Brexit, trade and the governance of non-communicable diseases: a research agenda.

BACKGROUND: The UK's post-Brexit trade strategy has potentially important implications for population health and equity. In particular, it will impact on the structural risk factors for non-communicable diseases (NCDs), including the consumption of health-harming commodities such as tobacco, alcohol and ultra-processed food and beverages. This article catalogues recent developments in UK trade policy. It then presents a narrative review of the existing research literature on trade and health and previous, prospective studies on the health impacts of Brexit. In so doing it identifies key questions and foci for a future research agenda on the implications of UK's emerging trade regime for NCD prevention. MAIN TEXT: We identify five key areas for future research. (1) Additional scholarship to document the health effects of key trade agreements negotiated by the UK government; (2) The implications of these agreements for policy-making to address health impacts, including the potential for legal challenges under dispute settlement mechanisms; (3) The strategic objectives being pursued by the UK government and the extent to which they support or undermine public health; (4) The process of trade policy-making, its openness to public health interests and actors and the impact of the political and ideological legacy of Brexit on outcomes; (5) The impact of the UK's post-Brexit trade policy on partner countries and blocs and their cumulative impact on the global trade regime. CONCLUSIONS: Further research is urgently need to understand the ways in which the UK's post-Brexit trade strategy will impact on NCDs and policy responses to address these, including the openness of the trade policy architecture to health issues. The outcomes of this process will have wider systemic effects on the global trade regime with implications for health. Researchers must be cognizant of the ideological components of the policy debate which have been absent from previous analysis of Brexit, trade and health.

Non-communicable disease policy implementation from 2014 to 2021: a repeated cross-sectional analysis of global policy data for 194 countries.

BACKGROUND: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are the world's leading cause of death and disability. Global implementation of WHO-recommended NCD policies has been increasing with time, but in 2019 fewer than half of these policies had been implemented globally. In 2022, WHO released updated data on NCD policy implementation, on the basis of surveys conducted in 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to examine whether the trajectory of global policy implementation changed during this period. METHODS: In this repeated cross-sectional analysis, we used data from the 2015, 2017, 2020, and 2022 WHO progress monitors to calculate NCD policy implementation scores for all 194 WHO member states. We used Welch's ANOVA and Games-Howell post-hoc pairwise testing to examine changes in mean implementation scores for 19 WHO-recommended NCD policies, with assessment at the global, geographical, geopolitical, and country-income levels. We collated sales data on tobacco, alcohol, and junk foods to examine the association between changes in sales and the predicted probability of implementation of policies targeting these products. We also calculated the Corporate Financial Influence Index (CFII) for each country, which was used to assess the association between corporate influence and policy implementation. We used logistic regression to assess the relationship between product sales and the probability of implementing related policies. The relationship between CFII and policy implementation was assessed with Pearson's correlation analysis and random-effects multivariate regression. FINDINGS: Across the 194 countries, in the years preceding publication of each progress monitor, mean total policy implementation score (out of a potential 18·0) was 7·0 (SD 3·5) in 2014, 8·2 (3·5) in 2016, 8·6 (3·6) in 2019, and 8·6 (3·6) in 2021. Only the differences in mean implementation score between 2014 and the other three report years were deemed statistically significant (pairwise p<0·05). Thus the steady improvement in mean global NCD policy implementation stalled in 2021 at 47·8%. However, from 2019 to 2021, we identified shifts in individual policies: global mean implementation scores increased for policies on tobacco, clinical guidelines, salt, and child food marketing, and decreased for policies on alcohol, breastmilk substitute marketing, physical activity mass media campaigns, risk factor surveys, and national NCD plans and targets. Six of the seven policies with the lowest levels of implementation (global mean score <0·4 out of a potential 1·0) in both 2019 and 2021 were related to tobacco, alcohol, and unhealthy food. From 2020 onwards, we identified weak or no associations between sales of tobacco, alcohol, and junk foods and the predicted probability of implementing policies related to each commodity. Country-level CFII was significantly associated with total policy implementation score (Pearson's r -0·49, 95% CI -0·59 to -0·36), and this finding was supported in multivariate modelling for all policies combined and for all commercial policies except alcohol policies. INTERPRETATION: NCD policy implementation has stagnated. Progress in the implementation of some policies is matched by decreased implementation of others, particularly those related to unhealthy commodities. To prevent NCDs and their consequences, and attain the Sustainable Development Goals, the rate of NCD policy adoption must be substantially and urgently increased before the next NCD progress monitor and UN high-level meeting on NCDs in 2024. FUNDING: None.

