ArticleGlobalization and health2025
A political economy analysis of the legislative response to unhealthy food and beverage marketing in Chile, Canada and the UK.
Article in Globalization and health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding power in food policy: a critical scoping review of methods to guide future research.Health promotion international · 2026Article
- Political economy analysis of health: a scoping review of concepts, definitions, frameworks, outcomes, and applications.Health policy and planning · 2026Article
- Learning from Latin America: toward stronger regulation of unhealthy food marketing.Health promotion international · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
United Nations bodies call for legal responses to restrict children's exposure to unhealthy food marketing; however, few governments have introduced legislative controls. This research studies the underlying political economy influences that impacted the introduction of legal responses. We used a multiple case study methodology to examine the political economy influences on the policy process in three contexts (Chile, Canada and the UK). Data from documentary evidence and 21 semi-structured key informant interviews were analysed using a political economy framework studying the institutions, interests, ideas and the associated power dynamics that shaped the policy process. The prevailing neoliberal ideologies and overarching institutional paradigm, in which all actors were operating, meant any form of government intervention had to be justified, evidence-based and no more intrusive on commercial enterprise and public life than necessary. The neoliberal paradigm permeated each of the political economy elements (institutions, ideas and interests). In addition, its influence was observed in all stages of the policy process, from introduction through to adoption of the resulting law or regulation, and experienced in both the executive and legislative branches of government. A paradigm shift away from the protection and primacy of commercial enterprise and limited government interference would reduce the barriers governments face when introducing legislative responses to unhealthy food marketing. These dynamics may be tempered if institutional, actor and discursive power is harnessed in support of the legitimate public health measure, which would involve a strong mandate for the ministry responsible and a dedicated and influential policy entrepreneur. - Provides an insight into how three different governments legislated unhealthy food marketing. - Provides lessons for other governments about what challenges those countries faced and how they overcame them. - Considers the political reality behind policy making that impacts on how evidence-based policy making occurs.
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.