UK Food Policy & Nutrition: Tracking

ProgressStrengthening accountability systems for nutrition in the UK

Foodfoundation.org.uk

Today’s speakers

@Food_Foundation

Lawrence HaddadSenior Research Fellow

IFPRI@l_haddad

Inge KauerExecutive DirectorAccess to Nutrition

@ingekauer

Boyd Swinburn - KeynoteProf. of Population,

Nutrition and Global HealthUniversity of Auckland

@BoydSwinburn

Fiona WatsonConsultant

The Food Foundation@Food_Foundation

Today’s panellists

@Food_Foundation

Lord Chris Haskins

Andrew OpieDirector of Food and Sustainability

British Retail Consortium @the_brc

Jo RallingCampaign Director

Jamie Oliver Food Foundation@FoodRev

Guy Poppy Chief Scientific Advisor Food Standards Agency

@GuyPoppy1

Corinna Hawkes - ChairProf. of Food Policy

City University London@CorinnaHawkes

www.foodfoundation.org.uk

What is the food environment?The collective physical, economic, policy and sociocultural surroundings, opportunities and conditions that influence people’s food and beverage choices and nutritional status.

  

1. Analys

e conte

xt

2. Collect releva

nt info.

3. Evidence ground policies

and actions

4. Validate evidence with govt

officials

5. Rate govt

policies and

actions

6. Weight, sum &

calculate Food-EPI scores

7. Qualify, comme

nt & recommend

8. Translate results for govt & stake-holders

Methods

DomainsPOLICY

3. Promotion

2. Labelling 9. Governance

4. Prices

6. Retail

5. Provision

8. Leadership

INFRASTRUTURE1. Composition

7. Trade & Investment

12. Platforms for Interaction

11. Funding & Resources

10. Monitoring & Intelligence

13. Health in All Policies

1. FOOD COMPOSITION: There are government systems implemented to ensure that, where practicable, processed foods minimise the energy density and the nutrients of concern.

1.1 Food composition targets/standards have been established by the government for the content of unhealthy nutrients of concern in certain foods or food groups if they are major contributors to population intakes of these nutrients.

Good Practice Statements

Food Epi in the UK•Approach of current government:

- Dependence on individual choice - Voluntary control of the companies- Transfer of responsibility to local authorities

RESULT = http://www.legislation.gov.uk/

Katie in the UK

Minsŏ in South Korea Fatemeh in Iran

Some restrictions on advertising HFSS food and

drink on TV since 2008.

Advertising

Ban on soft drinks advertised on TV

since 2004.

Restrictions on advertising specific categories of food

during children’s TV, radio and internet

since 2010.

Katie in the UK

Daniela in Ecuador

Voluntary ‘Traffic light’ labelling on FOP lables

since 2010.

Labelling

Mandatory ‘traffic light’ labelling on packaged

food for fat, sugar and salt since 2014.

Victoria in AustraliaRestaurant chains required to display calorie content of food products on

their menu boards.

Katie in the UK

Crystal in Barbados

No sugar tax (yet)

Tax

Excise tax (10%) on sugary drinks introduced in August 2015

Esztera in HungaryTax (varying rates) adopted in

2012 on ready-to-eat HFSS foods

Katie in the UK

Frida in Denmark

School food regulations implemented. Milk, and fruit & veg for young

children.

School food

Fruit & veg daily for school children introduced in 2009.

Sigrid in EstoniaRestrictions on HFSS, sweet

treats and soft drinks in schools since 2008.

Brazil

Governance

• Multi-sectoral coordination

• Personal ownership and leadership from

President• Strong participation from

civil society• Private sector

engagement

Food Standards Agency

Dept. of

Health

DEFRA

Food Standards Agency

Dept. of Local

Communities

TreasuryHMRC

DEFRA

Local Authorities England

1. Analys

e conte

xt

2. Collect releva

nt info.

3. Evidence ground policies

and actions

4. Validate evidence with govt

officials

5. Rate govt

policies and

actions

6. Weight, sum &

calculate Food-EPI scores

7. Qualify, comme

nt & recommend

8. Translate results for govt & stake-holders

Next Steps for Food Epi in the UK

We are here• Partners?

• Devolved areas?

• Food environment or food system?

