"Part of the Solution": Food Corporation Strategies for Regulatory Capture and Legitimacy

Public-Private Partnerships in Mexico: Implications of Engaging With the Food and Beverage Industry for Public Health Nutrition

BACKGROUND

In the last few years, Mexico adopted public health policies to tackle non-communicable diseases (NCDs), such as front of package nutrition labelling, food marketing restrictions to children, and a soda tax. In parallel, transnational food and beverage industries (F&BIs), their allies, and the government have agreed on public-private partnerships (PPPs) to implement policies or deliver programs. However, research has questioned the benefits of PPPs and exposed its limitations as a suitable mechanism to improve public health. This study analyses how four PPPs between the Mexican government, the F&BI, and allies are working to achieve their goals. We critically assessed the objectives, scope, reported impacts, governance principles and perceived risks and benefits for the public health agenda of these PPPs.

METHODS

This qualitative study is based on 26 interviews with key actors, and 170 publicly available documents, including 22 obtained through freedom of information (FOI) requests related to four purposively selected PPPs aiming to improve health.

RESULTS

We found that the four PPPs studied had minimal public information available on their implementation and impact. The private partners tend to dictate the design, information management, and implementation of the programs, while promoting their brands. Few independent evaluations of the PPPs exist, and none reported on their effectiveness or public health benefits. Good governance principles, such as accountability, transparency, fairness, participation, integrity, and credibility, were barely followed in each of the cases studied. Public officials did not automatically question the conflict of interest (CoI) of such arrangements. When there were COI, the potential risks these posed did not always outweigh the financial benefits of working with the F&BI and its allies.

CONCLUSION

The four PPPs studied produced minimal gains for public health while boosting credibility for the participating transnational F&BIs. It shows the lack of awareness of how these PPPs might be hindering public health gains.

Corporate interest groups and their implications for global food governance: mapping and analysing the global corporate influence network of the transnational ultra-processed food industry

BACKGROUND

A major challenge to transforming food systems to promote human health and sustainable development is the global rise in the manufacture and consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPFs). A key driver of this dietary transition is the globalization of UPF corporations, and their organized corporate political activity (CPA) intended to counter opposition and block government regulation. UPF industry CPA and the corporate interest groups who lobby on their behalf have been well described at the national level, however, at the global level, this network has not been systematically characterized. This study aims to map, analyse, and describe this network, and discuss the implications for global food policy action on UPFs, global food governance (GFG), and food systems transformation.

METHODS

We conducted a network analysis of the declared interest group memberships of the world's leading UPF corporations, extracted from web sources, company reports, and relevant academic and grey literature. Data on the characteristics of these interest groups were further extracted for analysis, including year founded, level, type, and headquarter location.

RESULTS

We identified 268 interest groups affiliated with the UPF industry. The UPF manufacturers Nestlé (n = 171), The Coca-Cola Company (n = 147), Unilever (n = 142), PepsiCo (n = 138), and Danone (n = 113) had the greatest number of memberships, indicating strong centrality in coordinating the network. We found that this network operates at all levels, yet key actors now predominantly coordinate globally through multistakeholder channels in GFG. The most common interest group types were sustainability/corporate social responsibility/multistakeholder initiatives, followed by branding and advertising, and food manufacturing and retail. Most corporate interest groups are headquartered where they can access powerful government and GFG decision-makers, nearly one-third in Washington DC and Brussels, and the rest in capital cities of major national markets for UPFs.

CONCLUSIONS

The UPF industry, and especially its leading corporations, coordinate a global network of interest groups spanning multiple levels, jurisdictions, and governance spaces. This represents a major structural feature of global food and health governance systems, which arguably poses major challenges for actions to attenuate the harms of UPFs, and to realising of healthy and sustainable food systems.

