Search

BackgroundBreastfeeding is important for the health and development of the child, and for maternal health, in all country contexts. However, global sales of breast-milk substitutes (BMS), including infant, follow-up and toddler formulas, have 'boomed' in recent decades. This raises the importance of international food standards established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex) on the safety, composition and labelling of BMS. Such standards appear to be strongly contested by governments, industry and civil society groups, yet few studies have investigated the politics of Codex standard-setting processes. The aim of this paper is to understand who participates in decision-making, and how actors frame and contest proposals to revise the Codex Standard on Follow-up Formula (FUF).MethodsWe adopted a case study design involving two steps. First, we enumerated government, industry, civil society, and international organization stakeholders participating in standard-setting processes of the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses (CCNFSDU). Second, we conducted a framing analysis of stakeholder inputs during the FUF standard revision in CCNFSDU meetings. Publicly available online meeting reports (2015-2019) were retrieved, analyzed using a theoretical framework, and organized thematically.ResultsHigh-income country (HIC) delegates greatly outnumbered those from other country income categories. Industry representation was higher compared with other observer categories. Member state delegations included more industry representation than civil society representation, and were occasionally the only member state delegates. Industry stakeholders framed arguments in terms of trade implications, science, and flexible standards. Civil society groups used public health, science, and pro-breastfeeding frames.ConclusionCodex BMS standard-setting procedures are dominated by HICs and industry groups. Limited representation of civil society, and of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), suggest actions are needed to substantially increase support for their involvement at Codex. Such representation may help to counteract power asymmetries and commercial influences on food standards for infants and young children.

BackgroundInternational food standards set by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC), have become more prominent in international trade politics, since being referenced by various World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements. We examine how this impacts implementation of the World Health Organization (WHO) International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes.MethodsUsing trade in commercial milk formulas (CMFs) as a case study, we collected detailed data on interventions across various WTO bodies between 1995 and 2019. We used language from these interventions to guide data collection on member state and observer positions during the CAC review of the Codex Standard for Follow-up Formula (CSFUF), and during CAC discussions on the relevance of WHO policies and guidelines.ResultsExporting member states made 245 interventions regarding CMFs at the WTO, many citing deviations from standards set by the CAC. These did not occur in formal disputes, but in WTO Committee and Accession processes, toward many countries. In Thailand, complaints are linked to weakened regulation. Exporters also sought to narrow the CSFUF at the CAC in a way that is at odds with recommendations in the International Code. Tensions are growing more broadly within the CAC regarding relevance of WHO recommendations. Countries coordinated during WTO committee processes to advocate for reapportioning core WHO funding to the CAC and in order to further influence standard-setting.ConclusionThe commercial interests of the baby food industry are magnifying inconsistencies between health guidelines set by the WHO, standard-setting at the CAC, and functions of the WTO. This poses serious concerns for countries' abilities to regulate in the interests of public health, in this case to protect breastfeeding and its benefits for the health of infants, children and mothers.

BackgroundThe global milk formula market has 'boomed' in recent decades, raising serious concerns for breastfeeding, and child and maternal health. Despite these developments, few studies have investigated the global expansion of the baby food industry, nor the market and political practices corporations have used to grow and sustain their markets. In this paper, our aim is to understand the strategies used by the baby food industry to shape 'first-foods systems' across its diverse markets, and in doing so, drive milk formula consumption on a global scale. We used a theoretically guided synthesis review method, which integrated diverse qualitative and quantitative data sources.ResultsGlobal milk formula sales grew from ~US$1.5 billion in 1978 to US$55.6 billion in 2019. This remarkable expansion has occurred along two main historical axes. First, the widening geographical reach of the baby food industry and its marketing practices, both globally and within countries, as corporations have pursued new growth opportunities, especially in the Global South. Second, the broadening of product ranges beyond infant formula, to include an array of follow-up, toddler and specialized formulas for a wider range of age groups and conditions, thereby widening the scope of mother-child populations subject to commodification. Sophisticated marketing techniques have been used to grow and sustain milk formula consumption, including marketing through health systems, mass-media and digital advertising, and novel product innovations backed by corporate science. To enable and sustain this marketing, the industry has engaged in diverse political practices to foster favourable policy, regulatory and knowledge environments. This has included lobbying international and national policy-makers, generating and deploying favourable science, leveraging global trade rules and adopting corporate policies to counter regulatory action by governments.ConclusionThe baby food industry uses integrated market and political strategies to shape first-foods systems in ways that drive and sustain milk formula market expansion, on a global scale. Such practices are a major impediment to global implementation of the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes, and other policy actions to protect, promote and support breastfeeding. New modalities of public health action are needed to negate the political practices of the industry in particular, and ultimately to constrain corporate power over the mother-child breastfeeding dyad.