US and EU Free Trade Agreements and implementation of policies to control tobacco, alcohol, and unhealthy food and drinks: A quasi-experimental analysis.

BACKGROUND: Identifying and tackling the factors that undermine regulation of unhealthy commodities is an essential component of effective noncommunicable disease (NCD) prevention. Unhealthy commodity producers may use rules in US and EU Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) to challenge policies targeting their products. We aimed to test whether there was a statistical relationship between US and EU FTA participation and reduced implementation of WHO-recommended policies. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We performed a statistical analysis assessing the probability of at least partially implementing 10 tobacco, alcohol, and unhealthy food and drink policies in 127 countries in 2014, 2016, and 2019. We assessed differences in implementation of these policies in countries with and without US/EU FTAs. We used matching to conduct 48 covariate-adjusted quasi-experimental comparisons across 27 matched US/EU FTA members (87 country-years) and performed additional analyses and robustness checks to assess alternative explanations for our results. Out of our 48 tests, 19% (9/48) identified a statistically significant decrease in the predicted probability of at least partially implementing the unhealthy commodity policy in question, while 2% (1/48) showed an increase. However, there was marked heterogeneity across policies. At the level of individual policies, US FTA participation was associated with a 37% reduction (95%CI: -0.51 to -0.22) in the probability of fully implementing graphic tobacco warning policies, and a 53% reduction (95%CI: -0.63 to -0.43) in the probability of at least partially implementing smoke-free place policies. EU FTA participation was associated with a 28% reduction (95%CI: -0.45 to -0.10) in the probability of fully implementing graphic tobacco warning policies, and a 25% reduction (95%CI: -0.47 to -0.03) in the probability of fully implementing restrictions on child marketing of unhealthy food and drinks. There was a positive association with implementing fat limits and bans, but this was not robust. Associations with other outcomes were not significant. The main limitations included residual confounding, limited ability to discern precise mechanisms of influence, and potentially limited generalisability to other FTAs. CONCLUSIONS: US and EU FTA participation may reduce the probability of implementing WHO-recommended tobacco and child food marketing policies by between a quarter and a half-depending on the FTA and outcome in question. Governments negotiating or participating in US/EU FTAs may need to establish robust health protections and mitigation strategies to achieve their NCD mortality reduction targets.

Reassessing the health impacts of trade and investment agreements: a systematic review of quantitative studies, 2016-20.

To ensure a high level of health protection, governments must ensure that health and trade policy objectives are aligned. We conducted a systematic review of the health impacts of trade policies, including trade and investment agreements (TIAs), to provide a timely overview of this field. We systematically reviewed studies evaluating the health impacts of trade policies published between Jan 19, 2016, and July 10, 2020. Included studies were quantitative studies evaluating the impact of TIAs and trade policies on health determinants or outcomes. We evaluated methodological quality and performed a narrative synthesis. 21 of 28 067 articles identified via searches met our criteria. Methodologically strong studies found reduced child mortality, deteriorating worker health, rising supplies of sugar, ultra-processed food, tobacco, and alcohol supplies, and increased drug overdoses following trade reforms, compared with the time periods before trade reform. However, associations varied substantially across contexts and socioeconomic characteristics. Our findings show that trade policies, including TIAs, have diverse effects on health and health determinants. These effects vary substantially across contexts and socioeconomic groups. Governments seeking to adopt healthy trade policies should consider these updated findings to ensure that opportunities for health improvement are leveraged and widely shared, while harms are avoided, especially among vulnerable groups.

Protecting noncommunicable disease prevention policy in trade and investment agreements.

