice, 'Stress the environmental importance of the industry'). Mechanisms not included in the original framework identified were 'Stress the reduction of CO2 emissions promoted by the industry'; 'Question the effectiveness of regulation'; 'Suggest public-private partnerships'; 'Shift the blame away from the product' and 'Question sugary drinks taxation as a public health recommendation'. No new practices or mechanisms to the original framework emerged in the 'Policy substitution' strategy.

conclusionsThe strategies and practices are used collectively and complement each other. Arguments herein identified are in line with those reported in other countries under different contexts and using different methodologies. Future research should address whether and under what conditions lobbying from this industry sector is effective in the Brazilian Legislature.

Indexed as

Sugar-Sweetened BeveragesBrazilHumansLobbyingSugarsTaxesSugarsCorporate political activityLobbyingPublic policySugar-sweetened beveragesTaxation

Identifiers

PMID33820589
PMCPMC8825954

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.