Regulating the Right to Adequate Food in Mexico: Informant Insights About the General Law on Adequate and Sustainable Food

Anderson, Ashlyn; Moyo, Busiso; Núñez-González, Evelyn; Carriedo, Angela; Harris, Jody; Walls, Helen

Regulating the Right to Adequate Food in Mexico: Informant Insights About the General Law on Adequate and Sustainable Food

Articles in Press

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Ashlyn Anderson ¹

Busiso Moyo ²

Evelyn Núñez-González ³

Angela Carriedo ⁴

Jody Harris ⁵

Helen Walls ⁶

¹ London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK

² Institute of Social Development, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa

³ Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK

⁴ World Public Health Nutrition Association, London, UK

⁵ Food Equity Centre, Institute of Development Studies, Brighton, UK

⁶ Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK

Abstract

Background
The right to adequate food (RtAF) is increasingly incorporated into domestic food and nutrition legal frameworks to inform policy-making. Mexico’s General Law on Adequate and Sustainable Food (LGAAS), enacted in April 2024, is the country’s first law to operationalize the RtAF, which has been recognized in Article 4 of the Mexican Constitution since 2011, within domestic food policy. We examined informant insights on the LGAAS, focusing on its policy formulation and informant perspectives on the RtAF in the law.

Methods
We conducted a review of legislative documents and semi-structured key informant interviews. The document review covered the period from the law’s introduction to parliament (2020) to its approval (2024). Interviews (13) were conducted with informants from the Mexican government, academia, international development partners, and civil society involved in or influencing the formulation of the LGAAS. The health policy triangle framework informed the interview guide development, while both deductive and inductive thematic approaches guided the analysis.

Results
Informants identified how the following key factors affected the formulation of the LGAAS: regional action influenced RtAF legislation, national intersectoral collaboration fostered accountability, coalition building sustained momentum, and an enabling policy environment supported prioritization of the LGAAS. Political contentions and perceived industry influence also impacted negotiations. Informants consistently framed the RtAF as a cross-cutting concept linked to food security and food sovereignty, but there were differing interpretations of the state’s role in the progressive realization of the RtAF to deliver food system transformation in Mexico.

Conclusion
The LGAAS positions Mexico among a small number of countries adopting a rights-based framework to address food system reform. Its formulation highlights the role of several key factors in supporting the operationalization of the RtAF into an actionable framework law, though implementation is yet to occur.

Keywords

Right to Adequate Food

Food Policy

Food System

Mexico

1. UN Economic and Social Council, General Comment No. 12: The Right to Adequate Food (Art. 11 of the Covenant). UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR); May 12, 1999. https://www.refworld.org/legal/general/cescr/1999/en/87491.

2. Saul B. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Travaux Preparatoires. Oxford University Press; 2016.

3. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Realizing the right to adequate food to end hunger and malnutrition in all its forms. Rome, Italy: FAO; 2023.

4. Bourke-Martignoni J. The right to food. Research Handbook on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights as Human Rights. Edward Elgar Publishing; 2020:137-158.

5. Mechlem K. Food Security and the Right to Food in the Discourse of the United Nations. European Law Journal. 2004;10(5):631-648. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0386.2004.00235.x

6. Ayala A, Meier BM. A human rights approach to the health implications of food and nutrition insecurity. Public Health Rev. 2017;38(1):10. doi:10.1186/s40985-017-0056-5

7. De Schutter O. From charity to entitlement: Implementing the right to food in Southern and Eastern Africa. United Nations; 2012.

8. Sage C. Food security, food sovereignty and the special rapporteur: Shaping food policy discourse through realising the right to food. Dialogues in Human Geography. 2014;4:195-199. doi:10.1177/2043820614537156

9. Pol JLV, Schuftan C. No right to food and nutrition in the SDGs: mistake or success? BMJ Glob Health. 2016;1(1):e000040. doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2016-000040

10. Harris J, Gibbons S, Kaaba OB, Hrynick T, Stirton R. A ‘right to nutrition’ in its social, legal, and political context: how international human rights translate to Zambian realities. J Hum Rights Pract. 2022;14(3):879-903. doi:10.1093/jhuman/huac043

11. Anderson, A. Moyo, B., Walls, H. Contemporary policy developments for addressing food insecurity and malnutrition through the operationalisation of the right to food. Economic & Social Rights Review in Africa. 2025;5(33). https://dullahomarinstitute.org.za/socio-economic-rights/esr-review-archives/archives/esr-review-no-5-vol-33-of-2025/esr-review-5-of-2025.pdf.

12. Riol KSC. The right to Food Guidelines, Democracy and Citizen Participation: Country Case Studies. Taylor & Francis; 2016.

13. Deutsche Welthungerhilfe e. V. Right to food. Bonn: Welthungerhilfe; 2024. https://www.welthungerhilfe.org/fileadmin/pictures/publications/en/fact-sheets/topics/2024-policy-brief-right-to-food-en.pdf.

14. Latin America and the Caribbean Parliament. Framework Law on the Right to Food and Food Sovereignty. Panama City: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the Mexican Agency of International Cooperation for Development (AMEXCID); 2018:44.

15. Fanzo J, Cordes KY, Fox E, Bulman A. Tying the knot: an interdisciplinary approach to understanding the human right to adequate nutrition. Colum J Transnat'l L. 2018;57:62. https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/sustainable_investment_staffpubs/51.

16. Pol JLV. El enfoque legal contra el hambre: el derecho a la alimentación y las leyes de seguridad alimentaria [The legal focus against hunger: the right to food and food security laws]. 2010. https://www.academia.edu/download/38643513/Enfoque_Legal_contra_el_Hambre_-_JL_Vivero__Henry_Dunant.pdf.

