Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38388413›Full record

ArticleGlobalization and health2024

Corporate interest groups and their implications for global food governance: mapping and analysing the global corporate influence network of the transnational ultra-processed food industry.

Scott Slater, Mark Lawrence, Benjamin Wood, Paulo Serodio, Phillip Baker

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Globalization and health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
19.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Policy mix for a low-carbon food system.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Scott SlaterSchool of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia. sslater@deakin.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-2642-8609
Mark LawrenceSchool of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia.
Benjamin WoodGlobal Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Paulo SerodioInstitute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, UK.
Phillip BakerSchool of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia.
Deakin University · AUUniversity of Essex · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA major challenge to transforming food systems to promote human health and sustainable development is the global rise in the manufacture and consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPFs). A key driver of this dietary transition is the globalization of UPF corporations, and their organized corporate political activity (CPA) intended to counter opposition and block government regulation. UPF industry CPA and the corporate interest groups who lobby on their behalf have been well described at the national level, however, at the global level, this network has not been systematically characterized. This study aims to map, analyse, and describe this network, and discuss the implications for global food policy action on UPFs, global food governance (GFG), and food systems transformation.

methodsWe conducted a network analysis of the declared interest group memberships of the world's leading UPF corporations, extracted from web sources, company reports, and relevant academic and grey literature. Data on the characteristics of these interest groups were further extracted for analysis, including year founded, level, type, and headquarter location.

resultsWe identified 268 interest groups affiliated with the UPF industry. The UPF manufacturers Nestlé (n = 171), The Coca-Cola Company (n = 147), Unilever (n = 142), PepsiCo (n = 138), and Danone (n = 113) had the greatest number of memberships, indicating strong centrality in coordinating the network. We found that this network operates at all levels, yet key actors now predominantly coordinate globally through multistakeholder channels in GFG. The most common interest group types were sustainability/corporate social responsibility/multistakeholder initiatives, followed by branding and advertising, and food manufacturing and retail. Most corporate interest groups are headquartered where they can access powerful government and GFG decision-makers, nearly one-third in Washington DC and Brussels, and the rest in capital cities of major national markets for UPFs.

conclusionsThe UPF industry, and especially its leading corporations, coordinate a global network of interest groups spanning multiple levels, jurisdictions, and governance spaces. This represents a major structural feature of global food and health governance systems, which arguably poses major challenges for actions to attenuate the harms of UPFs, and to realising of healthy and sustainable food systems.

Indexed as

Food, ProcessedPublic OpinionFoodFood IndustryHumansIndustryPoliticsCorporate powerFood systemsFront groupsGlobal food governanceLobbyingMultistakeholderPartnershipsTrade associationsUltra-processed foods

Identifiers

PMID38388413
PMCPMC10882744
OpenAlexW4392044336

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.