2016 GLOBAL ACCESS TO NUTRITION INDEX

FOOD FOUNDATION

LONDON, 10 FEBRUARY 2016

#ATNI2016

@ATNIndex

18

Encourage improvements in companies’ policies, practices and performance to result in:• Greater consumer access to more nutritious foods and beverages• An environment facilitating the consumption of healthier foods and beverages

InvestorsProvide context for company engagementMediaRaise profile of industry role in malnutrition

Civil societyFacilitate effective advocacy

PolicymakersInform regulatory and policy agenda

AcademicsStimulate research on best practices

Provide companies a tool for benchmarking their nutrition

practices

Serve as an impartial source of information for interested

stakeholders

Stimulate dialogue

and action

Given its size and reach, the private sector can make a significant contribution to addressing obesity and undernutrition.

ATNI seeks to

Tool for accountabilit

y

What ATNF aims to achieve – our theory of change

The private sector can play a powerful role….

19

… and has a financial and social responsibility to act

20

2016 Global Index methodology

21

2016 Global Index methodology

22

Overall ranking

• Unilever leads the Index, with a score of 6.4 out of 10

• Nestlé and Danone also remain in the top three, as in 2013

• Mars (16 to 5) & FrieslandCampina (19 to 8) have improved the most

• Eight have risen, six fallen, five stayed the same, three new entrants.

Overall findings

23

The world’s largest food companies must step up efforts to address the global nutrition crisis – investors can play a key role

• Some companies have made improvements but the industry as a whole is moving too slowly: the average score has only increased to 2.5 from 2.2 in the 2013 Index

• All companies must invest more in embedding nutrition into their global businesses– To tackle obesity, they should adopt stronger nutrition strategies and

policies and use robust systems to measure the nutritional value of all of their products and make their foods healthier, among other things

– To tackle undernutrition, they must invest within their businesses and work with governments and civil society to find innovative ways of providing affordable and accessible foods for poorer people

• Companies must take a global approach; US companies particularly must not just focus on their home markets, as they typically do

• The marketing practices of all six of the baby food manufacturers evaluated in a new element of the assessment fall short of international standards, undermining breastfeeding which is the optimal form of nutrition for infants

24

Category B - Products• Unilever leads with significant margin over Nestlé

• Higher ranking than in 2013: FrieslandCampina, Mars and Ferrero

• Lower ranking: Kellogg’s and ConAgra

• Inadequate efforts to improve products’ nutritional quality

• Nutrient Profiling system: only 13 companies report having one

• % of products that can be advertised to children• Proxy for healthiness of product portfolio• Only Danone and Unilever provided data

• Fortification of products to tackle undernutrition • Only Ajinomoto, Danone, FrieslandCampina,

Mondelez, Nestlé, Coca-Cola and Unilever have formulated a commitment

25

Category D - Marketing• Highest-scoring Category, Danone leads.

• Marketing to all consumers 7 companies without evidence of a responsible marketing policy

• Marketing to children • Most companies subscribing to self-regulatory

pledges • But significant gaps remain in pledges

• Not applied to all media• Do not cover over 12s• Audience threshold for children 35%

• Definition of marketability to children• Only Kellogg, Ferrero, Danone, Nestlé

and Unilever use a robust NPS

• GLOBAL policies on responsible marketing to children and adults, applied to all channels, particularly new media, are required.

• No data on marketing spending on healthy products

Categories C, E, F and G – average scores very low

26

Category C: Accessibility and affordability

Category E: Support for healthy and active lifestyles

• Most companies engage with nutrition stakeholders but unclear whether and how they use the results to improve policies and practice

• Very little engagement on undernutrition

• Much more transparency is needed on companies’ lobbying activities on nutrition

• Critical issue• Lowest scoring Category on the

Index, as in 2013.

• Companies expected to do much more to make healthy foods in developed and developing markets more affordable and more accessible.

• Generally a low-scoring Category• Employee wellness programs need to

be strengthened and extended• More focus needed on supporting

breastfeeding mothers at work• Companies need to move to

supporting independently designed and implemented programs to support consumers

Category F: Labelling and claims

• Back-of-pack labelling commitments reasonably good; generally not globally consistent and some key nutrients missed

• Lack of data from companies on extent of policy roll-out

• Focus needs to be on useful front-of-pack labelling and responsible use of health and nutrition claims. Category G: Engagement with

stakeholders and policymakers

27

Discussion

• Strengthen the UK country profile in the Global Nutrition Report (UK Government to make available relevant data)

• Complete the Food EPI exercise for the UK (Food Foundation to convene a workshop of experts to assess the UK Government’s level of implementation of policies and infrastructure support against international best practice for improving the healthiness of food environments)

• Conduct a Access to Nutrition Index for the UK that scores and rates the largest Food & Beverage manufacturers (ATNI to include the UK as a ‘Spotlight Country’).

www.foodfoundation.org.uk