An Empirical Study of Regulatory Capture in Kenya's Maize Seed Sector

In sub-Saharan Africa, public sector breeding programs depend on local seed companies to deliver new maize varieties to farmers. Such varieties are needed to adapt cropping systems to climate change. While dozens of small and medium seed companies have emerged in the last two decades, the maize seed market in Kenya remains dominated by the parastatal seed company Kenya Seed Company, with multinational seed companies making major inroads. We assess whether parastatal and multinational seed companies have captured Kenya's seed laws to the detriment of local small and medium seed companies ('regulatory capture'), negatively effecting competition and the capacity of local companies to introduce new varieties in the hybrid maize seed market. We conducted in-depth interviews based on legal clauses with maize seed companies active in Kenya, as well as interviews with regulators and stakeholders. Results show that local companies do not feel disadvantaged compared to their multinational counterparts or the parastatal. However, all of them are wary of the entry of new actors. Moreover, through excessive procedures, the Kenyan government keeps a sovereign grasp over the seed sector. Despite frustrations with some of these excessive procedures, seed companies felt comfortable in the protective environment of the Kenyan seed market and were generally happy with the technical aspects of Kenya's seed laws, which are based on international norms. We suggest some improvements to make Kenyan seed laws more conducive to varietal turnover, in line with seed companies' suggestions and taking into account the political sensitivities of the Kenyan government.

What is the purpose of ultra-processed food? An exploratory analysis of the financialisation of ultra-processed food corporations and implications for public health

BACKGROUND

In recent decades there has been a global rise in consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPFs) to the detriment of population health and the environment. Large corporations that have focused heavily on low-cost manufacturing and extensive marketing of UPFs to maximise profits have driven this dietary transition. The same corporations claim to serve the interests of multiple 'stakeholders', and that they are contributing to sustainable development. This paper aimed to test these claims by examining the degree to which UPF corporations have become 'financialised', focusing on the extent to which they have prioritised the financial interests of their shareholders relative to other actors, as well as the role that various types of investors have played in influencing their governance. Findings were used to inform discussion on policy responses to improve the healthiness of population diets.

METHODS

We adopted an exploratory research design using multiple methods. We conducted quantitative analysis of the financial data of U.S. listed food and agricultural corporations between 1962 and 2021, share ownership data of a selection of UPF corporations, and proxy voting data of a selection of investors between 2012 and 2022. We also conducted targeted narrative reviews using structured and branching searches of academic and grey literature.

RESULTS

Since the 1980s, corporations that depend heavily on manufacturing and marketing UPFs to generate profits have been increasingly transferring money to their shareholders relative to their total revenue, and at a level considerably higher than other food and agricultural sectors. In recent years, large hedge fund managers have had a substantial influence on the governance of major UPF corporations in their pursuit of maximising short-term returns. In comparison, shareholders seeking to take steps to improve population diets have had limited influence, in part because large asset managers mostly oppose public health-related shareholder proposals.

CONCLUSIONS

The operationalisation of 'shareholder primacy' by major UPF corporations has driven inequity and undermines their claims that they are creating 'value' for diverse actors. Measures that protect population diets and food systems from the extractive forces of financialisation are likely needed as part of efforts to improve the healthiness of population diets.

Policy networks and competing interests in the development of the Mexican sugar-sweetened beverages tax

INTRODUCTION

Sugar taxes threaten the business models and profits of the food and beverage industry (F&BI), which has sought to avert, delay or influence the content of health taxes globally. Mexico introduced a sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) tax in 2014 and other regulatory measures to improve population diets. This paper examines how policy networks emerged within and affected the development and implementation of the Mexican SSB tax.

METHODS

This qualitative study analyses 31 interviews conducted with key stakeholders involved in the soda tax policy process and 145 documents, including grey literature and peer-reviewed literature. The policy network approach was used to map contacts, interconnections, relationships and links between the state, civil society and commercial actors involved in the SSB tax. These findings were used to examine the responsiveness, participation and accountability of the soda tax policy formulation.

