What arguments and from whom are most influential in shaping public health policy: thematic content analysis of responses to a public consultation on the regulation of television food advertising to children in the UK.

Ahmed Razavi, J Adams, Martin White
Author Information
  1. Ahmed Razavi: MRC Epidemiology Unit, Cambridge, UK. ORCID
  2. J Adams: Centre for Diet and Activity Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. ORCID
  3. Martin White: Centre for Diet and Activity Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We explore one aspect of the decision making process-public consultation on policy proposals by a national regulatory body-aiming to understand how public health policy development is influenced by different stakeholders.
DESIGN: We used thematic content analysis to explore responses to a national consultation on the regulation of television advertising of foods high in fat, salt and sugar aimed at children.
SETTING: UK.
RESULTS: 139 responses from key stakeholder groups were analysed to determine how they influenced the regulator's initial proposals for advertising restrictions. The regulator's priorities were questioned throughout the consultation process by public health stakeholders. The eventual restrictions implemented were less strict in many ways than those originally proposed. These changes appeared to be influenced most by commercial, rather than public health, stakeholders.
CONCLUSIONS: Public health policy making appears to be considered as a balance between commercial and public health interests. Tactics such as the questioning and reframing of scientific evidence may be used. In this example, exploring the development of policy regulating television food advertising to children, commercial considerations appear to have led to a watering down of initial regulatory proposals, with proposed packages not including the measures public health advocates considered to be the most effective. This seems likely to have compromised the ultimate public health effectiveness of the regulations eventually implemented.

Keywords

References

  1. CMAJ. 2003 Jun 10;168(12):1585 [PMID: 12796354]
  2. Annu Rev Public Health. 2009;30:211-25 [PMID: 18976142]
  3. PLoS Med. 2012;9(6):e1001242 [PMID: 22723746]
  4. Am J Public Health. 2006 Jan;96(1):20-32 [PMID: 16317203]
  5. Addiction. 2011 Sep;106(9):1560-7 [PMID: 21781203]
  6. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013 Sep 18;13:117 [PMID: 24047204]
  7. Qual Health Res. 2005 Nov;15(9):1277-88 [PMID: 16204405]
  8. Appetite. 2013 Mar;62:209-15 [PMID: 22561190]
  9. Bull World Health Organ. 2016 Jul 1;94(7):540-8 [PMID: 27429493]
  10. Sociol Health Illn. 2016 Sep;38(7):1026-42 [PMID: 27037612]
  11. PLoS One. 2014 Feb 05;9(2):e87389 [PMID: 24505286]
  12. Addiction. 2016 Jan;111(1):18-32 [PMID: 26173765]
  13. Arch Dis Child. 2009 Sep;94(9):658-62 [PMID: 19477912]
  14. J Adolesc Health. 2009 Sep;45(3 Suppl):S18-29 [PMID: 19699433]
  15. PLoS One. 2012;7(2):e31578 [PMID: 22355376]
  16. Annu Rev Public Health. 2014;35:293-306 [PMID: 24328989]
  17. J Public Health Policy. 2013 May;34(2):239-53 [PMID: 23447026]
  18. Acad Med. 2014 Sep;89(9):1245-51 [PMID: 24979285]
  19. Public Health Nutr. 2012 Aug;15(8):1483-8 [PMID: 22115416]
  20. PLoS One. 2013 Nov 27;8(11):e80864 [PMID: 24312249]

Grants

  1. /Wellcome Trust
  2. MR/K023187/1/Medical Research Council
  3. /British Heart Foundation
  4. /Cancer Research UK

MeSH Term

Advertising
Child
Dissent and Disputes
Food Industry
Government Regulation
Humans
Nutrition Policy
Qualitative Research
Stakeholder Participation
Television
United Kingdom

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0healthpublicpolicyconsultationadvertisingproposalsinfluencedstakeholdersresponsestelevisionchildrencommercialexploremakingnationalregulatorydevelopmentusedthematiccontentanalysisregulationUKregulator'sinitialrestrictionsimplementedproposedconsideredfoodOBJECTIVES:oneaspectdecisionprocess-publicbody-aimingunderstanddifferentDESIGN:foodshighfatsaltsugaraimedSETTING:RESULTS:139keystakeholdergroupsanalyseddetermineprioritiesquestionedthroughoutprocesseventuallessstrictmanywaysoriginallychangesappearedratherCONCLUSIONS:PublicappearsbalanceinterestsTacticsquestioningreframingscientificevidencemayexampleexploringregulatingconsiderationsappearledwateringpackagesincludingmeasuresadvocateseffectiveseemslikelycompromisedultimateeffectivenessregulationseventuallyargumentsinfluentialshapingpolicy:qualitativeresearch

Similar Articles

Cited By