International Trade and Investment Agreements as Barriers to Food Environment Regulation for Public Health Nutrition: A Realist Review

Document Type : Review Article

Authors

1 School of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

2 Menzies Centre for Health Policy, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Abstract

Background
Achieving healthy food systems will require regulation across the supply chain; however, binding international economic agreements may be constraining policy space for regulatory intervention in a way that limits uptake of ‘best-practice’ nutrition policy. A deeper understanding of the mechanisms through which this occurs, and under which conditions, can inform public health engagement with the economic policy sector.
 
Methods
We conducted a realist review of nutrition, policy and legal literature to identify mechanisms through which international trade and investment agreements (TIAs) constrain policy space for priority food environment regulations to prevent non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Recommended regulations explored include fiscal policies, product bans, nutrition labelling, advertising restrictions, nutrient composition regulations, and procurement policies. The process involved 5 steps: initial conceptual framework development; search for relevant empirical literature; study selection and appraisal; data extraction; analysis and synthesis, and framework revision.
 
Results
Twenty-six studies and 30 institutional records of formal trade/investment disputes or specific trade concerns (STCs) raised were included. We identified 13 cases in which TIA constraints on nutrition policy space could be observed. Significant constraints on nutrition policy space were documented with respect to fiscal policies, product bans, and labelling policies in 4 middle-income country jurisdictions, via 3 different TIAs. In 7 cases, trade-related concerns were raised but policies were ultimately preserved. Two of the included cases were ongoing at the time of analysis.
TIAs constrained policy space through 1) TIA rules and principles (non- discrimination, necessity, international standards, transparency, intellectual property rights, expropriation, and fair and equitable treatment), and 2) interaction with policy design (objectives framed, products/services affected, nutrient thresholds chosen, formats, and time given to comment or implement). Contextual factors of importance included: actors/institutions, and political/regulatory context.
 
Conclusion
Available evidence suggests that there are potential TIA contributors to policy inertia on nutrition. Strategic policy design can avoid most substantive constraints. However, process constraints in the name of good regulatory practice (investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), transparency, regulatory coherence, and harmonisation) pose a more serious threat of reducing government policy space to enact healthy food policies.

