How can marketing restrictions on unhealthy foods and beverages be adopted? How can marketing restrictions on unhealthy foods and beverages be adopted?

Build the policy rationale  

Gather local evidence on why restrictions on sweetened beverages and foods high in nutrients and ingredients of concern (e.g., saturated fat, salt, sugar, nonsugar sweetener) that are often ultra-processed are needed.

This includes health and nutrition data (such as obesity rates and diet-related chronic diseases) as well as information on marketing exposure and its power to influence consumption (such as the proportion of marketing devoted to unhealthy foods).

Use global evidence to support local data (e.g., effects of marketing on food preferences, requests and dietary intake). Collect information on food marketing policies that have been implemented elsewhere to support the case for the policy and its design. If strengthening existing regulations to better align with best practices, collect evidence that relates to the proposed policy change.

This information should be used to craft an evidence-based policy, justify its introduction and provide baseline data for evaluating policy change. The data should be collected, summarized and publicized to build policy support.

Decision tree to guide data collection decisions:

Source: UNICEF and the World Health Organization’s Taking action to protect children from the harmful impact of food marketing A child rights-based approach.

International frameworks and guidelines require governments to take action to prevent noncommunicable diseases and to protect the health of children.

Develop measurable policy objectives

Policy objectives should focus on reducing population exposure to the marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages—and its power to influence dietary preferences, behaviors and intake—including all marketing to which children may be exposed, through mandatory, comprehensive restrictions across all platforms and marketing practices.

Objectives should be clear and measurable in the short-term.

Research the policy environment

Determine the policy’s scope and definitions, including cross-border marketing, and ensure they align with other existing or planned nutrition policies. Ideally food marketing policy is paired with other policies including front-of-package labeling, fiscal policies and school nutrition policies.

-> See Food Policy Hub’s case study “How Chile Integrated Marketing Restrictions Into Comprehensive Food Policy.”

Understand the legal context

Review laws to determine the legal entry point and understand the legal, constitutional and human rights frameworks that can be used to support the case for mandatory, comprehensive marketing restrictions. Many countries have legislation or guidance that addresses other forms of marketing and other health-harming commodities, such as tobacco.

Comprehensive bans are legitimate public health measures that can be lawful and proportionate under international human rights law and many countries’ constitutional law, protecting people’s rights to health and adequate food and nutrition and strengthening consumers’ ability to make decisions that prioritize their well-being.

Map potential stakeholders

Many actors can positively or negatively influence the course of marketing restrictions, including:

• Policymakers
• Academics
• Civil society advocates and organizations
• The food and beverage industry
• Media industry

Mapping these actors helps identify their influence and the best ways to engage them. Allies can join forces in coalitions to advance the policy.

-> See section: Build academic, government and civil society coalitions

Food and beverage marketing is ubiquitous, with the vast majority promoting unhealthy products. While marketing landscapes vary by context, marketing practices are increasingly similar across countries as digital media rises, and global best practices can be adapted locally to design effective solutions.

Food marketing policies should address two components: exposure (reach and frequency) and power (creative content, design and execution, such as using cartoon characters).

Policies have traditionally focused on broadcast media, which remains an important source of unhealthy food marketing. However, companies increasingly use diverse marketing channels, especially digital, to build brands and consumer relationships.

Digital marketing presents new regulatory challenges. It uses decentralized platforms and novel techniques like influencer marketing and data-driven targeted advertising. As people spend more time online, companies have followed, making digital platforms central points of exposure that must be regulated.

Building strong, multisectoral coalitions that act as a united front is important for policy success. Coalition members must not be associated with the food and beverage industry.

Government partnerships

The government should lead food marketing policy development but engage and consult with civil society and academia. Multiple government departments should work together (e.g., child protection, health and education, consumer affairs, media and communication), potentially through a government-led working group.

Civil society partnerships

Civil society coalitions, free of conflict of interest, can help ensure health objectives remain central throughout the policy process.

