Barriers to, and facilitators of, the adoption of a sugar sweetened beverage tax to prevent non-communicable diseases in Namibia: a policy landscape analysis

Politics-evidence conflict in national health policy making in Africa: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Generally, public health policy-making is hardly a linear process and is characterized by interactions among politicians, institutions, researchers, technocrats and practitioners from diverse fields, as well as brokers, interest groups, financiers and a gamut of other actors. Meanwhile, most public health policies and systems in Africa appear to be built loosely on technical and scientific evidence, but with high political systems and ideologies. While studies on national health policies in Africa are growing, there seems to be inadequate evidence mapping on common themes and concepts across existing literature.

PURPOSE

The study seeks to explore the extent and type of evidence that exist on the conflict between politics and scientific evidence in the national health policy-making processes in Africa.

METHODS

A thorough literature search was done in PubMed, Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, Dimensions, Taylor and Francis, Chicago Journals, Emerald Insight, JSTOR and Google Scholar. In total, 43 peer-reviewed articles were eligible and used for this review.

RESULT

We found that the conflicts to evidence usage in policy-making include competing interests and lack of commitment; global policy goals, interest/influence, power imbalance and funding, morals; and evidence-based approaches, self-sufficiency, collaboration among actors, policy priorities and existing structures. Barriers to the health policy process include fragmentation among actors, poor advocacy, lack of clarity on the agenda, inadequate evidence, inadequate consultation and corruption. The impact of the politics-evidence conflict includes policy agenda abrogation, suboptimal policy development success and policy implementation inadequacies.

CONCLUSIONS

We report that political interests in most cases influence policy-makers and other stakeholders to prioritize financial gains over the use of research evidence to policy goals and targets. This situation has the tendency for inadequate health policies with poor implementation gaps. Addressing these issues requires incorporating relevant evidence into health policies, making strong leadership, effective governance and a commitment to public health.

Multisectoral action to address noncommunicable diseases: lessons from three country case studies

Introduction

Multisectoral action is a central component of the global response to the rising prevalence of non-communicable diseases (NCDs). In this paper we aimed to unpack the definition of multisectoral action and provide an overview of the historical context, challenges, and recommendations alongside three country case studies: salt reduction in the UK, tobacco legislation in Nigeria, and regulation of edible oils in Iran.

Methods

We used an iterative review process to select three country case studies from a list of 20 potential cases previously identified by WHO. At our third round of review we unanimously agreed to focus on salt reduction in the UK, tobacco regulation in Nigeria, and edible oil regulation in Iran as these represented rich cases on diverse risk factors from three different world regions that we felt offered important lessons. We conducted literature reviews to identify further data for each case study.

Results

Across the three studies a number of important themes emerged. We found that multisectoral approaches demand the often difficult reconciliation of competing and conflicting values and priorities. Across our three chosen cases, commercial interests and free trade agreements were the most common obstacles to successful multisectoral strategies. We found that early consultative stakeholder engagement and strong political and bureaucratic leadership were necessary for success.

Discussion

The complex multi-rooted nature of NCDs requires a multisectoral approach, but the inevitable conflicts that this entails requires careful navigation.

An umbrella review of the acceptability of fiscal and pricing policies to reduce diet-related noncommunicable disease

CONTEXT

Poor diet has been implicated in a range of noncommunicable diseases. Fiscal and pricing policies (FPs) may offer a means by which consumption of food and non-alcoholic beverages with links to such diseases can be influenced to improve public health.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the acceptability of FPs to reduce diet-related noncommunicable disease, based on systematic review evidence.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychInfo, SCI, SSCI, Web of Science, Scopus, EconLit, the Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, and the Campbell Collaboration Library were searched for relevant studies published between January 1, 1990 and June 2021.

DATA EXTRACTION

The studies included systematic reviews of diet-related FPs and: used real-world evidence; examined real or perceived barriers/facilitators; targeted the price of food or non-alcoholic beverages; and applied to entire populations within a jurisdiction. A total of 9996 unique relevant records were identified, which were augmented by a search of bibliographies and recommendations from an external expert advisory panel. Following screening, 4 systematic reviews remained.

DATA ANALYSIS

Quality appraisal was conducted using the AMSTAR 2 tool. A narrative synthesis was undertaken, with outcomes grouped according to the WHO-INTEGRATE criteria. The findings indicated a paucity of high-quality systematic review evidence and limited public support for the use of FPs to change dietary habits. This lack of support was related to a number of factors that included: their perceived potential to be regressive; a lack of transparency, ie, there was mistrust around the use of revenues raised; a paucity of evidence around health benefits; the deliberate choice of rates that were lower than those considered necessary to affect diet; and concerns about the potential of such FPs to harm economic outcomes such as employment.

CONCLUSION

The findings underscore the need for high-quality systematic review evidence on this topic, and the importance of responding to public concerns and putting in place mechanisms to address these when implementing FPs. This study was funded by Safefood [02A-2020].