Preventing noncommunicable diseases is a global priority, for which the World Health Organization has recommended policies to reduce the consumption of tobacco products, alcohol and unhealthy foods. However, regulation has been strongly opposed by affected industries, who have invoked the provisions of legally binding trade and investment agreements. The aim of this analysis of the legal, economic and public health literature was to present a short primer on the relationship between noncommunicable disease prevention policy and trade and investment agreements to help public health policy-makers safeguard public health policies. The analysis identified opportunities for protecting, and even promoting, public health in trade and investment agreements, including: (i) ensuring exceptions for public health measures are included in agreements; (ii) committing to good regulatory practice that balances transparency and cooperation with the need for governments to limit the influence of vested interests; (iii) ensuring trade and investment agreement preambles acknowledge the importance of public health; (iv) excluding investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms from agreements; and (v) limiting the scope and definition of key provisions on investor protection to reduce the risk of investment disputes. This synthesis of the multidisciplinary literature also provides support for greater strategic and informed engagement between the health and trade policy sectors. In addition, ensuring a high level of health protection in trade and investment agreements requires cooperation between disciplines, engagement with experts in law, economics and public health policy, and fully transparent policy processes and governance structures.

La prévention des maladies non transmissibles constitue une priorité mondiale. Dans ce contexte, l'Organisation mondiale de la Santé a recommandé des politiques visant à réduire la consommation de produits du tabac, d'alcool et d'aliments nocifs pour la santé. Néanmoins, cette régulation s'est heurtée à une forte opposition de la part des industries concernées, qui ont invoqué les dispositions prévues dans les accords juridiquement contraignants en matière de commerce et d'investissement. La présente analyse se penche sur la littérature juridique, économique et de santé publique. Son but: décrire brièvement la relation entre les mesures de prévention des maladies non transmissibles d'une part, et les accords en matière de commerce et d'investissement d'autre part, afin d'aider les législateurs compétents à défendre les politiques de santé publique. Cette analyse a identifié divers moyens de préserver, voire de promouvoir la santé publique dans les accords de commerce et d'investissement, notamment: (i) en veillant à inclure des exceptions pour les mesures de santé publique dans les accords; (ii) en s'engageant à respecter les bonnes pratiques réglementaires, qui concilient la transparence et la coopération avec la nécessité, pour les gouvernements, de limiter l'influence des intérêts en place; (iii) en s'assurant que les accords de commerce et d'investissement mentionnent dans leur préambule l'importance de la santé publique; (iv) en excluant de ces accords les mécanismes de règlement des différends entre États et investisseurs; et enfin, (v) en limitant la portée et la définition des dispositions fondamentales sur la protection des investisseurs afin de diminuer le risque de différend. Cette synthèse de littérature multidisciplinaire contribue également à plus d'engagement stratégique et éclairé entre les politiques sanitaires et commerciales. En outre, garantir un haut niveau de protection sanitaire dans les accords de commerce et d'investissement implique une collaboration entre plusieurs disciplines, la mobilisation d'experts en droit, en économie et en politiques de santé publique, ainsi que des structures de gouvernance et des processus d'élaboration des politiques entièrement transparents.

La prevención de las enfermedades no transmisibles es una prioridad mundial, por lo que la Organización Mundial de la Salud ha recomendado la adopción de políticas para reducir el consumo de productos de tabaco, alcohol y alimentos malsanos. Sin embargo, las industrias afectadas se han opuesto con firmeza a la regulación, invocando las disposiciones de los acuerdos comerciales y de inversión jurídicamente vinculantes. El objetivo de este análisis sobre la documentación jurídica, económica y de salud pública fue presentar una breve introducción sobre la relación entre la política de prevención de las enfermedades no transmisibles y los acuerdos comerciales y de inversión para ayudar a las autoridades responsables de formular las políticas de salud pública a protegerlas. El análisis identificó oportunidades para proteger, e incluso promover, la salud pública en los acuerdos comerciales y de inversión, que incluyen i) garantizar la inclusión de excepciones para las medidas de salud pública en los acuerdos; ii) comprometerse con las buenas prácticas regulatorias que equilibran la transparencia y la cooperación con la necesidad de los gobiernos de limitar la influencia de los intereses creados; iii) garantizar que los preámbulos de los acuerdos comerciales y de inversión reconocen la importancia de la salud pública; iv) excluir de los acuerdos los mecanismos de resolución de disputas entre inversores y Estados; y v) limitar el alcance y la definición de las disposiciones clave sobre la protección de los inversores para reducir el riesgo de disputas sobre las inversiones. Esta síntesis de la documentación multidisciplinar también respalda un mayor compromiso estratégico e informado entre los sectores de la salud y la política comercial. Además, se requiere la cooperación entre las disciplinas, la participación de especialistas en derecho, economía y política de salud pública, y procesos políticos y estructuras de gobernanza totalmente transparentes para garantizar un alto nivel de protección de la salud en los acuerdos comerciales y de inversión.

