How do actors with asymmetrical power assert authority in policy agenda-setting? A study of authority claims by health actors in trade policy

Public health advocacy strategies to influence policy agendas: lessons from a narrative review of success in trade policy

BACKGROUND

Despite accumulating evidence of the implications of trade policy for public health, trade and health sectors continue to operate largely in silos. Numerous barriers to advancing health have been identified, including the dominance of a neoliberal paradigm, powerful private sector interests, and constraints associated with policymaking processes. Scholars and policy actors have recommended improved governance practices for trade policy, including: greater transparency and accountability; intersectoral collaboration; the use of health impact assessments; South-South networking; and mechanisms for civil society participation. These policy prescriptions have been generated from specific cases, such as the World Trade Organization's Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health or specific instances of trade-related policymaking at the national level. There has not yet been a comprehensive analysis of what enables the elevation of health goals on trade policy agendas. This narrative review seeks to address this gap by collating and analysing known studies across different levels of policymaking and different health issues.

RESULTS

Sixty-five studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Health issues that received attention on trade policy agendas included: access to medicines, food nutrition and food security, tobacco control, non-communicable diseases, access to knowledge, and asbestos harm. This has occurred in instances of domestic and regional policymaking, and in bilateral, regional and global trade negotiations, as well as in trade disputes and challenges. We identified four enabling conditions for elevation of health in trade-related policymaking: favourable media attention; leadership by trade and health ministers; public support; and political party support. We identified six strategies successfully used by advocates to influence these conditions: using and translating multiple forms of evidence, acting in coalitions, strategic framing, leveraging exogenous factors, legal strategy, and shifting forums.

CONCLUSION

The analysis demonstrates that while technical evidence is important, political strategy is necessary for elevating health on trade agendas. The analysis provides lessons that can be explored in the wider commercial determinants of health where economic and health interests often collide.

Authority in tobacco control in Pacific Small Island Developing States: a qualitative study of multisectoral tobacco governance in Fiji and Vanuatu

OBJECTIVE

Small Island Developing States (SIDS) struggle with implementing multisectoral tobacco control measures, and health sector actors often lack capacity to forge multisectoral commitment. This study aims to explore the sources and dynamics of authority that can enable multisectoral collaboration despite the divergence of policy agendas in tobacco control.

METHODS

We applied a qualitative, explorative case study design, with data collection and analysis guided by an analytical framework that identifies sources and dynamics of authority. Seventy interviews were conducted in Fiji and Vanuatu between 2018 and 2019.

RESULTS

The key features shaping multisectoral coordination for tobacco control in Fiji and Vanuatu are the expert, institutional, capacity-based and legal authority that state and non-state actors have in tobacco governance. The amount of authority actors can secure from these sources was shown to be influenced by their performance (perceived or real), the discourse around tobacco control, the existing legal tools and their strategic alliances. SIDS vulnerabilities, arising from small size, isolation and developing economies, facilitate an economic growth discourse that reduces health sector actors' authority and empowers protobacco actors to drive tobacco governance.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results highlight the need for terms of engagement with the tobacco industry to enable governments to implement multisectoral tobacco control measures. Expanding assistance on tobacco control among government and civil society actors and increasing messaging about the impact of economic, trade and agricultural practices on health are essential to help SIDS implement the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.

Creating Political Will for Action on Health Equity: Practical Lessons for Public Health Policy Actors

BACKGROUND

Despite growing evidence on the social determinants of health and health equity, political action has not been commensurate. Little is known about how political will operates to enact pro-equity policies or not. This paper examines how political will for pro-health equity policies is created through analysis of public policy in multiple sectors.

METHODS

Eight case studies were undertaken of Australian policies where action was either taken or proposed on health equity or where the policy seemed contrary to such action. Telephone or face-to-face interviews were conducted with 192 state and non-state participants. Analysis of the cases was done through thematic analysis and triangulated with document analysis.

RESULTS

Our case studies covered: trade agreements, primary healthcare (PHC), work conditions, digital access, urban planning, social welfare and Indigenous health. The extent of political will for pro-equity policies depended on the strength of path dependency, electoral concerns, political philosophy, the strength of economic and biomedical framings, whether elite interests were threatened and the success or otherwise of civil society lobbying.

CONCLUSION

Public health policy actors may create political will through: determining how path dependency that exacerbates health inequities can be broken, working with sympathetic political forces committed to fairness; framing policy options in a way that makes them more likely to be adopted, outlining factors to consider in challenging the interests of elites, and considering the extent to which civil society will work in favour of equitable policies. A shift in norms is required to stress equity and the right to health.