They can also:

• Reveal and counter industry marketing tactics and interference
• Convey public support to policymakers
• Communicate the health impacts of unhealthy food marketing and the benefits of restrictions
• Engage stakeholders including parents, children and other affected parties
• Collaborate with actors tackling the marketing of other health-harming products, including tobacco, alcohol or breast-milk substitutes

Academic partnerships

Researchers can support the government by providing evidence for the policy that is free from conflicts of interest—from the policy rationale and design to evidence needed to defend the proposal against industry arguments and conduct evaluations. Technical working groups may be established to facilitate this.

The food and beverage industry markets its products to shape social norms and influence eating habits, especially among children and underserved communities. It positions products as essential consumer items to increase sales and distract from their impacts on human and planetary health.

Pushing for self-regulation

The industry interferes in government efforts to restrict marketing, often by pushing for self-regulation. However, these voluntary pledges are ineffective: they lack evidence of effectiveness, have limited scope, place control in the hands of an industry with conflicting incentives, and lack proper accountability mechanisms.

For example, most voluntary pledges claim not to use licensed characters, celebrities or other child-targeted tactics on products not meeting industry-designed nutritional criteria, but they exempt product packaging and company-owned brand characters from these restrictions.

Threatening legal action 

The food and beverage industry may threaten or take legal action against governments seeking to implement marketing restrictions, using international investment law, trade law or domestic law.

How to manage conflicts of interest

Governments must actively manage conflicts of interest when developing marketing restrictions. Conflicts of interest arise when the food and beverage industry’s interests influence decision-making at the expense of public health, going beyond standard public consultations to shape how the industry itself is regulated.

When industry actors have undue influence over the regulatory process, they may skew decisions in ways that weaken or delay effective restrictions, making robust mechanisms to identify and manage these conflicts of interest integral to protecting the integrity of policy development.

Demonstrating widespread support for food marketing policy among the public, policymakers and other stakeholders increases the likelihood of policy adoption.

Develop a communication strategy

Civil society should engage the media to put and keep marketing restrictions on the policy agenda and develop a comprehensive framework for communication to the public and policymakers.

Communication should be structured in key phases:

• Build the case for why the policy is needed
• Identify the cause of the problem that the proposed solution will help solve
• Articulate the solution and how supporters can help

Build broader stakeholder support

Civil society can use the following strategies to build broader stakeholder support:

• Produce resources that support policy advocacy and implementation (e.g., toolkits, reports)
• Reach decision-makers through open letters or by organizing a petition and/or letter-writing campaign
• Set up meetings with policymakers
• Organize public conferences/debates and rallies that engage allied policymakers

Children and other groups especially affected by the marketing of unhealthy food and beverages should be engaged in advocacy.

Public consultations

The government should hold a public consultation on draft regulations and actively involve civil society organizations in the discussion and development of draft regulations. Civil society can submit comments and encourage community members to participate, helping to ensure that a broad range of voices beyond industry are represented in the process. The government’s final decisions should prioritize public health evidence over other interests.

WHO acknowledges that countries may start with a stepwise or “partial” approach to restricting marketing, such as focusing on certain channels or certain foods. However, research and experience show that stepwise policies leave people inadequately protected since the industry migrates marketing to unregulated areas and uses this approach to delay policy implementation.

Comprehensive food marketing policies are ideal because they’re as expansive as possible, reducing the risk of migration to unregulated spaces.

-> See Food Policy Hub’s best practice recommendations to learn what makes a policy comprehensive

Source: Global Food Research Program at UNC-Chapel Hill. Maps: Restrictions on marketing food to children.

When developing a policy to restrict unhealthy food marketing, address these five key questions:

1. Which regulatory measure should be used?
2. Whom should the policy protect?
3. What types of marketing should be restricted?
4. To what extent should marketing be restricted?
5. Which foods and beverages should the policy apply to?