Keywords


  1. World Cancer Research Fund. Food, Nutrition, Physical Activity and the Prevention of Cancer: A Global Perspective. Washington, DC: American Institute for Cancer Research; 2007.
  2. World Health Organization (WHO). Guideline: Sodium Intake for Adults and Children. Geneva: WHO; 2012.
  3. Strazzullo P, D'Elia L, Kandala NB, Cappuccio FP. Salt intake, stroke, and cardiovascular disease: meta-analysis of prospective studies. BMJ. 2009;339:b4567. doi:10.1136/bmj.b4567
  4. Mozaffarian D, Aro A, Willett WC. Health effects of trans-fatty acids: experimental and observational evidence. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2009;63 Suppl 2:S5-21. doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602973
  5. Johnson RK, Appel LJ, Brands M, et al. Dietary sugars intake and cardiovascular health: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2009;120(11):1011-1020. doi:10.1161/circulationaha.109.192627
  6. Sonestedt E, Overby NC, Laaksonen DE, Birgisdottir BE. Does high sugar consumption exacerbate cardiometabolic risk factors and increase the risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease? Food Nutr Res. 2012;56. doi:10.3402/fnr.v56i0.19104
  7. Te Morenga L, Mallard S, Mann J. Dietary sugars and body weight: systematic review and meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials and cohort studies. BMJ. 2013;346:e7492.
  8. Mozaffarian D, Hao T, Rimm EB, Willett WC, Hu FB. Changes in diet and lifestyle and long-term weight gain in women and men. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(25):2392-2404. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1014296
  9. Malik VS, Willett WC, Hu FB. Sugar-sweetened beverages and BMI in children and adolescents: reanalyses of a meta-analysis. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009;89(1):438-439; author reply 439-440. doi:10.3945/ajcn.2008.26980
  10. Baker P, Friel S, Schram A, Labonte R. Trade and investment liberalization, food systems change and highly processed food consumption: a natural experiment contrasting the soft-drink markets of Peru and Bolivia. Global Health. 2016;12(1):24. doi:10.1186/s12992-016-0161-0
  11. Schram A, Labonte R, Baker P, Friel S, Reeves A, Stuckler D. The role of trade and investment liberalization in the sugar-sweetened carbonated beverages market: a natural experiment contrasting Vietnam and the Philippines. Global Health. 2015;11(1):41. doi:10.1186/s12992-015-0127-7
  12. Monteiro CA, Moubarac JC, Cannon G, Ng SW, Popkin B. Ultra-processed products are becoming dominant in the global food system. Obes Rev. 2013;14 Suppl 2:21-28. doi:10.1111/obr.12107
  13. Baker P, Friel S. Food systems transformations, ultra-processed food markets and the nutrition transition in Asia. Global Health. 2016;12(1):80. doi:10.1186/s12992-016-0223-3
  14. Moodie R, Stuckler D, Monteiro C, et al. Profits and pandemics: prevention of harmful effects of tobacco, alcohol, and ultra-processed food and drink industries. Lancet. 2013;381(9867):670-679. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(12)62089-3
  15. Worldwide trends in body-mass index, underweight, overweight, and obesity from 1975 to 2016: a pooled analysis of 2416 population-based measurement studies in 128·9 million children, adolescents, and adults. Lancet. 2017;390(10113):2627-2642. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(17)32129-3
  16. Afshin A, Forouzanfar MH, Reitsma MB, et al. Health effects of overweight and obesity in 195 countries over 25 years. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(1):13-27. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1614362
  17. An R, Guan C, Liu J, Chen N, Clarke C. Trade openness and the obesity epidemic: a cross-national study of 175 countries during 1975-2016. Ann Epidemiol. 2019;37:31-36. doi:10.1016/j.annepidem.2019.07.002
  18. De Vogli R, Kouvonen A, Gimeno D. The influence of market deregulation on fast food consumption and body mass index: a cross-national time series analysis. Bull World Health Organ. 2014;92(2):99-107a. doi:10.2471/blt.13.120287
  19. Popkin BM, Corvalan C, Grummer-Strawn LM. Dynamics of the double burden of malnutrition and the changing nutrition reality. Lancet. 2020;395(10217):65-74. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(19)32497-3
  20. Worldwide trends in diabetes since 1980: a pooled analysis of 751 population-based studies with 4.4 million participants. Lancet. 2016;387(10027):1513-1530. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(16)00618-8
  21. Swinburn BA, Kraak VI, Allender S, et al. The global syndemic of obesity, undernutrition, and climate change: the Lancet Commission report. Lancet. 2019;393(10173):791-846. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(18)32822-8
  22. World Health Organization (WHO). Global Action Plan for the Prevention and Control of NCDs 2013-2020. Geneva: WHO; 2013:103.
  23. World Health Organization (WHO). Report of the Commission on Ending Childhood Obesity. Geneva: WHO; 2016:50.
  24. World Health Organization (WHO). Tackling NCDs: ‘Best Buys’ and Other Recommended Interventions for the Prevention and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases. Geneva: WHO; 2017:28.
  25. Roberto CA, Swinburn B, Hawkes C, et al. Patchy progress on obesity prevention: emerging examples, entrenched barriers, and new thinking. Lancet. 2015;385(9985):2400-2409. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(14)61744-x
