Skip to main content
main-content

01.12.2017 | Research | Ausgabe 1/2017 Open Access

Globalization and Health 1/2017

Controlling corporate influence in health policy making? An assessment of the implementation of article 5.3 of the World Health Organization framework convention on tobacco control

Zeitschrift:
Globalization and Health > Ausgabe 1/2017
Autoren:
Gary Jonas Fooks, Julia Smith, Kelley Lee, Chris Holden
Wichtige Hinweise

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.​1186/​s12992-017-0234-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Abstract

Background

The World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) stands to significantly reduce tobacco-related mortality by accelerating the introduction of evidence-based tobacco control measures. However, the extent to which States Parties have implemented the Convention varies considerably. Article 5.3 of the FCTC, is intended to insulate policy-making from the tobacco industry’s political influence, and aims to address barriers to strong implementation of the Convention associated with tobacco industry political activity. This paper quantitatively assesses implementation of Article 5.3’s Guidelines for Implementation, evaluates the strength of Parties’ efforts to implement specific recommendations, and explores how different approaches to implementation expose the policy process to continuing industry influence.

Methods

We cross-referenced a broad range of documentary data (including FCTC Party reports and World Bank data on the governance of conflicts of interest in public administration) against Article 5.3 implementation guidelines (n = 24) for 155 Parties, and performed an in-depth thematic analysis to examine the strength of implementation for specific recommendations.

Results

Across all Parties, 16% of guideline recommendations reviewed have been implemented. Eighty-three percent of Parties that have taken some action under Article 5.3 have introduced less than a third of the guidelines. Most compliance with the guidelines is achieved through pre-existing policy instruments introduced independently of the FCTC, which rarely cover all relevant policy actors and fall short of the guideline recommendations. Measures introduced in response to the FCTC are typically restricted to health ministries and not explicit about third parties acting on behalf of the industry. Parties systematically overlook recommendations that facilitate industry monitoring.

Conclusion

Highly selective and incomplete implementation of specific guideline recommendations facilitates extensive ongoing opportunities for industry policy influence. Stronger commitment to implementation is required to ensure consistently strong compliance with the FCTC internationally.
Zusatzmaterial
Additional file 1: Table S1. Guidelines for Implementation of Article 5.3 of the FCTC (abridged). Table S2. Implementation by Recommendation (all Parties in sample). Table S3. Implementation by Recommendation (Parties that have taken some steps in accordance with Article 5.3). Table S4. Awareness Raising (Recommendations 1.1, 1.2 and 6.1). Table S5. Restricting Access to Policymakers (Recommendation 2.1). Table S6. Protocols for Industry-Government Interactions (Recommendation 2.1). Table S7. Transparency in Industry Government Interactions (Recommendation 2.2). Table S8. Partnerships and Strategic Self-regulations (Recommendations 3.1-3.3). Table S9. Policy Subsidies (Recommendations 3.4). Table S10. Prohibition of Sponsorship. (DOCX 586 kb)
12992_2017_234_MOESM1_ESM.docx
Literatur
Über diesen Artikel

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2017

Globalization and Health 1/2017 Zur Ausgabe