Who influences nutrition policy space using international trade and investment agreements? A global stakeholder analysis

Background

Regulation of food environments is needed to address the global challenge of poor nutrition, yet policy inertia has been a problem. A common argument against regulation is potential conflict with binding commitments under international trade and investment agreements (TIAs). This study aimed to identify which actors and institutions, in different contexts, influence how TIAs are used to constrain policy space for improving food environments, and to describe their core beliefs, interests, resources and strategies, with the objective of informing strategic global action to preserve nutrition policy space.

Methods

We conducted a global stakeholder analysis applying the Advocacy Coalition Framework, based on existing academic literature and key informant interviews with international experts in trade and investment law and public health nutrition policy.

Results

We identified 12 types of actors who influence policy space in the food environment policy subsystem, relevant to TIAs. These actors hold various beliefs regarding the economic policy paradigm, the nature of obesity and dietary diseases as health problems, the role of government, and the role of industry in solving the health problem. We identified two primary competing coalitions: 1) a ‘public health nutrition’ coalition, which is overall supportive of and actively working to enact comprehensive food environment regulation; and 2) an ‘industry and economic growth’ focussed coalition, which places a higher priority on deregulation and is overall not supportive of comprehensive food environment regulation. The industry and economic growth coalition appears to be dominant, based on its relative power, resources and coordination. However, the public health nutrition coalition maintains influence through individual activism, collective lobbying and government pressure (e.g. by civil society), and expert knowledge generation.

Conclusions

Our analysis suggests that industry and economic growth-focussed coalitions are highly capable of leveraging networks, institutional structures and ideologies to their advantage, and are a formidable source of opposition acting to constrain nutrition policy space globally, including through TIAs. Opportunities for global public health nutrition coalitions to strengthen their influence in the support of nutrition policy space include strategic evidence generation and coalition-building through broader engagement and capacity-building.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12992-021-00764-7.

What Generates Attention to Health in Trade Policy-Making? Lessons From Success in Tobacco Control and Access to Medicines: A Qualitative Study of Australia and the (Comprehensive and Progressive) Trans-Pacific Partnership

BACKGROUND

Despite greater attention to the nexus between trade and investment agreements and their potential impacts on public health, less is known regarding the political and governance conditions that enable or constrain attention to health issues on government trade agendas. Drawing on interviews with key stakeholders in the Australian trade domain, this article provides novel insights from policy actors into the range of factors that can enable or constrain attention to health in trade negotiations.

METHODS

A qualitative case study was chosen focused on Australia's participation in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations and the domestic agenda-setting processes that shaped the government's negotiating mandate. Process tracing via document analysis of media reporting, parliamentary records and government inquiries identified key events during Australia's participation in the TPP negotiations. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 25 key government and non-government policy actors including Federal politicians, public servants, representatives from public interest nongovernment organisations and industry associations, and academic experts.

RESULTS

Interviews revealed that domestic concerns for protecting regulatory space for access to generic medicines and tobacco control emerged onto the Australian government's trade agenda. This contrasted with other health issues like alcohol control and nutrition and food systems that did not appear to receive attention. The analysis suggests sixteen key factors that shaped attention to these different health issues, including the strength of exporter interests; extent of political will of Trade and Health Ministers; framing of health issues; support within the major political parties; exogenous influencing events; public support; the strength of available evidence and the presence of existing domestic legislation and international treaties, among others.

CONCLUSION

These findings aid understanding of the factors that can enable or constrain attention to health issues on government trade agendas, and offer insights for potential pathways to elevate greater attention to health in future. They provide a suite of conditions that appear to shape attention to health outside the biomedical health domain for further research in the commercial determinants of health.

Corporate power and the international trade regime preventing progressive policy action on non-communicable diseases: a realist review