  26. Popkin B, Monteiro C, Swinburn B. Overview: Bellagio conference on program and policy options for preventing obesity in the low- and middle-income countries. Obes Rev. 2013;14 Suppl 2:1-8. doi:10.1111/obr.12108
  27. Dr. Margaret Chan, Director-General of the World Health Organization. Opening address at the 8th Global Conference on Health Promotion. Presented at: the 8th Global Conference on Health Promotion; June 10, 2013; Helsinki, Finland. https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/2013/health_promotion_20130610/en/.
  28. McNeill D, Barlow P, Birbeck C, et al. Trade and investment agreements: implications for health protection. J World Trade. 2017;51(1):159-182.
  29. Barlow P, McKee M, Basu S, Stuckler D. The health impact of trade and investment agreements: a quantitative systematic review and network co-citation analysis. Global Health. 2017;13(1):13. doi:10.1186/s12992-017-0240-x
  30. Koivusalo M, Schrecker T, Labonté R. Globalization and policy space for health and social determinants of health. In: Labonte R, Schrecker T, Packer C, Runnels V, eds. Globalization and Health: Pathways, Evidence and Policy. Routledge; 2009:105-130.
  31. Rodrik D. What do trade agreements really do? J Econ Perspect. 2018;32(2):73-90. doi:10.1257/jep.32.2.73
  32. Voon T, Mitchell AD. Philip Morris vs. Tobacco Control: Two Wins for Public Health but Uncertainty Remains. Columbia FDI Perspectives. 2016;182:1-3.
  33. Hepburn J. Final Costs Details are Released in Philip Morris v. Australia Following Request by IAReporter. Investment Arbitration Reporter (online). https://www.iareporter.com/articles/final-costs-details-are-released-in-philip-morris-v-australia-following-request-by-iareporter/.  Published March 21, 2019.
  34. Kelsey J. Regulatory chill: learnings from New Zealand's plain packaging tobacco law. QUT Law Rev. 2017;17(2):21-45. doi:10.5204/qutlr.v17i2.701
  35. Tienhaara K. Regulatory chill and the threat of arbitration: a view from political science. In: Brown C, Miles K, eds. Evolution in Investment Treaty Law and Arbitration. Cambridge University Press; 2011.
  36. Van Harten G, Scott DN. Investment treaties and the internal vetting of regulatory proposals: a case study from Canada. J Int Dispute Settl. 2016;7(1):92-116. doi:10.1093/jnlids/idv031
  37. Pawson R, Greenhalgh T, Harvey G, Walshe K. Realist review--a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10 Suppl 1:21-34. doi:10.1258/1355819054308530
  38. Baker P, Hawkes C, Wingrove K, et al. What drives political commitment for nutrition? a review and framework synthesis to inform the United Nations Decade of Action on Nutrition. BMJ Glob Health. 2018;3(1):e000485. doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2017-000485
  39. Farrell P, Thow AM, Abimbola S, Faruqui N, Negin J. How food insecurity could lead to obesity in LMICs: when not enough is too much: a realist review of how food insecurity could lead to obesity in low- and middle-income countries. Health Promot Int. 2018;33(5):812-826. doi:10.1093/heapro/dax026
  40. Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Buckingham J, Pawson R. RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses. BMC Med. 2013;11(1):21. doi:10.1186/1741-7015-11-21
  41. Wong G, Westhorp G, Pawson R. Realist synthesis: RAMESES training materials. Published online 2013.
  42. Voon T, Mitchell AD, Liberman J. Regulating Tobacco, Alcohol and Unhealthy Foods: The Legal Issues. Routledge; 2014.
  43. Fidler DP, Aginam O, Correa C. Legal Review of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) from a Health Policy Perspective. WHO; 2006.
  44. Schram A, Ruckert A, VanDuzer JA, et al. A conceptual framework for investigating the impacts of international trade and investment agreements on noncommunicable disease risk factors. Health Policy Plan. 2018;33(1):123-136. doi:10.1093/heapol/czx133
  45. Kelsey J. International Trade Law and Tobacco Control: Trade and Investment Law Issues Relating to Proposed Tobacco Control Policies to Achieve an Effectively Smokefree New Zealand by 2025. Auckland, NZ: The University of Auckland; 2012:99.
  46. Schram A, Friel S, VanDuzer JA, Ruckert A, Labonté R. Internalisation of international investment agreements in public policymaking: developing a conceptual framework of regulatory chill. Global Policy. 2018;9(2):193-202. doi:10.1111/1758-5899.12545
  47. QSR International Pty Ltd. NVivo Qualitative Data Analysis Software.
  48. Halabi SF. International trademark protection and global public health: a just-compensation regime for expropriations and regulatory takings. Cathol Univers Law Rev. 2012;61(1):325-380.
  49. Sheargold E, Mitchell AD. Oils ain't oils: product labelling, palm oil and the WTO. Melb J Int Law. 2011;12:396-418.
  50. McGrady B, Jones A. Tobacco control and beyond: the broader implications of United States Clove Cigarettes for non-communicable diseases. Am J Law Med. 2013;39(2-3):265-289. doi:10.1177/009885881303900204
  51. Marquez C. Warning: This Product May Cause Heart Disease, Diabetes, or Just Make You Fat: Using the International Strategy Requiring Warning Labels on Tobacco as a Blueprint for Regulating Soft Drinks. Southwest J Int Law. 2015;21:457-478.
  52. Kaldor JC. Food reformulation for NCD-prevention: regulatory options and potential barriers. QUT Law Rev. 2018;18(1):76-95. doi:10.5204/qutlr.v18i1.729
  53. Larios P. The fight at the soda machine: analyzing the sweetener trade dispute between the United States and Mexico before the World Trade Organization. Am Univ Int Law Rev. 2004;20(3):649-702.