RESULTS

Complex interconnections were identified between state and non-state actors. These included advisory relationships, financial collaborations and personal connections between those in high-level positions. Relationships between the government and the F&BI were not always disclosed. International organisations and academics were identified as key financial or technical supporters of the tax. Key governance principles of participation, responsiveness and accountability were undermined by some of these relationships, including the participation of non-state actors in policy development and the powerful role of the F&BI in evaluation and monitoring.

CONCLUSION

This case study exemplifies the importance of links and networks between actors in health policymaking. The F&BI influence endangers the primary aim of the SSB tax to protect health. The identified links highlight the normalisation of connections among actors with competing aims and interests toward health, thereby jeopardising attempts to tackle obesity rates.

Marketing Responses to the Taxation of Soft Drinks Comment on "Understanding Marketing Responses to a Tax on Sugary Drinks: A Qualitative Interview Study in the United Kingdom, 2019"

The paper by Forde et al provides a useful qualitative consideration of marketing responses to the implementation of the 2018 Soft Drinks Industry Levy (SDIL) in the United Kingdom. This commentary discusses that paper and its conclusions and seeks to place them in a broader context for marketing, fiscal measures and health and public policy. It suggests that modern conceptualisations of marketing and wider considerations of market and non-market strategies could provide a valuable lens to understand the ways in which companies and sectors respond to the threats they perceive and the constantly changing sectoral opportunities. It is important that fiscal measures introduced have the desired effects, and that not only positive behaviours (whether of companies or consumers) are incentivised, but that adverse behaviours are actively disincentivised.

Power and Other Commercial Determinants of Health: An Empirical Study of the Australian Food, Alcohol, and Gambling Industries

BACKGROUND

Commercial determinants of health (CDoH) represent a critical frame for exploring undue corporate and commercial influence over health. Power lenses are integral to understanding CDoH. Impacts of food, alcohol, and gambling industries are observable CDoH outcomes. This study aims to inform understanding of the systems and institutions of commercial and/or corporate forces working within the Australian food, alcohol, and gambling industries that influence health and well-being, including broader discourses materialised via these systems and institutions.

METHODS

Twenty semi-structured interviews were conducted with key-informants on Australian public policy processes. Interviewees were current and former politicians, political staff members, regulators and other public servants, industry representatives, lobbyists, journalists, and researchers with expertise and experience of the Australian food, alcohol, and/ or gambling industries. Interviews sought participants' perceptions of Australian food, alcohol, and gambling industries' similarities and differences, power and influence, relationships, and intervention opportunities and needs.

RESULTS

Strategies and tactics used by Australian food, alcohol and gambling industries are similar, and similar to those of the tobacco industry. They wield considerable soft (eg, persuasive, preference-shaping) and hard (eg, coercive, political, and legal/economic) power. Perceptions of this power differed considerably according to participants' backgrounds. Participants framed their understanding of necessary interventions using orthodox neoliberal discourses, including limiting the role of government, emphasising education, consumer freedom, and personal choice.

CONCLUSION

Food, alcohol, and gambling industries exercise powerful influences in Australian public policy processes, affecting population health and well-being. Per Wood and colleagues' framework, these manifest corporate, social, and ecological outcomes, and represent considerable instrumental, structural, and discursive power. We identify power as arising from discourse and material resources alike, along with relationships and complex industry networks. Addressing power is essential for reducing CDoH harms. Disrupting orthodox discourses and ideologies underpinning this should be a core focus of public health (PH) advocates and researchers alike.

Corporate Harm Minimisation: Promises and Perils Comment on "Understanding Marketing Responses to a Tax on Sugary Drinks: A Qualitative Interview Study in the United Kingdom, 2019"

Taxes on sugary drinks are often used to encourage companies to reformulate their products to reduce the sugar content. This comment discusses how product reformulation can strengthen the market and political power of the food industry, and questions whether these political risks outweigh the public health benefits. It proposes the term 'corporate harm minimisation' to describe the strategic adaptation of a public health harm reduction strategy to align with company or industry goals. It concludes by reflecting on the other ways that corporations influence health beyond the production and marketing of 'unhealthy commodities,' and why public health actors must explore other strategies to challenge powerful corporations.