Transnational tobacco, alcohol and ultra-processed food corporations use the international trade regime to prevent policy action on non-communicable diseases (NCDs); i.e. to promote policy 'non-decisions'. Understanding policy non-decisions can be assisted by identifying power operating in relevant decision-making spaces, but trade and health research rarely explicitly engages with theories of power. This realist review aimed to synthesize evidence of different forms and mechanisms of power active in trade and health decision-making spaces to understand better why NCD policy non-decisions persist and the implications for future transformative action. We iteratively developed power-based theories explaining how transnational health-harmful commodity corporations (THCCs) utilize the international trade regime to encourage NCD policy non-decisions. To support theory development, we also developed a conceptual framework for analysing power in public health policymaking. We searched six databases and relevant grey literature and extracted, synthesized and mapped the evidence against the proposed theories. One hundred and four studies were included. Findings were presented for three key forms of power. Evidence indicates THCCs attempt to exercise instrumental power by extensive lobbying often via privileged access to trade and health decision-making spaces. When their legitimacy declines, THCCs have attempted to shift decision-making to more favourable international trade legal venues. THCCs benefit from structural power through the institutionalization of their involvement in health and trade agenda-setting processes. In terms of discursive power, THCCs effectively frame trade and health issues in ways that echo and amplify dominant neoliberal ideas. These processes may further entrench the individualization of NCDs, restrict conceivable policy solutions and perpetuate policymaking norms that privilege economic/trade interests over health. This review identifies different forms and mechanisms of power active in trade and health policy spaces that enable THCCs to prevent progressive action on NCDs. It also points to potential strategies for challenging these power dynamics and relations.

Defending access to medicines in regional trade agreements: lessons from the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership - a qualitative study of policy actors' views

Background

The Regional Economic Partnership Agreement (RCEP) is a mega regional trade agreement signed by fifteen countries on 15 November 2020 after 8 years of negotiation. Signatories include the ten members of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) plus China, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea and Australia. India was a negotiating party until it withdrew from the negotiations in November 2019. The RCEP negotiations were initially framed as focused on the needs of low income countries. Public health concerns emerged however when draft negotiating chapters were leaked online, revealing pressures on countries to agree to intellectual property and investment measures that could exacerbate issues of access to medicines and seeds, and protecting regulatory space for public health. A concerted Asia Pacific civil society campaign emerged in response to these concerns, and in 2019, media and government reporting suggested that several of these measures had been taken off the table, which was subsequently confirmed in the release of the signed text in November 2020.

Results

This paper examines civil society and health actors’ views of the conditions that successfully contributed to the removal of these measures in RCEP, with a focus on intellectual property and access to medicines. Drawing on twenty semi-structured qualitative interviews with civil society, government and legal and health experts from nine countries participating in the RCEP negotiations, the paper reports a matrix of ten conditions related to actor power, ideas, political context and specific health issues that appeared to support prioritisation of some public health concerns in the RCEP negotiations.

Conclusions

Conditions identified included strong low and middle income country leadership; strong civil society mobilisation, increased technical capacity of civil society and low and middle income negotiators; supportive public health norms; processes that somewhat opened up the negotiations to hear public health views; the use of evidence; domestic support for health issues; and supportive international public health legislation. Lessons from the RCEP can inform prioritisation of public health in future trade agreement negotiations.

Power and the people's health

Public policy plays a central role in creating and distributing resources and conditions of daily life that matter for health equity. Policy agendas have tended to focus on health care delivery and individualised interventions. Asking why there is a lack of policy action on structural drivers of health inequities raises questions about power inequities in policy systems that maintain the status quo. In this paper we investigate the power dynamics shaping public policy and implications for health equity. Using a Health Equity Power Framework (HEPF), we examined data from 158 qualitative interviews with government, industry and civil society actors across seven policy case studies covering areas of macroeconomics, employment, social protection, welfare reform, health care, infrastructure and land use planning. The influence of structures of capitalism, neoliberalism, sexism, colonisation, racism and biomedicalism were widely evident, manifested through the ideologies, behaviours and discourses of state, market, and civil actors and the institutional spaces they occupied. Structurally less powerful public interest actors made creative use of existing or new institutional spaces, and used network, discursive and moral power to influence policy, with some success in moderating inequities in structural and institutional forms of power. Our hope is that the methodological advancement and empirical data presented here helps to illuminate how public interest actors can navigate structural power inequities in the policy system in order to disrupt the status quo and advance a comprehensive policy agenda on the social determinants of health equity. However, this analysis highlights the unrealistic expectation of turning health inequities around in a short time given the long-term embedded power dynamics and inequities within policy systems under late capitalism. Achieving health equity is a power-saturated long game.

Smashing the patriarchy to address gender health inequities: Past, present and future perspectives from Aotearoa (New Zealand)

The second wave feminist dream of smashing the patriarchy remains a task yet to be completed on a complex to do list. Women, particularly able-bodied cis-gendered white women however do enjoy the privilege of living longer than men. But our longer lives take place within patriarchal-capitalist systems where many women's social and cultural rights continue to be compromised. How do we ensure that all women can exercise our right to health and wellbeing? In this paper, the authors examine, critique, review and re-vision the dynamics of power and patriarchy over three distinct time periods - 1999, 2019 and 2039. We look to the past to track progress; we look to the present to see what we have achieved and look to the future for what might be. This conceptual paper is informed by the authors' expert knowledge, a review of the literature and the novel use of speculative ethnography. The authors conclude that patriarchy remains not only a negative determinant of women's health that needs to be smashed, but is also a threat to all people and to planetary health.