  54. World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe. Evaluating Implementation of the WHO Set of Recommendations on the Marketing of Foods and Non-Alcoholic Beverages to Children: Progress, Challenges and Guidance for next Steps in the WHO European Region. WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2018.
  55. Salazar ARV. NAFTA Chapter 11, regulatory expropriation, and domestic counter-advertising law. Ariz J Int Comp Law. 2010;27(1):31-82.
  56. Hirono K, Haigh F, Gleeson D, Harris P, Thow AM, Friel S. Is health impact assessment useful in the context of trade negotiations? a case study of the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement. BMJ Open. 2016;6(4):e010339. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010339
  57. Thow AM, Snowdon W, Labonté R, et al. Will the next generation of preferential trade and investment agreements undermine prevention of noncommunicable diseases? a prospective policy analysis of the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement. Health Policy. 2015;119(1):88-96. doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2014.08.002
  58. Friel S, Ponnamperuma S, Schram A, et al. Shaping the discourse: what has the food industry been lobbying for in the Trans Pacific Partnership trade agreement and what are the implications for dietary health? Crit Public Health. 2016;26(5):518-529. doi:10.1080/09581596.2016.1139689
  59. von Tigerstrom B. How do international trade obligations affect policy options for obesity prevention? lessons from recent developments in trade and tobacco control. Can J Diabetes. 2013;37(3):182-188. doi:10.1016/j.jcjd.2013.03.402
  60. Puig S. The merging of international trade and investment law. Berkeley J Int Law. 2015;33(1):1-59.
  61. Thow AM, McGrady B. Protecting policy space for public health nutrition in an era of international investment agreements. Bull World Health Organ. 2014;92(2):139-145. doi:10.2471/blt.13.120543
  62. Thow AM, Annan R, Mensah L, Chowdhury SN. Development, implementation and outcome of standards to restrict fatty meat in the food supply and prevent NCDs: learning from an innovative trade/food policy in Ghana. BMC Public Health. 2014;14:249. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-14-249
  63. World Trade Organization. Mexico – Tax Measures on Soft Drinks and Other Beverages: Report of the Panel. http://www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/wtopanelsfull/mexico-sweetenertax(panel)(full).pdf. Published online October 7, 2005.
  64. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). Investment Dispute Settlement. Cargill, Incorporated v. United Mexican States (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/05/2). Investment Dispute Settlement Navigator. http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/ISDS/Details/204. Published 2013.
  65. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). Investment Dispute Settlement. Archer Daniels Midland and Tate & Lyle Ingredients Americas, Inc. v. United Mexican States (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/04/5). Investment Dispute Settlement Navigator. http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/ISDS/Details/167. Published 2013.
  66. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). Investment Dispute Settlement. Corn Products International, Inc. v. United Mexican States (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/04/1). Investment Dispute Settlement Navigator. http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/ISDS/Details/166. Published 2013.
  67. Bech-Larsen T, Aschemann-Witzel J. A macromarketing perspective on food safety regulation: the Danish ban on trans-fatty acids. J Macromarketing. 2012;32(2):208-219. doi:10.1177/0276146711435262
  68. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 21 march 2007. Published online June 2007.
  69. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 5 July 2007. Published online August 2007.
  70. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 9 November 2007. Published online January 2008.
  71. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 20 March 2008. Published online June 2008.
  72. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 1-2 July 2008. Published online September 2008.
  73. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 5-6 November 2008. Published online January 2009.
  74. Rimpeekool W, Seubsman SA, Banwell C, Kirk M, Yiengprugsawan V, Sleigh A. Food and nutrition labelling in Thailand: a long march from subsistence producers to international traders. Food Policy. 2015;56:59-66. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2015.07.011
  75. Thow AM, Jones A, Hawkes C, Ali I, Labonté R. Nutrition labelling is a trade policy issue: lessons from an analysis of specific trade concerns at the World Trade Organization. Health Promot Int. 2018;33(4):561-571. doi:10.1093/heapro/daw109
  76. Barlow P, Labonte R, McKee M, Stuckler D. Trade challenges at the World Trade Organization to national noncommunicable disease prevention policies: a thematic document analysis of trade and health policy space. PLoS Med. 2018;15(6):e1002590. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1002590
  77. Thow AM, Reeve E, Naseri T, Martyn T, Bollars C. Food supply, nutrition and trade policy: reversal of an import ban on turkey tails. Bull World Health Organ. 2017;95(10):723-725. doi:10.2471/blt.17.192468
  78. Fa'alili-Fidow J, McCool J, Percival T. Trade and health in Samoa: views from the insiders. BMC Public Health. 2014;14:309. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-14-309
