Objective: To systematically characterise sugar‐sweetened beverage (SSB) tax policy changes in Pacific Island countries and territories (PICTs) from 2000 to 2019. Methods: Medline, Google Scholar, Pacific Islands Legal Information Institute database, Factiva and news and government websites were systematically searched up to October 2019. Information was extracted on the date and SSB tax level change, tax type, included beverages, and earmarking; and checked for consistency with local experts. Results: Three‐quarters of PICTs had an SSB tax (n=16/21) and 11 of these were excise taxes that included both imported and locally produced beverages. The level of tax was over 20% in 14 jurisdictions. SSB tax was increased by more than 20 percentage points in eight PICTs. Most taxes were ad valorem or volumetric, three were earmarked and only two taxes targeted sugar‐sweetened fruit juices. The majority of countries (14/21) had different tax rates for imported and locally produced beverages. Conclusions: More than three‐quarters of PICTs have SSB taxes. More than one‐third increased these taxes since 2000 at an amount that is expected to reduce soft drink consumption. Implications for public health: Despite high‐quality tax design elements in some PICTs, SSB control policies could generally be strengthened to improve health benefits, e.g. by targeting all SSBs and earmarking revenue for health.

Objective:Our study analysed evolving regional commitments on food policy in the Pacific. Our aim was to understand regional priorities and the context of policy development, to identify opportunities for progress.Design:We analysed documentation from a decade of regional meetings in order to map regional policy commitments relevant to healthy diets. We focused on agriculture, education, finance, health, and trade sectors, and Heads of State forums. Drawing on relevant political science methodologies, we looked at how these sectors ‘frame’ the drivers of and solutions to non-communicable diseases (NCD), their policy priorities, and identified areas of coherence and tension.Setting:The Pacific has among the highest rates of non-communicable diseases in the world, but also boasts an innovative and proactive response. Heads of State have declared NCD a ‘crisis’ and countries have committed to specific prevention activities set out in a regional ‘Roadmap’. Yet, diet-related NCD risk-factors remain stubbornly high and many countries face challenges in establishing a healthy food environment.Results:Policies to improve food environments and prevent NCD are a stated priority across regional policy forums, with clear agreement on the need for a multi-sectoral response. However, we identified challenges in sustaining these priorities as political attention fluctuated. We found examples of inconsistencies and tension in sectoral responses to the NCD epidemic that may restrict implementation of the multi-sectoral action.Conclusion:Understanding the priorities and positions underpinning sectoral responses can help drive a more coherent NCD response, and lessons from the Pacific are relevant to public health nutrition policy and practice globally.

Background: Non-Communicable Diseases (NCD) are the leading cause of death in the Pacific Island Countries and Territories (PICTs) accounting for approximately 70% of mortalities. Pacific leaders committed to take action on the Pacific NCD Roadmap, which specifies NCD policy and legislation. To monitor progress against the NCD Roadmap, the Pacific Monitoring Alliance for NCD Action (MANA) was formed and the MANA dashboard was developed. This paper reports on the first status assessment for all 21 PICTs. Methods: The MANA Dashboard comprises 31 indicators across the domains of leadership and governance, preventive policies, health system response and monitoring processes, and uses a 'traffic light' rating scheme to track progress. The dashboard indicators draw on WHO's best-buy interventions and track highly cost-effective interventions for addressing NCDs. The MANA coordination team in collaboration with national NCD focal points completed Dashboards for all 21 PICTs between 2017 and 2018 in an agreed process. The data were analysed and presented within each area of the MANA dashboard. Results: This assessment found that PICTs are at varying stages of developing and implementing NCD policy and legislation. Some policy and legislation are in place in most PICTs e.g. smoke free environment (18 PICTs), alcohol licensing (19 PICTs), physical education in schools (14 PICTs), reduction of population salt consumption (14 PICTs) etc. However, no PICTs has policy or legislation on tobacco industry interference, controlling marketing of foods and drinks to children, and reducing trans-fats in the food supply, and only 7 PICTs have policies restricting alcohol advertising. Eighteen PICTs implement tobacco taxation measures, however only five were defined as having strong measures in place. Nineteen PICTs have alcohol taxation mechanisms and 13 PICTs have fiscal policies on foods to promote healthier diets. Conclusion: This baseline assessment fills a knowledge gap on current strengths and areas where more action is needed to scale up NCD action in a sustained 'whole of government and whole of society approach' in PICTs. The findings of this assessment can be used to identify priority actions, and as a mutual accountability mechanism to track progress on implementation of NCD policy and legislation at both national and Pacific level.

No abstract