Industry influence over global alcohol policies via the World Trade Organization: a qualitative analysis of discussions on alcohol health warning labelling, 2010-19.

BACKGROUND: Accelerating progress to implement effective alcohol policies is necessary to achieve multiple targets within the WHO global strategy to reduce the harmful use of alcohol and the Sustainable Development Goals. However, the alcohol industry's role in shaping alcohol policy through international avenues, such as trade fora, is poorly understood. We investigate whether the World Trade Organization (WTO) is a forum for alcohol industry influence over alcohol policy. METHODS: In this qualitative analysis, we studied discussions on alcohol health warning labelling policies that occurred at the WTO's Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee meetings. Using the WTO Documents Online archive, we searched the written minutes of all TBT Committee meetings available from Jan 1, 1995, to Dec 31, 2019, to identify minutes and referenced documents pertaining to discussions on health warning labelling policies. We specifically sought WTO member statements on health warning labelling policies. We identified instances in which WTO member representatives indicated that their statements represented industry. We further developed and applied a taxonomy of industry rhetoric to identify whether WTO member statements advanced arguments made by industry in domestic forums. FINDINGS: Among 83 documents, comprising TBT Committee minutes, notifications to the WTO of the policy proposal, and written comments by WTO members, WTO members made 212 statements (between March 24, 2010, and Nov 15, 2019) on ten alcohol labelling policies proposed by Thailand, Kenya, the Dominican Republic, Israel, Turkey, Mexico, India, South Africa, Ireland, and South Korea. WTO members stated that their claims represented industry in seven (3·3%) of 212 statements, and 117 (55·2%) statements featured industry arguments. Member statements featured many arguments used by industry in domestic policy forums to stall alcohol policy. Arguments focused on descaling and reframing the nature and causes of alcohol-related problems, promoting alternative policies such as information campaigns, promoting industry partnerships, questioning the evidence, and emphasising manufacturing and wider economic costs and harms. INTERPRETATION: WTO discussions at TBT Committee meetings on alcohol health warnings advanced arguments used by the alcohol industry in domestic settings to prevent potentially effective alcohol policies. WTO members appeared to be influenced by alcohol industry interests, although only a minority of challenges explicitly referenced industry demands. Increased transparency about vested interests might be needed to overcome industry influence. FUNDING: None.

COVID-19 data are messy: analytic methods for rigorous impact analyses with imperfect data.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an avalanche of scientific studies, drawing on many different types of data. However, studies addressing the effectiveness of government actions against COVID-19, especially non-pharmaceutical interventions, often exhibit data problems that threaten the validity of their results. This review is thus intended to help epidemiologists and other researchers identify a set of data issues that, in our view, must be addressed in order for their work to be credible. We further intend to help journal editors and peer reviewers when evaluating studies, to apprise policy-makers, journalists, and other research consumers about the strengths and weaknesses of published studies, and to inform the wider debate about the scientific quality of COVID-19 research. RESULTS: To this end, we describe common challenges in the collection, reporting, and use of epidemiologic, policy, and other data, including completeness and representativeness of outcomes data; their comparability over time and among jurisdictions; the adequacy of policy variables and data on intermediate outcomes such as mobility and mask use; and a mismatch between level of intervention and outcome variables. We urge researchers to think critically about potential problems with the COVID-19 data sources over the specific time periods and particular locations they have chosen to analyze, and to choose not only appropriate study designs but also to conduct appropriate checks and sensitivity analyses to investigate the impact(s) of potential threats on study findings. CONCLUSIONS: In an effort to encourage high quality research, we provide recommendations on how to address the issues we identify. Our first recommendation is for researchers to choose an appropriate design (and the data it requires). This review describes considerations and issues in order to identify the strongest analytical designs and demonstrates how interrupted time-series and comparative longitudinal studies can be particularly useful. Furthermore, we recommend that researchers conduct checks or sensitivity analyses of the results to data source and design choices, which we illustrate. Regardless of the approaches taken, researchers should be explicit about the kind of data problems or other biases that the design choice and sensitivity analyses are addressing.