Neoliberal discourse, actor power, and the politics of nutrition policy: A qualitative analysis of informal challenges to nutrition labelling regulations at the World Trade Organization, 2007-2019

Unhealthy diets are increasing contributors to poor health and mortality in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Government interventions targeting the structural drivers of unhealthy diets are needed to prevent these illnesses, including nutrition labelling regulations that create healthier food environments. Yet, implementation remains slow and uneven. One explanation for slow implementation highlights the role of politics, including powerful ideological discourse and its strategic deployment by economically powerful actors. In this article, we advance research on the politics of nutrition policies by analysing political discourse on nutrition labelling regulations within an influential and under-studied global institution: the World Trade Organization (WTO). We identified WTO Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee meeting minutes with reference to nutrition labelling policies proposed by Thailand, Chile, Indonesia, Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia, and Uruguay (2007-2019; n = 47). We analysed the frames, narratives, and normative claims that feature in inter-country discourse within TBT meetings and examined how actors mobilize ideological and material sources of power via these statements. We find that informal government challenges to nutrition labelling proposals within the Committee featured a narrative that individualized the causes of and solutions to poor diet, downplayed harms from industrialised food products, and framed state regulation as harmful and unjust. These non-technical claims mobilised neoliberal ideology and rhetoric to contest the normative legitimacy of members' proposals and to de-socialize and de-politicize poor diets. Furthermore, high-income countries (HICs) re-framed policy goals to focus on individual determinants of poor nutrition whilst calling for their preferred policies to be adopted. Patterns of discourse within TBT meetings also had striking similarities with arguments raised by multi-national food corporations elsewhere. Our findings suggest that non-technical and ideological arguments raised during TBT meetings serve as inconspicuous tools through which nutrition labelling policies in LMICs are undermined by HICs, industry, and the powerful ideology of neoliberalism.

Advancing a health equity agenda across multiple policy domains: a qualitative policy analysis of social, trade and welfare policy

OBJECTIVE

While there is urgent need for policymaking that prioritises health equity, successful strategies for advancing such an agenda across multiple policy sectors are not well known. This study aims to address this gap by identifying successful strategies to advance a health equity agenda across multiple policy domains.

DESIGN

We conducted in-depth qualitative case studies in three important social determinants of health equity in Australia: employment and social policy (Paid Parental Leave); macroeconomics and trade policy (the Trans Pacific Partnership agreement); and welfare reform (the Northern Territory Emergency Response). The analysis triangulated multiple data sources included 71 semistructured interviews, document analysis and drew on political science theories related to interests, ideas and institutions.

RESULTS

Within and across case studies we observed three key strategies used by policy actors to advance a health equity agenda, with differing levels of success. The first was the use of multiple policy frames to appeal to a wide range of actors beyond health. The second was the formation of broad coalitions beyond the health sector, in particular networking with non-traditional policy allies. The third was the use of strategic forum shopping by policy actors to move the debate into more popular policy forums that were not health focused.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis provides nuanced strategies for agenda-setting for health equity and points to the need for multiple persuasive issue frames, coalitions with unusual bedfellows, and shopping around for supportive institutions outside the traditional health domain. Use of these nuanced strategies could generate greater ideational, actor and institutional support for prioritising health equity and thus could lead to improved health outcomes.

Health Inequality as a Large-Scale Outcome of Complex Social Systems: Lessons for Action on the Sustainable Development Goals

Action on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) needs to become real and impactful, taking a "whole systems" perspective on levers for systems change. This article reviews what we have learned over the past century about the large-scale outcome of health inequality, and what we know about the behaviour of complex social systems. This combined knowledge provides lessons on the nature of inequality and what effective action on our big goals, like the SDGs, might look like. It argues that economic theories and positivist social theories which have dominated the last 150 years have largely excluded the nature of human connections to each other, and the environment. This exclusion of intimacy has legitimatised arguments that only value-free economic processes matter for macro human systems, and only abstract measurement constitutes valuable social science. Theories of complex systems provide an alternative perspective. One where health inequality is viewed as emergent, and causes are systemic and compounding. Action therefore needs to be intensely local, with power relationships key to transformation. This requires conscious and difficult intervention on the intolerable accumulation of resources; improved reciprocity between social groups; and reversal of system flows, which at present ebb away from the local and those already disadvantaged.