The Foundations of Corporate Strategies Comment on "'Part of the Solution': Food Corporation Strategies for Regulatory Capture and Legitimacy"

The "Part of the Solution" article describes how the food industry has evolved its strategies to respond to critics and government regulation by co-option and appeasement to create a less hostile environment. Rather than focusing research on single industries it would be more efficient and productive to focus on corporate political activities (CPAs) that directly influence democratic institutions and processes having authority over laws, policy, rules and regulations that govern industry. The most influential and direct CPA are election campaign donations, lobbying, and the reverse revolving door (RRD). In the United States those CPA flow from rights of corporations that underlie all industry strategies. The US history of how corporations obtained their rights is described, and research about the affirmative effects of those three CPA is summarized. Health research is needed about those CPA and their effects on health law, policy and regulation in the United States and other nations.

Situating Food Industry Influence: Governance Norms and Economic Order Comment on "'Part of the Solution': Food Corporation Strategies for Regulatory Capture and Legitimacy"

Lacy-Nichols and Williams provide important new insights into the ongoing contest over policy space and consumer behavior. I attempt to situate these insights in relation to government mandates and governance norms and situate these norms and mandates in the prevailing economic order. This approach is necessary to understand how corporate practices persist and why governments are receptive to the approaches outlined in the analysis conducted by Lacy-Nichols and Williams. This approach can help explain why governments are often receptive to corporations positioning themselves as 'part of the solution'. Governments want strong economies and big food positions itself as contributor to this end. The point I attempt to articulate is that we often conceive of corporate power as power over, while I suggest that corporate power is rather power within and through a system that is oriented towards profits and economic growth.

Applying a Commercial Determinants of Health Lens to Understand, Expose and Counter Industry Co-option, Appeasement and Partnership Comment on "'Part of the Solution': Food Corporation Strategies for Regulatory Capture and Legitimacy"

Lacy-Nichols and Williams' examination of the food industry illustrates how it altered its approach from mostly oppositional to regulation to one of appeasement and co-option. This reflection builds upon this by using a commercial determinants of health (CDoH) lens to understand, expose and counter industry co-option, appeasement and partnership strategies that impact public health. Lessons learned from tobacco reveal how tobacco companies maintained public credibility by recruiting scientists to produce industry biased data, co-opting public health groups, gaining access to policy elites and sitting on important government regulatory bodies. Potential counter solutions to food industry appeasement and co-option include (i) understanding corporate actions of health harming industries, (ii) applying mechanisms to minimize industry engagement, (iii) dissecting industry relationship building, and (iv) exposing the negative effects of public private partnerships (PPPs). Such counter-solutions might help to neutralise harmful industry practices, products and policies which currently threaten to undermine healthy food policies.

Responding to Food Industry Initiatives to Be "Part of the Solution" Comment on "'Part of the Solution': Food Corporation Strategies for Regulatory Capture and Legitimacy"

In response to growing concerns about chronic diseases, food insecurity, low-wage food labor, and global warming, the food industry has developed new strategies to respond to its critics and pursue its business and political goals. As Lacy-Nicholas and Williams described in a recent review, the food industry has expanded its repertoire from opposition to critics to appeasement, co-option, and partnerships.1 Defining themselves as "part of the solution," the food industry seeks to disarm its opponents, shift policy debates to favor its interests, or delay decisions that jeopardize its profits or power. This commentary explores how health professionals, can respond to this changing repertoire. Lessons from previous campaigns to control harmful industry practices,2 suggest that no single strategy will counter changing food industry efforts to achieve its goals. Thus, advocates must consider a portfolio of approaches that can be deployed in response to changing circumstances, industry tactics, and threats to health.

