Comparison of food industry policies and commitments on marketing to children and product (re)formulation in Australia, New Zealand and Fiji

Gary Sacks · Mélissa Mialon · Stefanie Vandevijvere · Helen Trevena · Wendy Snowdon · Michelle Crino +1 more

58 citations0/0 files storedCritical Public Health

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling

Abstract

Unhealthy food environments are known to be major drivers of diet-related non-communicable diseases globally, and there is an imperative for major food companies to be publicly accountable for their actions to improve the healthiness of food environments. This paper examines the prevalence of publicly available policies and commitments of major packaged food and soft drink manufacturers, and fast-food restaurants in Australia, New Zealand and Fiji with respect to reducing food marketing to children and product (re)formulation. In each country, the most prominent companies in each sector were selected. Company policies, commitments and relevant industry initiatives were gleaned from company and industry association websites. In Australia and New Zealand, there are a higher proportion of companies with publicly available marketing and formulation policies than in Fiji. However, even in Australia, a large proportion of the most prominent food companies do not have publicly available policies. Where they exist, policies on food marketing to children generally focus on those aged less than 12, do not apply to all types of media, marketing channels and techniques, and do not provide transparency with respect to the products to which the policies apply. Product formulation policies, where they exist, focus mostly on salt reduction and changes to the make-up of overall product portfolios, and do not generally address saturated fat, added sugar and energy reduction. In the absence of strong policies and corresponding actions by the private sector, it is likely that government action (e.g. through co-regulation or legislation) will be needed to drive improved company performance.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 58 citations exist upstream.

References

2013Profits and pandemics: prevention of harmful effects of tobacco, alcohol, and ultra-processed food and drink industries 2003Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health 2009The Perils of Ignoring History: Big Tobacco Played Dirty and Millions Died. How Similar Is Big Food?2013INFORMAS ( I nternational N etwork for F ood and O besity/non‐communicable diseases R esearch, M onitoring and A ction S upport): overview and key principles 2013A proposed approach to monitor private‐sector policies and practices related to food environments, obesity and non‐communicable disease prevention 2002Food Politics—How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health 2010The Snack Attack 2013Monitoring the levels of important nutrients in the food supply

Cited by

2019Benchmarking the commitments related to population nutrition and obesity prevention of major food companies in New Zealand 2022A realist review of voluntary actions by the food and beverage industry and implications for public health and policy in low- and middle-income countries 2019Assessment of the stated policies of prominent food companies related to obesity and non-communicable disease (NCD) prevention in Thailand 2025

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.