The health and ecological harms created and spread by firms active in many unhealthy commodity industries (UCIs) have received considerable attention from the public health community. However, less focus has been paid to analysing the distribution of wealth and income – important social and economic determinants of health – by these industries. This study aimed to examine long-term trends in wealth and income distribution by publicly listed corporations active in four UCIs: fossil fuels; tobacco; ultra-processed foods; and alcohol. Quantitative analysis of a range of data was conducted for firms listed on stock exchanges in the United States (US). Wealth and income distribution metrics were analysed at the industry level, including effective corporate tax rates and shareholder value ratios. The equity ownership structures and investor location of 20 of the largest firms were also explored. Since the 1980s, US-listed firms in the examined UCIs have distributed much less of their wealth and income to governments and much more to shareholders and investors mostly based in high-income countries. The study provides evidence that firms active in UCIs create a 'double burden of maldistribution': their externalised social and ecological harms disproportionately affect disadvantaged population groups and governments in low- and middle-income countries; whilst, simultaneously, they are increasingly transferring wealth and income to a group over-represented by a small and privileged elite. The identified distributive injustice warrants increased policy attention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Breastfeeding is important for the health and development of the child, and for maternal health, in all country contexts. However, global sales of breast-milk substitutes (BMS), including infant, follow-up and toddler formulas, have 'boomed' in recent decades. This raises the importance of international food standards established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex) on the safety, composition and labelling of BMS. Such standards appear to be strongly contested by governments, industry and civil society groups, yet few studies have investigated the politics of Codex standard-setting processes. The aim of this paper is to understand who participates in decision-making, and how actors frame and contest proposals to revise the Codex Standard on Follow-up Formula (FUF). Methods: We adopted a case study design involving two steps. First, we enumerated government, industry, civil society, and international organization stakeholders participating in standard-setting processes of the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses (CCNFSDU). Second, we conducted a framing analysis of stakeholder inputs during the FUF standard revision in CCNFSDU meetings. Publicly available online meeting reports (2015-2019) were retrieved, analyzed using a theoretical framework, and organized thematically. Results: High-income country (HIC) delegates greatly outnumbered those from other country income categories. Industry representation was higher compared with other observer categories. Member state delegations included more industry representation than civil society representation, and were occasionally the only member state delegates. Industry stakeholders framed arguments in terms of trade implications, science, and flexible standards. Civil society groups used public health, science, and pro-breastfeeding frames. Conclusion: Codex BMS standard-setting procedures are dominated by HICs and industry groups. Limited representation of civil society, and of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), suggest actions are needed to substantially increase support for their involvement at Codex. Such representation may help to counteract power asymmetries and commercial influences on food standards for infants and young children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The inappropriate marketing and aggressive promotion of breastmilk substitutes (BMS) undermines breastfeeding and harms child and maternal health in all country contexts. Although a global milk formula 'sales boom' is reportedly underway, few studies have investigated its dynamics and determinants. This study takes two steps. First, it describes trends and patterns in global formula sales volumes (apparent consumption), by country income and region. Data are reported for 77 countries, for the years 2005–19, and for the standard (0–6 months), follow‐up (7‐12 m), toddler (13‐36 m), and special (0‐6 m) categories. Second, it draws from the literature to understand how transformations underway in first‐food systems – those that provision foods for children aged 0–36 months – explain the global transition to higher formula diets. Total world formula sales grew by 115% between 2005 and 2019, from 3.5 to 7.4 kg/child, led by highly‐populated middle‐income countries. Growth was rapid in South East and East Asia, especially in China, which now accounts for one third of world sales. This transition is linked with factors that generate demand for BMS, including rising incomes, urbanisation, the changing nature of woman's work, social norms, media influences and medicalisation. It also reflects the globalization of the baby food industry and its supply chains, including the increasing intensity and sophistication of its marketing practices. Policy and regulatory frameworks designed to protect, promote and support breastfeeding are partially or completely inadequate in the majority of countries, hence supporting industry expansion over child nutrition. The results raise serious concern for global child and maternal health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]