Search

Using data from a nationally representative household survey, this study investigates whether changes in food‐at‐home (FAH) purchases occurred following the introduction, modification, and implementation of the Chilean food labeling and marketing regulations. This study further examines whether changes in sugar, sodium, saturated fat, or calorie intake occurred. The results provide evidence of some improvements in dietary intake. In particular, sugar intake decreased primarily due to food modifications—that emerged as a supply response to regulations. This improvement in dietary intake was only found among those households who mainly buy FAH or shop mostly at grocery stores. Considering that across all households, nearly 10% of total FAH calories come from products with added sugars, the results suggest that there are missing opportunities that policy could leverage to improve food choices, especially among those less likely to be influenced by existing regulations—those who mainly spend on food away from home or those who primarily shop at alternative FAH outlets. [EconLit Citations: D22, L51, Q13]. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2016, Chile became the first country in Latin America to implement comprehensive regulations aimed at preventing obesity and diet-related non-communicable diseases. It introduced innovative measures including a mandatory front-of-pack nutrition labelling scheme for food products high in sodium, free sugars, fats, and calories, and strict advertising and marketing restrictions of unhealthy foods to children under 14 years of age. However, food-exporting countries have questioned the lawfulness of these measures in the context of the World Trade Organization's Technical Barriers to Trade Committee, and multinational food companies have filed several complaints before Chilean courts challenging their implementation. This article provides an overview of specific legal issues discussed in domestic courts and examines Chile's measures under the rules of international investment law. It assesses whether they would withstand a treaty claim based on indirect expropriation, breach of the national treatment standard, and breach of the fair and equitable treatment standard. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Canadian government recently committed to introduce legislation to restrict the commercial marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages to children. Objective: We compared the degree of strictness and agreement between nutrient profile (NP) models relevant to marketing restrictions by applying them in the Canadian context. Design: With the use of data from the University of Toronto 2013 Food Label Information Program (n = 15,342 prepackaged foods), 4 NP models were evaluated: the Food Standards Australia New Zealand-Nutrient Profiling Scoring Criterion (FSANZ-NPSC), theWHO Regional Office for Europe (EURO) model, the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) model, and a modified version of the PAHO model (Modified-PAHO), which did not consider the extent of food processing because the application of this characteristic was prone to ambiguity. The number and proportion of foods that would be eligible for marketing to children was calculated with the use of each model, overall and by food category. Results: The Modified-PAHO and PAHO models would permit only 9.8% (95% CI: 9.4%, 10.3%) and 15.8% (95% CI: 15.3%, 16.4%) of foods, respectively, followed by the EURO model [29.8% (95% CI: 29.0%, 30.5%)]. In contrast, the FSANZ-NPSC would consider almost half of prepackaged foods as eligible for marketing to children [49.0% (95% CI: 48.2%, 49.8%)]. Cross-classification analyses showed that only 8.1% of foods would be eligible based on all models (e.g., most pastas without sauce). Subanalyses showed that each model would be more stringent when evaluating food items that specifically target children on their package (n = 747; from 1.9% of foods eligible under Modified-PAHO to 24.2% under FSANZ-NPSC). Conclusions: The degree of strictness and agreement vary greatly between NP models applicable to marketing restrictions. The discrepancies between models highlight the importance for policy makers to carefully evaluate the characteristics underlying such models when trying to identify a suitable model to underpin regulations restricting the marketing of unhealthy foods to children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]