Multisectoral approach and WHO 'Bestbuys' in Nigeria's nutrition and physical activity policies.

Unhealthy diet and physical inactivity are modifiable risk factors for non-communicable diseases. Policies formulated in line with international guidelines are required for the implementation of population-level interventions to reduce the risks. This study describes the utilization of multisectoral approach (MSA) for the formulation of nutrition and physical activity policies and the extent to which they align with the WHO 'Best Buy Interventions'. The research utilized a descriptive case study design and the theoretical model guiding the study was the Walt and Gilson framework for policy analysis. Data were obtained through the interview of 44 key informants using pre-tested guides and document review of 17 policies and articles obtained from government institutions or through the search of electronic databases. Data were integrated and analysed using thematic analysis. Between 2000 and 2016, Nigeria had formulated 10 nutrition-related policies and 5 guidelines with actions to promote physical activity. Only three nutrition and two physical activity policies adopted a high level of MSA. In line with the WHO best buy interventions, educational interventions for the general population are proposed to reduce sugar and salt intake and replace transfat with polyunsaturated fats but there are no legal regulatory acts to support these actions. Policy documents with actions to reduce physical inactivity do not include the WHO best buys. The country should adopt a wider range of actors to formulate and review policies, integrate all the WHO best buy interventions and develop effective legislation to regulate the salt and sugar content of processed foods.

Analysis of tobacco control policies in Nigeria: historical development and application of multi-sectoral action.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco use is a major risk factor for non-communicable diseases and policy formulation on tobacco is expected to engrain international guidelines. This paper describes the historical development of tobacco control policies in Nigeria, the use of multi-sectoral action in their formulation and extent to which they align with the World Health Organisation "best buy" interventions. METHODS: We adopted a descriptive case study methodology guided by the Walt and Gilson Policy Analysis Framework. Data collection comprised of document review (N = 18) identified through search of government websites and electronic databases with no date restriction and key informant interviews (N = 44) with stakeholders in public and private sectors. Data was integrated and analyzed using content analysis. Ethical approval was granted by the University of Ibadan and University College Hospital Ethics Review Committee. RESULTS: Although the agenda for development of a national tobacco control policy dates back to the 1950s, a comprehensive Framework Convention for Tobacco Control (FCTC) compliant policy was only developed in 2015, 10 years after Nigeria signed the FCTC. Lack of funding and conflict of interest (of protecting citizens from harmful effect of tobacco viz. a viz. the economic gains from the industry) are the major barriers that slowed the policy process. Current tobacco -related policies developed by the Federal Ministry of Health were formulated through strong multi-sectoral engagement and covering all the four WHO "best buy" interventions. Other policies had limited multi-sectoral engagement and "best buy" strategies. The tobacco industry was involved in the development of the Standards for Tobacco Control of 2014 contrary to the long-standing WHO guideline against engagement of the industry in policy formulation. CONCLUSIONS: Nigeria has a comprehensive national policy for tobacco control which was formulated a decade after ratification of the FCTC due to constraints of funding and conflict of interest. Not all the tobacco control policies in Nigeria engrain the principles of multisectorality and best buy strategies in their formulation. There is an urgent need to address these neglected areas that may hamper tobacco control efforts in Nigeria.

Alcohol policies in Malawi: inclusion of WHO "best buy" interventions and use of multi-sectoral action.