17. Parliamentary Front Against Hunger in Latin America and the Caribbean. Regional FAO Office for Latin America and the Caribbean. 2010. http://parlamentarioscontraelhambre.org/file/info/fph-ialcsh.en.pdf.

18. Government of Mexico. Iniciativa con proyecto de Decreto por el que se Expide la Ley General de Alimentación Sostenible [Draft decree issuing the general law for adequate and sustainable food]. Mexico: Senate of the Republic; 2024.

19. Acedo A. Mexican Constitution Now Recognizes Right to Food. Foreign Policy in Focus. 2011. https://fpif.org/mexican_constitution_now_recognizes_right_to_food/.

20. Frente Parlamentario Contra el Hambre [Parliamentary Front Against Hunger]. Plan de trabajo 2019 [Workplan 2019]. https://parlamentarioscontraelhambre.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf/Plan-de-Trabajo-2019-FPH-Final.pdf.

21. FAOLEX Database. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO); 2025. https://www.fao.org/faolex/results/en/?search=adv#querystring=c2VhcmNoPXJpZ2h0IHRvIGZvb2QgJmlubWV0YTpzdWJqZWN0c2VsZWN0aW9uPUZEJnllYXJGcm9tPSZ5ZWFyVG89JmZhb2xleF9jb3VudHJ5PU1FWCZlbmRzdHJpbmc9MQ==

22. Pineda E, Hernández FM, Ortega-Avila AG, Jones A, Rivera JA. Mexico's bold new law on adequate and sustainable nutrition. Lancet. 2025;405(10481):764-767. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(24)01493-4

23. Berlan D, Buse K, Shiffman J, Tanaka S. The bit in the middle: a synthesis of global health literature on policy formulation and adoption. Health Policy Plan. 2014;29 Suppl 3:iii23-iii34. doi:10.1093/heapol/czu060

24. Walt G, Gilson L. Reforming the health sector in developing countries: the central role of policy analysis. Health Policy Plan. 1994;9(4):353-370. doi:10.1093/heapol/9.4.353

25. O'Brien GL, Sinnott SJ, Walshe V, Mulcahy M, Byrne S. Health policy triangle framework: Narrative review of the recent literature. Health Policy Open. 2020;1:100016. doi:10.1016/j.hpopen.2020.100016

26. Buse K, Mays N, Colombini M, Fraser A, Khan M, Walls H. Making Health Policy, 3e. McGraw Hill; 2023.

27. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Transforming food and agriculture through a system approach. Rome: FAO; 2025. doi:10.4060/cd6071en.

28. Hennink M, Kaiser BN. Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: A systematic review of empirical tests. Soc Sci Med. 2022;292:114523. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114523

29. Carter N, Bryant-Lukosius D, DiCenso A, Blythe J, Neville AJ. The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2014;41(5):545-7. doi:10.1188/14.ONF.545-547

30. Jenkins-Smith HC, Sabatier PA. The study of public policy processes. The Nation’s Health; 1993:135-142.

31. Haynes A, Loblay V. Rethinking barriers and enablers in qualitative health research: limitations, alternatives, and enhancements. Qual Health Res. 2024;34(14):1371-1383. doi:10.1177/10497323241230890

32. 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

33. Sing F, Carriedo A, Mackay S, Tenbensel T, Swinburn B. Barriers and enablers in designing regulations to restrict the exposure of children to unhealthy food and beverage marketing. Front Polit Sci. 2023;5:945742. doi:10.3389/fpos.2023.945742

34. Keeley J, Scoones I. Knowledge, power and politics: the environmental policy-making process in Ethiopia. J Mod Afr Stud. 2000;38(1):89-120.

35. Pérez-Ferrer C, Lock K, Rivera JA. Learning from international policies on trans fatty acids to reduce cardiovascular disease in low-and middle-income countries, using Mexico as a case study. Health Policy Plan. 2010;25(1):39-49. doi:10.1093/heapol/czp040

36. Cervantes G, Thow AM, Gómez-Oliver L, Durán-Arenas L, Pérez-Ferrer C. What opportunities exist for making the food supply nutrition friendly? A policy space analysis in Mexico. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2022;11(11):2451-2463. doi:10.34172/ijhpm.2021.164

37. Rivera JA, Colchero MA, Pérez-Ferrer C, Barquera S. Perspective: Mexico’s experience in building a toolkit for obesity and noncommunicable diseases prevention. Adv Nutr. 2024;15(3):100180. doi:10.1016/j.advnut.2024.100180

38. 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:10.1093/heapol/czaa060

39. MacKillop E, Downe J. What counts as evidence for policy? An analysis of policy actors' perceptions. Public Adm Rev. 2023;83(5):1037-1050. doi:10.1111/puar.13567

40. Moyo BH, Thow AMT. Fulfilling the right to food for South Africa: justice, security, sovereignty and the politics of malnutrition. World Nutrition. 2020;11(3):112-152.

41. Thow AM, Greenberg S, Hara M, Friel S, duToit A, Sanders D. Improving policy coherence for food security and nutrition in South Africa: a qualitative policy analysis. Food Security. 2018;10(4):1105-1130. doi:10.1007/s12571-018-0813-4

42. Villiers C, Farooq MB, Molinari M. Qualitative research interviews using online video technology–challenges and opportunities. Meditari Accountancy Research. 2022;30(6):1764-1782. doi:10.1108/MEDAR-03-2021-1252