UN Food System Summit Fails to Address Real Healthy and Sustainable Diets Challenges

Coutinho, Janine Giuberti; Martins, Ana Paula Bortoletto; Preiss, Potira Viegas; Longhi, Lorenza; Recine, Elisabetta

doi:10.1057/s41301-021-00315-y

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 21 publications

(12 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to many leading food system scholars this partnership arrangement undermined existing democratic governance structures and multilateral public institutions such as the UN Committee on World Food Security and the High-Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition (HLPE). Moreover, many also suggested that the UNFSS organisers both provided agri-business and their constituents privileged access and leadership positions, and ultimately remained 'strategically silent' on corporate power and 'the health and ecological impacts of ultraprocessed foods' (UPFs) (6,35,59,60).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The rise of multi-stakeholderism, the power of ultra-processed food corporations, and the implications for global food governance: a network analysis

Slater,

Lawrence,

Wood

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent decades, multi-stakeholder institutions (MIs) involving the ultra-processed food (UPF) industry have presented themselves as "part of the solution" to addressing malnutrition and other food systems sustainability challenges. This has raised concerns for many health and global food governance (GFG) scholars; however, few studies have investigated the governance composition and characteristics of these MIs, nor considered the implications for responses to UPFs and other major food systems challenges. We aimed to address this gap by conducting a network analysis, drawing quantitative and qualitative data from web sources, company reports, business and market research databases, and relevant academic and grey literature. In total, 45 global food systems MIs were identified. When combined, UPF industry executives and their business associates held almost half (n=263, or 43.8%) of the total 601 MI leadership positions, with Unilever (n=20), Nestlé (n=17), PepsiCo Inc (n=14), and The Coca-Cola Company (n=13) the most central to the network. Categorisation by various characteristics showed that corporations (n=431, or 71.7%), high-income countries (n=495, or 82.4%), and four countries (United States, Switzerland, United Kingdom, and the Netherlands) (n=350, or 58.2%) in particular, are dominant amongst the leadership of the MIs analysed. This study provides empirical evidence that many MIs, both hide the UPF industry’s harmful effects, and continue the perpetuation of long-standing food system inequalities and injustices. MIs involving the UPF industry are now a major structural feature of the GFG system, and regulatory changes are needed, to ensure a public health and sustainability first approach in GFG is prioritized.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The rise of multi-stakeholderism, the power of ultra-processed food corporations, and the implications for global food governance: a network analysis

Slater,

Lawrence,

Wood

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, evidence now also shows that the UPF industry attempts to influence food systems governance, policy processes and scientific activities [ 30 , 35 , 36 ] across multiple levels, countries and regions [ 31 , 37 – 39 ], indicating transnational coordination globally to further their interests. This is an idea recently been referred to as both an ‘architecture’ built to meet the interests of UPF corporations [ 40 ], and an ‘ultra-processing regime’ [ 41 ]. In this paper, this is conceptualized as a form of global food systems governance by transnational corporate actors which is now layered onto, draws legitimacy from, and seeks to influence the multilateral food governance system of nation states, UN agencies, and civil society groups.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Slater,