BACKGROUND: Harmful use of alcohol is one of the most common risk factors for Non-Communicable Diseases and other health conditions such as injuries. World Health Organization has identified highly cost-effective interventions for reduction of alcohol consumption at population level, known as "best buy" interventions, which include tax increases, bans on alcohol advertising and restricted access to retailed alcohol. This paper describes the extent of inclusion of alcohol related "best buy" interventions in national policies and also describes the application of multi-sectoral action in the development of alcohol policies in Malawi. METHODS: The study was part of a multi-country research project on Analysis of Non-Communicable Disease Preventive Policies in Africa, which applied a qualitative case study design. Data were collected from thirty-two key informants through interviews. A review of twelve national policy documents that relate to control of harmful use of alcohol was also conducted. Transcripts were coded according to a predefined protocol followed by thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Only three of the twelve national policy documents related to alcohol included at least one "best buy" intervention. Multi-Sectoral Action was only evident in the development process of the latest alcohol policy document, the National Alcohol Policy. Facilitators for multi-sectoral action for alcohol policy formulation included: structured leadership and collaboration, shared concern over the burden of harmful use of alcohol, advocacy efforts by local non-governmental organisations and availability of some dedicated funding. Perceived barriers included financial constraints, high personnel turnover in different government departments, role confusion between sectors and some interference from the alcohol industry. CONCLUSIONS: Malawi's national legislations and policies have inadequate inclusion of the "best buy" interventions for control of harmful use of alcohol. Effective development and implementation of alcohol policies require structured organisation and collaboration of multi-sectoral actors. Sustainable financing mechanisms for the policy development and implementation processes should be considered; and the influence of the alcohol industry should be mitigated.

Restricting alcohol marketing to reduce alcohol consumption: A systematic review of the empirical evidence for one of the 'best buys'.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Even though a ban of alcohol marketing has been declared a 'best buy' of alcohol control policy, comprehensive systematic reviews on its effectiveness to reduce consumption are lacking. The aim of this paper was to systematically review the evidence for effects of total and partial bans of alcohol marketing on alcohol consumption. METHODS: This descriptive systematic review sought to include all empirical studies that explored how changes in the regulation of alcohol marketing impact on alcohol consumption. The search was conducted between October and December 2022 considering various scientific databases (Web of Science, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Embase) as well as Google and Google Scholar. The titles and abstracts of a total of 2572 records were screened. Of the 26 studies included in the full text screening, 11 studies were finally included in this review. Changes in consumption in relation to marketing bans were determined based on significance testing in primary studies. Four risk of bias domains (confounding, selection bias, information bias and reporting bias) were assessed. RESULTS: Seven studies examined changes in marketing restrictions in one location (New Zealand, Thailand, Canadian provinces, Spain, Norway). In the remaining studies, between 17 and 45 locations were studied (mostly high-income countries from Europe and North America). Of the 11 studies identified, six studies reported null findings. Studies reporting lower alcohol consumption following marketing restrictions were of moderate, serious and critical risk of bias. Two studies with low and moderate risk of bias found increasing alcohol consumption post marketing bans. Overall, there was insufficient evidence to conclude that alcohol marketing bans reduce alcohol consumption. CONCLUSIONS: The available empirical evidence does not support the claim of alcohol marketing bans constituting a best buy for reducing alcohol consumption.

Addressing NCDs: Challenges From Industry Market Promotion and Interferences.

Addressing the determinants of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) is challenged by aggressive market promotion by tobacco, alcohol and unhealthy food industries in emerging countries with fast economic development; and interference by these industries in government policies aimed at containing consumption of unhealthy products. This editorial reviews market promotion and industry interference and classifies them into four groups of tactics: (a) interfering with the legislative process; (b) using front groups to act on their behalf; (c) questioning the evidence of tobacco harm and the effectiveness of harm-reduction interventions; and (d) appearing responsible in the eyes of the public, journalists and policy-makers. Despite active implementation of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), the tobacco, alcohol and unhealthy food industries use similar tactics to aggressively interfere in policies, with the tobacco industry being the most aggressive. Policy interference by industries are effective in the context of poor governance, rampant corruption, conflict of interest among political and government actors, and regulatory capture in all levels of countries from low- to high-income. In addressing these interferences, government requires the practice of good governance, effective mechanisms to counteract conflict of interests among political and policy actors, and prevention of regulatory capture. The World Health Organization (WHO) Framework of Engagement with non-State Actors can be applied to the country context when engaging private entities in the prevention and control of NCDs.