A World Beyond Transnational Corporations: Meeting Human Rather Than Corporate Need Comment on "'Part of the Solution': Food Corporation Strategies for Regulatory Capture and Legitimacy"

This paper provides a commentary on Lacy-Nichols and Williams' analysis of the emerging tactics of the ultraprocessed food transnational corporations (TNCs). Our paper provides an overview of the growth in power and influence of TNCs in the past three decades and considers how this change impacts on health and health equity. We examine how wealth inequities have increased dramatically and how many of the health harms are externalised to governments or individuals. We argue that human interests and corporate interests differ. The article concludes with a consideration of alternative ways of organising an economy that are more human centred and health promoting. We suggest five changes are required: improved measurement of economic outputs beyond gross domestic product (GDP); improved regulation of finance and TNCs; development of localised economic models including cooperatives; reversal of privatisations; making the reduction of economic inequalities a goal of financial policy. We consider the barriers to these changes happening.

Trust, but Verify Comment on "'Part of the Solution': Food Corporation Strategies for Regulatory Capture and Legitimacy"

According to Lacy-Nichols and Williams, the food industry is increasingly forestalling regulation with incremental concessions and co-option of policy-making discourses and processes; bolstering their legitimacy via partnerships with credible stakeholders; and disarming critics by amending their product portfolios whilst maintaining high sales volumes and profits. Their assessment raises a number of fundamental philosophical questions that we must address in order to form an appropriate public health response: is it appropriate to treat every act of corporate citizenship with cynicism? If voluntary action leads to better health outcomes, does it matter whether profits are preserved? How should we balance any short-term benefits from industry-led reforms against the longer-term risk stemming from corporate capture of policy-making networks? I argue for a nuanced approach, focused on carefully defined health outcomes; allowing corporations the benefit of the doubt, but implementing robust binding measures the moment voluntary actions fail to meet independently set objectives.

Reaching consensus on definitions for food and physical activity policies: experience from the Policy Evaluation Network

BACKGROUND

An upsurge in policy evaluation research within public health sciences has led to multi-disciplinary research networks like the 'Policy Evaluation Network' (PEN). This multi-disciplinary collaboration highlighted the need for consensus on clear, common terminology and definitions to facilitate the multi-disciplinary research. This article outlines the development process of the PEN definitions glossary tool, with a focus on the key domains of policy design, implementation and outcomes as they apply to physical activity, sedentary behaviour and dietary behaviours.

METHODS

A project specific participatory process was undertaken, involving PEN researchers (n = 48) from seven European countries across various disciplinary backgrounds. All involved researchers were invited to identify and collate definitions that were commonly used in their research field. Terms and definitions were discussed and debated during three online workshops. Subsequently, the definitions were discussed and refined until consensus was reached.

RESULTS

Consensus definitions for 93 terms related to the evaluation of policy design, implementation and outcomes are provided. Consensus was reached on a range of terms where the terms were understood and used differently across represented disciplines (e.g. 'Outcome' and 'Impact'). A conceptual 'Inter-relations in policy-related concepts' diagram was developed to enable navigation through an online database with key terms.

CONCLUSIONS

The definitions resulting from this participatory process has supported PEN researchers and practitioners across disciplines to reach a shared understanding of different terms related to policy evaluation. Thus, providing a platform for avoiding conflicting use of the same terms in differing contexts over the course of the PEN work programme, facilitating clear and consistent communication, and allowing for clarity within collaborative multi-disciplinary projects and in public-facing messages.

