Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36371287›Full record

ArticleGlobalization and health2022

Towards reconciling population nutrition goals and investment policy in Thailand: understanding how investment policy actors defined, framed and prioritised nutrition.

Sirinya Phulkerd, Ashley Schram, Jeff Collin, Anne-Marie Thow, Yandisa Ngqangashe, Carmen Huckel Schneider, Sharon Friel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Globalization and health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Sirinya PhulkerdInstitute for Population and Social Research, Mahidol University, Salaya Campus, 999 Phutthamonthon 4 Road, Phutthamonthon, 73170, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand. sirinya.phu@mahidol.ac.th.ORCID 0000-0001-9373-3120
Ashley SchramMenzies Centre for Health Governance, School of Regulation and Global Governance, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Jeff CollinGlobal Health Policy Unit, School of Social & Political Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Anne-Marie ThowMenzies Centre for Health Policy and Economics, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Yandisa NgqangasheMenzies Centre for Health Governance, School of Regulation and Global Governance, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Carmen Huckel SchneiderMenzies Centre for Health Policy and Economics, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Sharon FrielMenzies Centre for Health Governance, School of Regulation and Global Governance, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGovernment's investment policy is an important driver of food system activities, which in turn influence consumers practices, dietary consumption patterns and nutrition-related health of populations. While governments globally have committed to developing coherent public policies to advance population nutrition, the objectives of investment policies are seen as being divorced from nutrition and health goals. This study aimed to examine investment policy in Thailand and explore how key actors variously define and frame their objectives in food investment policy, how nutrition issues are represented by the actors, and what discursive effects of the nutrition results were represented within the field of investment in Thailand.

methodsThis study conducted semi-structured interviews with 16 actors (from 23 recruited actors) from government, civil society, academia and industry. A coding framework was developed based on Bacchi's analytical framework encapsulated in the question "What's the problem represented to be?" which examines the problem and assumptions underlying a policy. Data coding was first undertaken by a lead researcher and then double-coded and cross-checked by research team. Disagreements were resolved with discussion until consensus was achieved. The interview data were analysed using thematic analysis.

resultsThe principal "problem" represented in food investment policy in Thailand was the perceived irrelevance of nutrition to governmental commitments towards increasing productivity and economic growth. Technological innovation in food production and processing such as ultra-processed foods was perceived as a key driver of economic growth. The key assumption underlying this representation was the primacy of a "productivist" policy paradigm, via which the government focuses on industrially driven food and agriculture and expansion to increase productivity and economic growth. This entails that the nutrition needs of Thai people are silenced and remain unacknowledged in investment policy contexts, and also does not take cognisance of the term "nutrition" and its importance to economic growth.

conclusionThe findings show that nutrition was not perceived as a political priority for the government and other investment actors. Promoting productivity and economic growth were clearly positioned as the primary purposes of investment within the dominant discourse. Nutrition regulation, particularly of UPF, may conflict with current investment policy directions which prioritise development of modern food production and processing. The study suggests that comprehensive policy communication about nutrition and food classification is needed.

Indexed as

GoalsNutrition PolicyGovernmentHealth PolicyHumansOrganizationsThailandDiscursive powerInvestment policyPopulation nutritionProblematisationThailandUltra-processed foods

Identifiers

PMID36371287
PMCPMC9652585

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.