COVID-19, Trade, and Health: This Changes Everything? Comment on "What Generates Attention to Health in Trade Policy-Making? Lessons From Success in Tobacco Control and Access to Medicines: A Qualitative Study of Australia and the (Comprehensive and Progressive) Trans-Pacific Partnership".

Townsend and colleagues highlighted the myriad political forces which fostered attention to health issues during negotiations to establish a new trans-pacific trade deal in Australia (the CP-TPP [Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership], formerly known as TPP). Among the factors they identify, exporter interests and exogenous events helped to generate attention to trade-related concerns about tobacco and access medicines, and limited attention to nutrition and alcohol. These are important considerations as the United Kingdom negotiates a trade deal with the United States in haste, whilst at the same time attempting to manage the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In this commentary, I reflect on changing attention to trade and nutrition during the COVID-19 pandemic in light of Townsend and colleagues' analysis. I explore scope for greater attention to nutrition in US-UK trade negotiations, and the challenges created by the vested interests of major UK and US processed food exporters. I further discuss the utility of the theoretical tools employed by Townsend and colleagues for wider debates in the political economy of health.

Brexit and trade policy: an analysis of the governance of UK trade policy and what it means for health and social justice.

BACKGROUND: There is an extensive body of research demonstrating that trade and globalisation can have wide-ranging implications for health. Robust governance is key to ensuring that health, social justice and sustainability are key considerations within trade policy, and that health risks from trade are effectively mitigated and benefits are maximised. The UK's departure from the EU provides a rare opportunity to examine a context where trade governance arrangements are being created anew, and to explore the consequences of governance choices and structures for health and social justice. Despite its importance to public health, there has been no systematic analysis of the implications of UK trade policy governance. We therefore conducted an analysis of the governance of the UK's trade policy from a public health and social justice perspective. RESULTS: Several arrangements required for good governance appear to have been implemented - information provision, public consultation, accountability to Parliament, and strengthening of civil service capacity. However, our detailed analyses of these pillars of governance identified significant weaknesses in each of these areas. CONCLUSION: The establishment of a new trade policy agenda calls for robust systems of governance. However, our analysis demonstrates that, despite decades of mounting evidence on the health and equity impacts of trade and the importance of strong systems of governance, the UK government has largely ignored this evidence and failed to galvanise the opportunity to include public health and equity considerations and strengthen democratic involvement in trade policy. This underscores the point that the evidence alone will not guarantee that health and justice are prioritised. Rather, we need strong systems of governance everywhere that can help seize the health benefits of international trade and minimise its detrimental impacts. A failure to strengthen governance risks poor policy design and implementation, with unintended and inequitable distribution of harms, and 'on-paper' commitments to health, social justice, and democracy unfulfilled in practice. Although the detailed findings relate to the situation in the UK, the issues raised are, we believe, of wider relevance for those with an interest of governing for health in the area of international trade.

The Effect of Schooling on Women's Overweight and Obesity: A Natural Experiment in Nigeria.

An extensive social scientific literature has documented the importance of schooling in preventing overweight and obesity among women. However, prior quasi-experimental studies investigating the causal effect of schooling on women's overweight and obesity have focused almost exclusively on high-income countries (HICs). Schooling effects may differ in low- or middle-income countries (LMICs), where information about the harms of being overweight is often sparse and where larger body sizes can be socially valued. Here I evaluate the causal impact of schooling on women's probability of being overweight or obese in an LMIC, Nigeria, using data from the 2003, 2008, and 2013 Demographic Health Surveys. In 1976, the Nigerian government abolished primary school fees and increased funding for primary school construction, creating quasi-random variation in access to primary school according to an individual's age and the number of newly constructed schools in their state of residence. I exploit both sources of variation and use a two-stage instrumental variables approach to estimate the effect of increased schooling on the probability of being overweight or obese. Each additional year of schooling increased the probability of being overweight or obese by 6%, but this effect estimate was not statistically different from zero. This finding differs from the protective effect of schooling documented in several HICs, suggesting that contextual factors play an important role calibrating the influence of additional schooling on overweight or obesity. Furthermore, my findings contrast markedly with the positive correlation between schooling and overweight/obesity identified in previous studies in Nigeria, suggesting that studies failing to account for selection bias overestimate the causal effect of schooling. More robust causal research is needed to examine the effect of schooling on overweight and obesity in LMIC contexts.