Framing Political Issues in Food System Transformative Changes

The paper addresses political issues related to policy interventions for food system sustainability. It presents the results of a literature review, which explores how the concept of power has been used so far by scholars of food system dynamics. Articles numbering 116 were subjected to an in-depth qualitative analysis, which allowed the identification of three main strands of the literature with respect to food and power issues: (1) marketing and industrial organisation literature, dealing with the economic power exercised by economic actors in contexts of noncompetitive market structures; (2) articles addressing the power issue from a political economy perspective and by using an interdisciplinary approach; (3) heterogenous studies. The results of the review witness a growing interest for the analysis of food systems, political issues, and the need of a wider use of analytical tools and concepts offered by social sciences for the study of power in sustainability policy design.

The corporate influence on food charity and aid: The "Hunger Industrial Complex" and the death of welfare

There is an existing literature on how food companies, including the unhealthy food commodity industries, influence policy through a number of approaches. Direct approaches include lobbying and funding of research. Backdoor or indirect tactics used by food companies to demonstrate engagement include funding community groups, tactics previously used by the tobacco industry. Food industry support for food charities engaged in food donations is an area that has not received attention. This is another backdoor approach and one which may compromise more general public health policy. It is no surprise that the companies that engage in this can be largely fall under the rubric of unhealthy food commodity industries. This link is sometimes referred to as the "hunger industrial complex" and is based on the argument that an alliance exists between the food industry and the food banking movement. With rising levels of food insecurity there is pressure on the food system to donate food to charitable enterprises such as food banks and soups kitchens, which is often encouraged by government policy such as "Good Samaritan legislation". Food businesses contribute surplus food and often promote it as part of their corporate social responsibility agenda. The argument presented here is not an anti-food charity one but one which challenges the development of charitable food aid as a system and a replacement for public policy. The reasons for this can be summarized under three headings: (1) such donation systems compromise the wider application of public food welfare and give the impression that food poverty is being addressed; (2) the links with food corporations provide a backdoor for influence on wider food policies; and (3) researchers taking money from food charities may be compromised by the direct and indirect relationships with companies. The focus in this paper is on the latter two issues; the first will be established as a context with work we have published elsewhere. This article draws on examples from the UK of how charities have linked with chocolate and soft drink companies. Examples include: "For every Easter egg bought on the Cadbury Worldwide Hide, Cadbury will donate an Easter egg to a food bank in our network"; a Coca-Cola initiative in December 2021 "Win a meal, give a meal on-pack competition across Coca-Cola Original Taste and Coca-Cola Zero Sugar consumption packs, giving consumers the chance to win food-related vouchers, while donating to FareShare"; and an October 2021 initiative where "McDonald's joins forces with FareShare to fund 1 million meals for UK families". These relationships go beyond companies donating surplus food to food charities such as food banks and pantries to encouraging consumers to buy their products with the promise that the company will contribute products to such charities or provide cash donations in return for the purchase of their product.

Design and Implementation of a Workshop for Evaluation of the Role of Power in Shaping and Solving Challenges in a Smart Foodshed

Current studies on data sharing via data commons or shared vocabularies using ontologies mainly focus on developing the infrastructure for data sharing yet little attention has been paid to the role of power in data sharing among food system stakeholders. Stakeholders within food systems have different interpretations of the types and magnitudes of their own and other’s level of power to solve food system challenges. Politically neutral, yet scientifically/socioeconomically accurate power classification systems are yet to be developed, and must be capable of enumerating and characterizing what power means to each stakeholder, existing power dynamics within the food system, as well as alternative forms of power not currently utilized to their full capacity. This study describes the design and implementation of a workshop, which used methods from community-based participatory modeling, to examine the role of power relative to data sharing and equitable health outcomes. Workshop participants co-created several boundary objects that described the power relationships among food system stakeholders and the changes needed to current power relationships. Our results highlight current imbalances in power relationships among food system stakeholders. The information we collected on specific relationships among broad categories of stakeholders highlighted needs for initiatives and activities to increase the types and varieties of power especially across consumers, farmers, and labor stakeholder groups. Furthermore, by utilizing this workshop methodology, food system stakeholders may be able to envision new power relationships and bring about a fundamental re-orienting of current power relationships capable of valorizing food system sustainability/resiliency, especially the health of its workers and consumers.

