International Journal of Health Policy and Management

International Journal of Health Policy and Management

Is a Government-Led Approach to Surveil Unhealthy Commodity Industries Feasible?; Comment on “National Public Health Surveillance of Corporations in Key Unhealthy Commodity Industries – A Scoping Review and Framework Synthesis”

Document Type : Commentary

Authors
Angela Carriedo 1
Margarita Otero-Alvarez 2
Carmen Levis 3
1 World Public Health Nutrition Association, London, UK
2 University of Nevada, Reno, NV, USA
3 NCD Alliance, Washington, DC, USA
10.34172/ijhpm.8601
Abstract
Bennett and colleagues’ paper aims to synthesize the existing frameworks to identify and monitor unhealthy commodity industry’s (UCI’s) influence on health “to create a template surveillance system to be used by national governments across industries.” In this commentary, we argue that to achieve a robust government-led national surveillance system, some challenges should be considered, such as (a) addressing power asymmetries between government and UCIs involved in policy-making, (b) evaluating competing interests among government constituencies to achieve policy coherence around health issues, and (c) contemplate whether governments rely on private or corporate donors and partners that may threaten financing and operationalization of the surveillance. Suggestions on how to overcome these challenges are beyond the scope of this commentary, but we discuss some cases of bottom-up approaches from organized groups aiming to hold UCIs accountable. We consider them to be emerging effective ways to support government-led initiatives and counter the long-lasting corporate power and negative impacts on public health.
Keywords
Public Health Surveillance
Unhealthy Commodity Industries
Organized Groups
  1. de Lacy-Vawdon C, Livingstone C. Defining the commercial determinants of health: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2020;20(1):1022. doi:1186/s12889-020-09126-1
  2. Lee K, Freudenberg N, Zenone M, et al. Measuring the commercial determinants of health and disease: a proposed framework. Int J Health Serv. 2022;52(1):115-128. doi:1177/00207314211044992
  3. Lacy-Nichols J, Marten R. Power and the commercial determinants of health: ideas for a research agenda. BMJ Glob Health. 2021;6(2):1022. doi:1136/bmjgh-2020-003850
  4. Friel S. Redressing the corporate cultivation of consumption: releasing the weapons of the structurally weak. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2021;10(12):784-792. doi:34172/ijhpm.2020.205
  5. Bennett E, Topp SM, Moodie AR. National Public Health Surveillance of Corporations in key unhealthy commodity industries - a scoping review and framework synthesis. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2023;12:6876. doi:34172/ijhpm.2023.6876
  6. Topp SM, Schaaf M, Sriram V, et al. Power analysis in health policy and systems research: a guide to research conceptualisation. BMJ Glob Health. 2021;6(11):e007268. doi:1136/bmjgh-2021-007268
  7. Moodie R, Bennett E, Kwong EJL, et al. Ultra-processed profits: the political economy of countering the global spread of ultra-processed foods - a synthesis review on the market and political practices of transnational food corporations and strategic public health responses. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2021;10(12):968-982. doi:34172/ijhpm.2021.45
  8. Barquera S, Sanchez-Bazan K, Carriedo A, Swinburn B. The development of a national obesity and diabetes prevention and control strategy in Mexico: actors, actions and conflict of interests. In: Public Health and the Food and Drinks Industry: The Governance and Ethics of Interaction. Lessons from Research, Policy and Practice. London: UK Health Forum; 2018:18-30.
  9. Lencucha RA, Vichit-Vadakan N, Patanavanich R, Ralston R. Addressing tobacco industry influence in tobacco-growing countries. Bull World Health Organ. 2024;102(1):58-64. doi:2471/blt.23.290219
  10. Maani N, Collin J, Friel S, et al. Bringing the commercial determinants of health out of the shadows: a review of how the commercial determinants are represented in conceptual frameworks. Eur J Public Health. 2020;30(4):660-664. doi:1093/eurpub/ckz197
  11. Wood B, Baker P, Sacks G. Conceptualising the commercial determinants of health using a power lens: a review and synthesis of existing frameworks. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2022;11(8):1251-1261. doi:34172/ijhpm.2021.05
  12. Foucault M. The subject and power. Crit Inq. 1982;8(4):777-795. doi:1086/448181
  13. Fuchs D, Di Giulio A, Glaab K, et al. Power: the missing element in sustainable consumption and absolute reductions research and action. J Clean Prod. 2016;132:298-307. doi:1016/j.jclepro.2015.02.006
  14. Thorn M. Addressing power and politics through action on the commercial determinants of health. Health Promot J Austr. 2018;29(3):225-227. doi:1002/hpja.216
  15. Carriedo A, Walls H, Brown KA. Acknowledge the elephant in the room: the role of power dynamics in transforming food systems: Comment on "What opportunities exist for making the food supply nutrition friendly? A policy space analysis in Mexico.” Int J Health Policy Manag. 2022;11(12):3137-3140. doi:34172/ijhpm.2022.7382
  16. Carriedo A, Lock K, Hawkins B. Policy process and non-state actors' influence on the 2014 Mexican soda tax. Health Policy Plan. 2020;35(8):941-952. doi:1093/heapol/czaa060
  17. Ámbito Financiero. ¿Quiénes son los diputados que votaron en contra del etiquetado frontal? 2021. Available from: https://www.ambito.com/politica/diputados/quienes-son-los-que-votaron-contra-del-etiquetado-frontal-n5306308. Accessed June 6, 2024.
  18. Carriedo A, Ojeda E, Crosbie E, Mialon M. Public-private partnerships in Mexico: implications of engaging with the food and beverage industry for public health nutrition. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2024;13:8008. doi:34172/ijhpm.2024.8008
  19. Carriedo A, Cairney P, Barquera S, Hawkins B. Policy networks and competing interests in the development of the Mexican sugar-sweetened beverages tax. BMJ Glob Health. 2023;8(Suppl 8):e012125. doi:1136/bmjgh-2023-012125
  20. Fakhri M. The food system summit's disconnection from people's real needs. J Agric Environ Ethics. 2022;35(3):16. doi:1007/s10806-022-09882-7
  21. Sidaner E, Balaban D, Burlandy L. The Brazilian school feeding programme: an example of an integrated programme in support of food and nutrition security. Public Health Nutr. 2013;16(6):989-994. doi:1017/s1368980012005101
  22. Smartphone Free Childhood. 2024. Available from: https://smartphonefreechildhood.co.uk/.
  23. Available from: https://www.dejusticia.org/. May 18, 2024.
  24. Crosbie E, Gomes FS, Olvera J, Rincón-Gallardo Patiño S, Hoeper S, Carriedo A. A policy study on front-of-pack nutrition labeling in the Americas: emerging developments and outcomes. Lancet Reg Health Am. 2023;18:100400. doi:1016/j.lana.2022.100400
  25. Slater S, Lawrence M, Wood B, Serodio P, Baker P. 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. Global Health. 2024;20(1):16. doi:1186/s12992-024-01020-4
  26. Hendlin YH, Han EL, Ling PM. Pharmaceuticalisation as the tobacco industry's endgame. BMJ Glob Health. 2024;9(2):e013866. doi:1136/bmjgh-2023-013866
International Journal of Health Policy and Management
Volume 13, Issue 1
2024
Pages 1-4

  • Received Date 22 May 2024
  • Revised Date 23 August 2024
  • Accepted Date 26 August 2024
  • First Published Date 28 August 2024
  • Published Date 01 December 2024