COVID-19 and the collapse of global trade: building an effective public health response.

The scale of the COVID-19 pandemic is a consequence of international trade and globalisation, with the virus spreading along established trade and travel routes. However, the pandemic also affects international trade through reductions in both supply and demand. In this Viewpoint we describe the many implications for health and propose ways to mitigate them. Problems include reduced access to medical supplies (in particular, personal protective equipment and tests), budgetary shortfalls as a result of reduced tariffs and taxes, and a general decline in economic activity-leading, in many cases, to recessions, threats to social safety nets, and to increased precariousness of income, employment, and food security. However, in exceptional cases, the pandemic has also brought some transient benefits, including to the environment. Looking ahead, there will be great pressure to further liberalise rules on trade to encourage economic recovery, but it is essential that trade policy be informed by its many consequences for health to ensure that the benefits are maximised and threats are minimised through active identification and mitigation.

Liberal trade policy and food insecurity across the income distribution: an observational analysis in 132 countries, 2014-17.

BACKGROUND: Eradicating food insecurity is necessary for achieving global health goals. Liberal trade policies might increase food supplies but how these policies influence individual-level food insecurity remains uncertain. We aimed to assess the association between liberal trade policies and food insecurity at the individual level, and whether this association varies across country-income and household-income groups. METHODS: For this observational analysis, we combined individual-level data from the Food and Agricultural Organization of the UN with a country-level trade policy index from the Konjunkturforschungsstelle Swiss Economic Institute. We examined the association between a country's trade policy score and the probability of individuals reporting moderate-severe or severe food insecurity using regression models and algorithmic weighting procedures. We controlled for multiple covariates, including gross domestic product, democratisation level, and population size. Additionally, we examined heterogeneity by country and household income. RESULTS: Our sample comprised 460 102 individuals in 132 countries for the period of 2014-17. Liberal trade policy was not significantly associated with moderate-severe or severe food insecurity after covariate adjustment. However, among households in high-income countries with incomes higher than US$25 430 per person per year (adjusted for purchasing power parity), a unit increase in the trade policy index (more liberal) corresponded to a 0·07% (95% CI -0·10 to -0·04) reduction in the predicted probability of reporting moderate-severe food insecurity. Among households in the lowest income decile (<$450 per person per year) in low-income countries, a unit increase in the trade policy index was associated with a 0·35% (0·06 to 0·60) increase in the predicted probability of reporting moderate-severe food insecurity. INTERPRETATION: The relationship between liberal trade policy and food insecurity varied across countries and households. Liberal trade policy was predominantly associated with lower food insecurity in high-income countries but corresponded to increased food insecurity among the world's poorest households in low-income countries. FUNDING: Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Economic and Social Research Council.

Global disparities in health-systems financing: A cross-national analysis of the impact of tariff reductions and state capacity on public health expenditure in 65 low- and middle-income countries, 1996-2015.

Understanding what contributes to cross-national differences in public health spending among low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) can help identify how policy-makers can reduce global disparities. Yet, research on this topic has so far overlooked the potential influence of one of the most strongly recommended economic reforms during the post-war era: reducing international trade taxes, 'tariffs'. Tariffs are an important source of tax revenue for some LMICs. Tariff declines can impact on government finances, and these changes may constrain public health expenditure where states lack the capacity to tax non-trade activities. We examined the association between tariff changes and public health spending in 65 LMICs, 1996-2015. We identify substantial variation in this association according to one indicator of state capacity, a country's score on the World Governance Indicators government effectiveness (GE) index. For example, tariff declines corresponded to reduced public health expenditures in countries with low GE scores. Our results suggest that tariff changes and domestic taxation capacities have an under-recognised impact on public health expenditure and may contribute to global health spending disparities.