Maximising the wealth of few at the expense of the health of many: a public health analysis of market power and corporate wealth and income distribution in the global soft drink market

Background

Many of the harms created by the global soft drink industry that directly influence human and planetary health are well documented. However, some of the ways in which the industry indirectly affects population health, via various socio-economic pathways, have received less attention. This paper aimed to analyse the extent to which market power and corporate wealth and income distribution in the global soft drink market negatively impact public health and health equity. In doing so, the paper sought to contribute to the development of a broad-based public health approach to market analysis. A range of dimensions (e.g., market concentration; financial performance; corporate wealth and income distribution) and indicators (e.g., Herfindahl Hirschman Index; earnings relative to the industry average; effective tax rates; and shareholder value ratios) were descriptively analysed. Empirical focus was placed on the two dominant global soft drink manufacturers.

Results

Coca-Cola Co, and, to a lesser extent, PepsiCo, operate across an extensive patchwork of highly concentrated markets. Both corporations control vast amounts of wealth and resources, and are able to allocate relatively large amounts of money to potentially harmful practices, such as extensive marketing of unhealthy products. Over recent decades, the proportion of wealth and income transferred by these firms to their shareholders has increased substantially; whereas the proportion of wealth and income redistributed by these two firms to the public via income taxes has considerably decreased. Meanwhile, the distribution of soft drink consumption is becoming increasingly skewed towards population groups in low and middle-income countries (LMICs).

Conclusions

Market power and corporate wealth and income distribution in the global soft drink market likely compound the market’s maldistribution of harms, and indirectly influence health by contributing to social and economic inequalities. Indeed, a ‘double burden of maldistribution’ pattern can be seen, wherein the wealth of the shareholders of the market’s dominant corporations, a group over-represented by a small and wealthy elite, is maximised largely at the expense of the welfare of LMICs and lower socioeconomic groups in high-income countries. If this pattern continues, the appropriate role of the global soft drink market as part of sustainable economic development will require rethinking.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12992-021-00781-6.

The Political Economy of Healthy and Sustainable Food Systems: An Introduction to a Special Issue

Today's food systems are contributing to multiple intersecting health and ecological crises. Many are now calling for transformative, or even radical, food systems change. Our starting assumption in this Special Issue is the broad claim that the transformative changes being called for in a global food system in crisis cannot - and ultimately will not - be achieved without intense scrutiny of and changes in the underlying political economies that drive today's food systems. The aim is to draw from diverse disciplinary perspectives to critically evaluate the political economy of food systems, understand key challenges, and inform new thinking and action. We received 19 contributions covering a diversity of country contexts and perspectives, and revealing inter-connected challenges and opportunities for realising the transformation agenda. We find that a number of important changes in food governance and power relations have occurred in recent decades, with a displacement of power in four directions. First, upwards as globalization has given rise to more complex and globally integrated food systems governed increasingly by transnational food corporations (TFCs) and international financial actors. Second, downwards as urbanization and decentralization of authority in many countries gives cities and sub-national actors more prominence in food governance. Third, outwards with a greater role for corporate and civil society actors facilitated by an expansion of food industry power, and increasing preferences for market-orientated and multi-stakeholder forms of governance. Finally, power has also shifted inwards as markets have become increasingly concentrated through corporate strategies to gain market power within and across food supply chain segments. The transformation of food systems will ultimately require greater scrutiny of these challenges. Technical 'problem-solving' and overly-circumscribed policy approaches that depoliticise food systems challenges, are insufficient to generate the change we need, within the narrow time-frame we have. While there will be many paths to transformation, rights-based and commoning approaches hold great promise, based on principles of participation, accountability and non-discrimination, alongside coalition building and social mobilization, including social movements grounded in food sovereignty and agroecology.