ArticleHealth promotion international2024
Watered down: a cross-case political economy analysis of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes in Vanuatu and Fiji.
Article in Health promotion international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- No Time Like the Present: Centring Politics in the Global NCD Policy Agenda Comment on "Barriers and Opportunities for WHO 'Best Buys' Non-Communicable Disease Policy Adoption and Implementation From a Political Economy Perspective: A Complexity Systematic Review".International journal of health policy and management · 2025Pooled it
- Getting unstuck: reframing health systems strengthening and resilience in fragile and conflict-affected settings.BMJ global health · 2026Review
- Navigating power in policy adoption: The political economy of noncommunicable diseases in Sierra Leone.SSM - health systems · 2025Article
- Sugar, power and policy: The political economy of a health and economic 'win-win' in Fiji's sugar-sweetened beverage tax.Globalization and health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) in Vanuatu and Fiji are praised for their alignment with the World Health Organization's noncommunicable diseases Best Buy policy recommendations. SSB taxes also intersect with economic, trade and commercial interests as well as complex domestic and international power dynamics. Yet, to date, the role of these broader interests and power dynamics in shaping SSB tax adoption in Vanuatu and Fiji has remained underexamined. Drawing on Bourdieu's forms of capital and triangulating interview (n = 50), document (n = 461) and observational data, this cross-case political economy analysis sought to understand where forms of power reside, how they manifest, and what impact they have on the alignment between SSB tax in Vanuatu and Fiji and national and global goals and priorities. Three interconnected themes emerged from the analysis: the influence of domestic industry actors in a context of shifting fiscal and trade incentives; the pivotal agenda-setting role of pro-tax multisectoral coalitions and the way political instability lent importance to informal policy processes. Findings evidence the varying influence of economic, social, and cultural capitals across the policy cycle and showcase the way in which actors strategically deployed, lost or re-imagined their capitals to secure policy influence. Importantly, cultural capital was essential to leveraging influence across the policy cycle and more inward-facing systems favoured the protection of domestic actors and industries, including their economic capital. From a health perspective, these political forces ultimately culminated in weaker or 'watered down' SSB taxes in both Vanuatu and Fiji.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.