Tackling NCDs: The Need to Address Alcohol Industry Interference and Policy Incoherence Across Sectors; Comment on “Towards Preventing and Managing Conflict of Interest in Nutrition Policy? An Analysis of Submissions to a Consultation on a Draft WHO Tool”

Document Type: Commentary

Authors

1 Menzies Centre for Health Governance, School of Regulation and Global Governance, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia

2 Centre for Alcohol Policy Research, School of Psychology & Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

3 School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

Abstract

Ralston et al highlight the ways that different actors in global nutrition governance conceptualise and frame the role of non-state actors in governance arrangements, including the potential for conflict of interest (COI) to undermine global health efforts. The authors argue that the World Health Organization (WHO) draft tool on managing COI in nutrition policy is an important innovation in global health, but that further research and refinement is needed for operationalising the management of COI with diverse actors in diverse contexts. In this commentary, reflecting on strategic framing and industry interference in policy-making, we argue for the urgent need for states and intergovernmental organisations to prevent alcohol industry interference in the development of national and global alcohol policy. We argue that policy incoherence remains a key barrier, where governments pursue health goals in the health sector while pursuing exports and market liberalisation of health harmful commodities in the trade sector.

Keywords


  1. Ralston R, Hil SE, da Silva Gomes F, Collin J. Towards preventing and managing conflict of interest in nutrition policy? an analysis of submissions to a consultation on a draft WHO tool. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2020; In Press. doi:10.34172/ijhpm.2020.52
  2. McCambridge J, Mialon M, Hawkins B. Alcohol industry involvement in policymaking: a systematic review. Addiction. 2018;113(9):1571-1584. doi:10.1111/add.14216
  3. Matzopoulos R, Parry CD, Corrigall J, Myers J, Goldstein S, London L. Global Fund collusion with liquor giant is a clear conflict of interest. Bull World Health Organ. 2012;90(1):67-69. doi:10.2471/blt.11.091413
  4. Movendi. Joint Open Letter to Global Fund: 80+ Endorsements, Governments Speaking Out. https://movendi.ngo/news/2018/02/13/joint-open-letter-global-fund-80-endorsements-worldwide/. Accessed July 12, 2020. Published 2018.
  5. Jernigan DH, Trangenstein PJ. What's next for WHO's global strategy to reduce the harmful use of alcohol? Bull World Health Organ. 2020;98(3):222-223. doi:10.2471/blt.19.241737
  6. World Health Organization (WHO). Discussion Paper: Implementation of the WHO Strategy to Reduce the Harmful Use of Alcohol Since its Endorsement, And the Way Forward. Geneva: WHO; 2019. https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/alcohol/2010-strategy/discussion-paper.pdf?sfvrsn=a171471c_2. Accessed July 13, 2020.  
  7. NCD Alliance. Accelerating Action to Reduce the Harmful Use of Alcohol. NCD Alliance; 2020. Statement by NCD Alliance February 18, 2020. https://ncdalliance.org/news-events/news/accelerating-action-to-reduce-the-harmful-use-of-alcohol.  Accessed July 13, 2020.  
  8. Commonwealth of Australia. Consultation Draft: National Alcohol Strategy 2018-2026. Department of Health, Commonwealth of Australia; 2017. https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/draft-national-alcohol-strategy-2018-2026.pdf. Accessed July 10, 2020.  
  9. Commonwealth of Australia. National Alcohol Strategy 2018-2026. Department of Health, Commonwealth of Australia; 2019. https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020/01/national-alcohol-strategy-2019-2028.pdf. Accessed July 10, 2020.  
  10. Townsend B, Schram A, Baum F, Labonté R, Friel S. How does policy framing enable or constrain inclusion of social determinants of health and health equity on trade policy agendas? Crit Public Health. 2020;30(1):115-126. doi:10.1080/09581596.2018.1509059
  11. Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education (FARE). National Alcohol Strategy: Analysis of Alcohol Industry Submissions. Canberra, Australia: FARE; 2018.
  12. Schram A, Aisbett E, Townsend B, Labonté R, Baum F, Friel S. Toxic trade: the impact of preferential trade agreements on alcohol imports from Australia in partner countries. Addiction. 2020;115(7):1277-1284. doi:10.1111/add.14925
  13. Lencucha R, Thow AM. How neoliberalism is shaping the supply of unhealthy commodities and what this means for NCD prevention. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2019;8(9):514-520. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2019.56
  14. O’Brien P, Gleeson D, Room R, Wilkinson C. Marginalising health information: implications of the trans-pacific partnership agreement for alcohol labelling. Melb Univ Law Rev. 2017;41:341-391.
  15. Townsend B, Friel S, Schram A, Baum F, Labonté R. What generates attention to health in trade policy-making? Lessons from success in tobacco control and access to medicines: a qualitative study of Australia and the (comprehensive and progressive) Trans-Pacific Partnership. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2020; In  Press. doi:10.34172/ijhpm.2020.80