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration no. CRD42021274454.

The non-use of evidence in the adoption of a sugar-sweetened beverage tax in OECD countries

BACKGROUND

Studies confirm the positive effect of sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxation on public health. However, only a few countries in Europe adopt SSB taxes. From a public policy perspective, we investigate the conditions under which countries do or do not follow this evidence.

METHODS

Crisp-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) of 26 European Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development countries with and without an SSB tax. We test which configurations of conditions (problem pressure, governmental composition, strategic planning, health care system, public health policies, inclusion of expert advice in policymaking) emerge as relevant in determining adoption and non-adoption between the years 1981 and 2021. Pathways that lead to the presence and absence of SSB taxes are identified separately.

RESULTS

At least one of the following configurations of conditions is present in countries that introduced taxation: (i) high financial problem pressure, low regulatory impact assessment activity; (ii) high public health problem pressure, a contribution-financed health care system, no holistic strategy for combatting non-communicable diseases (NCDs); (iii) a tax-financed health care system, a holistic NCD strategy, high strategic and executive planning capacity. In countries that did not adopt SSB taxes, we find (i) high regulatory impact assessment activity, high levels of sugar export; (ii) no holistic NCD strategy, high spending on preventive care; (iii and iv) a lack of strategic planning capacity and either a high share of spending on preventive care or inclusion of expert advice.

DISCUSSION

Evidence inclusion requires clear policy priorities in terms of strategy and resources to promote public health.

Study design: policy landscape analysis for sugar-sweetened beverage taxation in seven sub-Saharan African countries

This paper reports on the design of a study to examine the policy landscape relevant to sugar-sweetened beverage taxation in seven sub-Saharan African countries. The study responds to the need for strong policy to address the rising burden of non-communicable diseases in the region. Sugar-sweetened beverage taxation has been widely recommended as a key component of a comprehensive policy approach to NCD prevention. However, it has proved a contentious policy intervention, with industry strongly opposing the introduction of such taxes.

The aim was to identify opportunities to strengthen sugar-sweetened beverage taxation-related policy for the prevention of nutrition-related NCDs in a subset of Eastern and Southern African countries: Kenya, Tanzania, Botswana, Rwanda, Namibia, Zambia, Uganda. The study was conducted as a collaboration by researchers from nine institutions; including the seven study countries, South Africa, and Australia. The research protocol was collaboratively developed, drawing on theories of the policy process to examine the existing availability of evidence, policy context, and stakeholder interests and influence.

This paper describes the development of a method for a policy landscape analysis to strengthen policies relevant to NCD prevention, and specifically sugar-sweetened beverage taxation. This takes the form of a prospective policy analysis, based on systematic documentary analysis supplemented by consultations with policy actors, that is feasible in low-resource settings. Data were collected from policy documents, government and industry reports, survey documentation, webpages, and academic literature. Consultations were conducted to verify the completeness of the policy-relevant data collection. We analysed the frames and beliefs regarding the policy ‘problems’, the existing policy context and understandings of sugar-sweetened beverage taxation as a potential policy intervention, and the political context across relevant sectors, including industry interests and influence in the policy process.

This study design will provide insights to inform public health action to support sugar-sweetened beverage taxation in the region.

The political economy of sugar-sweetened beverage taxation: an analysis from seven countries in sub-Saharan Africa

Background: Non-communicable diseases are on the rise across sub-Saharan Africa. The region has become a targeted growth market for sugar-sweetened beverages, which are associated with weight gain, cardiovascular diseases and diabetes.Objective: To identify politico-economic factors relevant to nutrition-related fiscal policies, and to draw lessons regarding strategies to strengthen sugar-sweetened beverages taxation in the region and globally.Methods: We collected documentary data on policy content, stakeholders and corporate political activity from seven countries in east and southern Africa augmented by qualitative interviews in Botswana, Namibia, Kenya and Zambia, and stakeholder consultations in Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda. Data were analysed using a political economy framework, focusing on ideas, institutions, interests and power, and a 'bricolage' approach was employed to identify strategies for future action.Results: Non-communicable diseases were recognised as a priority in all countries. Kenya, Zambia, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda had taxes on non-alcoholic beverages, which varied in rate and tax base, but appeared to be motivated by revenue rather than health concerns. Botswana and Namibia indicated intention to adopt sugar-sweetened beverage taxes. Health-oriented sugar-sweetened beverage taxation faced challenges from entrenched economic policy paradigms for industry-led economic growth and was actively opposed by sugar-sweetened beverage-related industries. Strategies identified to support stronger sugar-sweetened beverage taxation included shifting the economic discourse to strengthen health considerations, developing positive public opinion, forging links with the agriculture sector for shared benefit, and leadership by a central government agency.Conclusions: There are opportunities for more strategic public health engagement with the economic sector to foster strong nutrition-related fiscal policy for non-communicable disease prevention in the region.