  79. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 25-26 June 2009. Published online September 2009.
  80. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 3-4 November 2010. Published online March 2011.
  81. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 6-7 March 2013. Published online May 2013.
  82. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 17, 19 and 20 June 2013. Published online September 2013.
  83. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 30-31 October 2013. Published online February 2014.
  84. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 19-20 March 2014. Published online May 2014.
  85. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 18-19 June 2014. Published online September 2014.
  86. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 5-6 November 2014. Published online March 2015.
  87. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 18-19 March 2015. Published online May 2015.
  88. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 17-18 June 2015. Published online September 2015.
  89. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 4-6 November 2015. Published online February 2016.
  90. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 9-10 March 2016. Published online May 2016.
  91. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 15-16 June 2016. Published online September 2016.
  92. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 10-11 November 2016. Published online February 2017.
  93. Carreño I. Chile's black STOP sign for foods high in fat, salt or sugar. Eur J Risk Regul. 2015;6(4):622-628.
  94. Carreño I, Dolle T. The Relationship between Public Health and IP Rights: Chile Prosecutes Kellogg’s, Nestlé and Masterfoods for Using Cartoons Aimed at Attracting Children. Eur J Risk Regul. 2017;8(1):170-177. doi:10.1017/err.2016.24
  95. World Cancer Research Fund International. Building Momentum: Lessons on Implementing a Robust Front-of-Pack Food Label. World Cancer Research Fund International; 2019.
  96. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 29-30 March 2017. Published online June 2017.
  97. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 14-15 June 2017. Published online September 2017.
  98. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 8-9 November 2017. Published online March 2018.
  99. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 6-7 March 2019. Published online May 2019.
  100. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 20-21 June 2019. Published online September 2019.
  101. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, World Trade Organization. Minutes of the meeting of 12-15 November 2019. Published online January 2020.
  102. World Trade Organization. Brazil - Measures Affecting Imports of Retreaded Tyres (DS332). https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/1pagesum_e/ds332sum_e.pdf. Accessed May 28, 2020.
  103. Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership - Chapter 9: Investment. https://www.mfat.govt.nz/assets/Trans-Pacific-Partnership/Text/9.-Investment-Chapter.pdf. Accessed May 28, 2020.
  104. Lukes S. Power: A Radical View. 2nd ed. Palgrave Macmillan; 2005.
  105. World Cancer Research Fund International. Building Momentum: Lessons on Implementing a Robust Sugar Sweetened Beverage Tax. World Cancer Research Fund International; 2018.
  106. World Cancer Research Fund International. Building Momentum: Lessons on Implementing Robust Restrictions of Food and Non-Alcoholic Beverage Marketing to Children. World Cancer Research Fund International; 2020.
  107. Thow AM, Jones A, Schneider CH, Labonté R. Global governance of front-of-pack nutrition labelling: a qualitative analysis. Nutrients. 2019;11(2). doi:10.3390/nu11020268
  108. Crosbie E, Carriedo A, Schmidt L. Hollow threats: transnational food and beverage companies' use of international agreements to fight front-of-pack nutrition labeling in Mexico and beyond. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2020. doi:10.34172/ijhpm.2020.146
  109. Chair of the Working Group on Investor-State Dispute Settlement Reform (Working Group III). Remarks of the Chair of Working Group III at the 52nd Session of UNCITRAL (16 July 2019). https://uncitral.un.org/sites/uncitral.un.org/files/remarks_from_wg_iii_chair_at_the_52nd_session_of_uncitral.pdf. Accessed May 25, 2020. Published online July 16, 2019.
  110. Yunus R. RCEP talks to proceed without ISDS. The Malaysian Reserve. https://themalaysianreserve.com/2019/09/13/rcep-talks-to-proceed-without-isds.  Accessed May 25, 2020. Published September 13, 2019.
  111. Thow AM, Nisbett N. Trade, nutrition, and sustainable food systems. Lancet. 2019;394(10200):716-718. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(19)31292-9
  112. Kaldor JC, Thow AM, Schönfeldt H. Using regulation to limit salt intake and prevent non-communicable diseases: lessons from South Africa's experience. Public Health Nutr. 2018:1-10. doi:10.1017/s1368980018003166
  113. Labonté R, Crosbie E, Gleeson D, McNamara C. USMCA (NAFTA 2.0): tightening the constraints on the right to regulate for public health. Global Health. 2019;15(1):35. doi:10.1186/s12992-019-0476-8
  114. Thow AM, Jones A, Huckel Schneider C, Labonté R. Increasing the public health voice in global decision-making on nutrition labelling. Global Health. 2020;16(1):3. doi:10.1186/s12992-019-0533-3

Articles in Press, Corrected Proof
Available Online from 19 October 2020
  • Receive Date: 29 May 2020
  • Revise Date: 10 September 2020
  • Accept Date: 28 September 2020