Lawrence,

Wood

et al. 2024

Global Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background A major challenge to transforming food systems to promote human health and sustainable development is the global rise in the manufacture and consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPFs). A key driver of this dietary transition is the globalization of UPF corporations, and their organized corporate political activity (CPA) intended to counter opposition and block government regulation. UPF industry CPA and the corporate interest groups who lobby on their behalf have been well described at the national level, however, at the global level, this network has not been systematically characterized. This study aims to map, analyse, and describe this network, and discuss the implications for global food policy action on UPFs, global food governance (GFG), and food systems transformation. Methods We conducted a network analysis of the declared interest group memberships of the world’s leading UPF corporations, extracted from web sources, company reports, and relevant academic and grey literature. Data on the characteristics of these interest groups were further extracted for analysis, including year founded, level, type, and headquarter location. Results We identified 268 interest groups affiliated with the UPF industry. The UPF manufacturers Nestlé (n = 171), The Coca-Cola Company (n = 147), Unilever (n = 142), PepsiCo (n = 138), and Danone (n = 113) had the greatest number of memberships, indicating strong centrality in coordinating the network. We found that this network operates at all levels, yet key actors now predominantly coordinate globally through multistakeholder channels in GFG. The most common interest group types were sustainability/corporate social responsibility/multistakeholder initiatives, followed by branding and advertising, and food manufacturing and retail. Most corporate interest groups are headquartered where they can access powerful government and GFG decision-makers, nearly one-third in Washington DC and Brussels, and the rest in capital cities of major national markets for UPFs. Conclusions The UPF industry, and especially its leading corporations, coordinate a global network of interest groups spanning multiple levels, jurisdictions, and governance spaces. This represents a major structural feature of global food and health governance systems, which arguably poses major challenges for actions to attenuate the harms of UPFs, and to realising of healthy and sustainable food systems.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, evidence now also shows that the UPF industry attempts to in uence food systems governance, policy processes and scienti c activities (30,35,36) across multiple levels, countries and regions (31,37,38,39), indicating transnational coordination globally to further their interests. This is an idea recently been referred to as both an 'architecture' built to meet the interests of UPF corporations (40), and an 'ultraprocessing regime' (41). In this paper, this is conceptualized as a form of global food systems governance by transnational corporate actors which is now layered onto, draws legitimacy from, and seeks to in uence the multilateral food governance system of nation states, UN agencies, and civil society groups.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Corporate lobbying and its implications for global food governance: mapping and analysing the global corporate influence network of the transnational ultra-processed food industry

Slater,

Lawrence,

Wood

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background A major challenge to transforming food systems to promote human health and sustainable development is the global rise in the manufacture and consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPFs). A key driver of this dietary transition is the globalization of UPF corporations, and their organized corporate political activity (CPA) intended to counter opposition and block government regulation. UPF industry CPA and the corporate interest groups who lobby on their behalf have been well described at the national level, however, at the global level, this network has not been systematically characterized. This study aims to map, analyse, and describe this network, and discuss the implications for global food policy action on UPFs, global food governance (GFG), and food systems transformation. Methods We conducted a network analysis of the declared interest group memberships of the world's leading UPF corporations, extracted from web sources, company reports, and relevant academic and grey literature. Data on the characteristics of these interest groups were further extracted for analysis, including year founded, level, type, and headquarter location. Results We identified 268 interest groups affiliated with the UPF industry. The UPF manufacturers Nestlé (n = 171), The Coca-Cola Company (n = 147), Unilever (n = 142), PepsiCo (n = 138), and Danone (n = 113) had the greatest number of memberships, indicating strong centrality in coordinating the network. We found that this network operates at all levels, yet key actors now predominantly coordinate globally through multistakeholder channels in GFG. The most common interest group types were sustainability/corporate social responsibility/multistakeholder initiatives, followed by branding and advertising, and food manufacturing and retail. Most corporate interest groups are headquartered where they can access powerful government and GFG decision-makers, nearly one-third in Washington DC and Brussels, and the rest in capital cities of major national markets for UPFs. Conclusions The UPF industry, and especially its leading corporations, coordinate a global network of interest groups spanning multiple levels, jurisdictions, and governance spaces. This represents a major structural feature of global food and health governance systems, which arguably poses major challenges for actions to attenuate the harms of UPFs, and to realising of healthy and sustainable food systems.

show abstract

UN Food System Summit Fails to Address Real Healthy and Sustainable Diets Challenges

Cited by 8 publications

References 21 publications

The rise of multi-stakeholderism, the power of ultra-processed food corporations, and the implications for global food governance: a network analysis

The rise of multi-stakeholderism, the power of ultra-processed food corporations, and the implications for global food governance: a network analysis

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

Corporate lobbying and its implications for global food governance: mapping and analysing the global corporate influence network of the transnational ultra-processed food industry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About