Building a Systems Map: Applying Systems Thinking to Unhealthy Commodity Industry Influence on Public Health Policy.

BACKGROUND: Unhealthy commodity industries (UCIs) engage in political practices to influence public health policy, which poses barriers to protecting and promoting public health. Such influence exhibits characteristics of a complex system. Systems thinking would therefore appear to be a useful lens through which to study this phenomenon, potentially deepening our understanding of how UCI influence are interconnected with one another through their underlying political, economic and social structures. As such this study developed a qualitative systems map to depict the complex pathways through which UCIs influence public health policy and how they are interconnected with underlying structures. METHODS: Online participatory systems mapping workshops were conducted between November 2021 and February 2022. As a starting point for the workshops, a preliminary systems map was developed based on recent research. Twenty-three online workshops were conducted with 52 geographically diverse stakeholders representing academia, civil society (CS), public office, and global governance organisations (CGO). Analysis of workshop data in NVivo and feedback from participants resulted in a final systems map. RESULTS: The preliminary systems map consisted of 40 elements across six interdependent themes. The final systems map consisted of 64 elements across five interdependent themes, representing key pathways through which UCIs impact health policy-making: (1) direct access to public sector decision-makers; (2) creation of confusion and doubt about policy decisions; (3) corporate prioritisation of commercial profits and growth; (4) industry leveraging the legal and dispute settlement processes; and (5) industry leveraging policy-making, norms, rules, and processes. CONCLUSION: UCI influence on public health policy is highly complex, involves interlinked practices, and is not reducible to a single point within the system. Instead, pathways to UCI influence emerge from the complex interactions between disparate national and global political, economic and social structures. These pathways provide numerous avenues for UCIs to influence public health policy, which poses challenges to formulating a singular intervention or limited set of interventions capable of effectively countering such influence. Using participatory methods, we made transparent the interconnections that could help identify interventions in future work.

Complex Interventions for a Complex System? Using Systems Thinking to Explore Ways to Address Unhealthy Commodity Industry Influence on Public Health Policy.

BACKGROUND: Interventions are needed to prevent and mitigate unhealthy commodity industry (UCI) influence on public health policy. Whilst literature on interventions is emerging, current conceptualisations remain incomplete as they lack considerations of the wider systemic complexities surrounding UCI influence, which may limit intervention effectiveness. This study applies systems thinking as a theoretical lens to help identify and explore how possible interventions relate to one another in the systems in which they are embedded. Related challenges to addressing UCI influence on policy, and actions to support interventions, were also explored. METHODS: Online participatory workshops were conducted with stakeholders with expertise in UCIs. A systems map, depicting five pathways to UCI influence, and the Action Scales Model were used to help participants identify interventions and guide discussions. Codebook thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Fifty-two stakeholders participated in 23 workshops. Participants identified 27 diverse, interconnected and interdependent interventions corresponding to the systems map's pathways that reduce the ability of UCIs to influence policy. These include, for example, reform policy financing; regulate public-private partnerships (PPPs); reform science governance and funding; frame and reframe the narrative, challenge neoliberalism and gross domestic product (GDP) growth; leverage human rights; change practices on multistakeholder governance; and reform policy consultation and deliberation processes. Participants also identified four potential key challenges to interventions (ie, difficult to implement or achieve; partially formulated; exploited or misused; requires tailoring for context), and four key actions to help support intervention delivery (ie, coordinate and cooperate with stakeholders; invest in civil society; create a social movement; nurture leadership). CONCLUSION: A systems thinking lens revealed the theoretical interdependence between disparate and heterogenous interventions. This suggests that to be effective, interventions need to align, work collectively, and be applied synchronously to different parts of the system, including multiple levels of governance. Importantly, these interventions need to be supported by intermediary actions to be achieved. Urgent action is now required to strengthen healthy alliances and implement interventions.