1. Which regulatory measure should be used?

Governments should adopt binding, enforceable laws—not voluntary or self-regulatory approaches. Only mandatory measures create accountability, help ensure compliance and enable states to fulfill their human rights obligations.

2. Whom should the policy protect?

Marketing restrictions have traditionally focused only on marketing explicitly targeted at or directed at children, but this narrow approach is both limiting and ineffective. To meaningfully protect children, policies must apply to all unhealthy food and beverage marketing they may be exposed to, not just marketing intended for them. Age-based restrictions alone are insufficient, because:

• Children’s and adults’ media spaces are not clearly separated
• Adults purchase food for children and shape their preferences
• Industry can migrate to unregulated channels
• Enforcement is hampered by the lack of clear criteria for determining whether an ad is child-directed

3. Which types of marketing should be restricted?

Marketing restrictions should cover all channels and types of marketing exposure, including:

• Cross-border marketing: Food packaging, product placement, digital
• Digital marketing: Social media, websites, apps, online gaming
• Indirect tactics: Corporate social responsibility initiatives, influencer and celebrity promotions, sponsorships

International cooperation, including through regional public health networks, is needed to address cross-border marketing.

4. To what extent should marketing be restricted?

All marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages—ideally identified by a nutrient profile model—should be restricted. Many countries have focused on marketing “directed at” or “targeted to” children; however, this does not include marketing that children are exposed to that is not explicitly targeted to them.

5. Which foods and beverages should be restricted?

Research shows that marketing restrictions are more effective when they use an evidence-based nutrient profile model to determine which foods should be subject to restricted marketing.

Source: Global Health Advocacy Incubator. Nutrient Profile Models: A valuable tool for developing healthy food policies.

Using nutrient profile models helps align different healthy food policies. For example, if a front-of-package warning labeling policy relies on a strong nutrient profile model to determine which foods and beverages receive at least one warning label, marketing restrictions can apply to the same products. This consistency strengthens both policies, reduces administrative burden and makes enforcement clearer.

-> See Food Policy Hub’s case study “How Chile Integrated Marketing Restrictions Into Comprehensive Food Policy”

Implementation, monitoring and enforcement of marketing restrictions should be considered throughout the policy process, including during early phases.

The implementation plan should clearly specify:

• The government agency responsible for monitoring and enforcement
• Sanctions for noncompliance
• Human, financial and other resources needed to sustain monitoring and enforcement
• Training for government authorities on the scope of their duties, with special emphasis on those responsible for enforcement
• Public awareness campaigns explaining what the policy means, with particular attention to underserved communities
• Clear compliance guidance for businesses, including marketers and food companies
• A reasonable but firm implementation timeline—the industry often seeks to prolong implementation, so timelines should be strictly set, with consideration for extended deadlines for smaller businesses

Inform the public that the policy is in effect

Use mass media campaigns to help ensure consumers are aware of their rights and how to advocate for them. If the public is able to report noncompliance as part of enforcement efforts, demonstrate how they can report their findings.

Monitor implementation

The monitoring system should include oversight by the appropriate government agency, as well as public reports about infringements. Given the wide variety of places where marketing appears and the wide array of forms in which it appears, monitoring efforts will need to be broad. It may be useful to leverage existing monitoring mechanisms for other marketing areas, as well as new technologies such as artificial intelligence for harder-to-capture digital marketing.

Develop an enforcement system

The food marketing policy should be accompanied by a transparent and accessible complaints process that allows individuals, entities and organizations to report violations. This process should then trigger investigation, followed by appropriate action from the enforcement agency. The system should have sanctions that are severe enough to deter companies from not complying with the regulations.

Evidence is important to:

• Identify policy loopholes exploited by industry
• Support enforcement
• Maintain support for the policy
• Showcase evidence of effectiveness should the food and beverage industry introduce legal challenges

Who should conduct evaluations

Evaluations should be conducted by governments or by independent groups of academic experts with no conflicts of interest, clear terms of reference and public funding. Results should be publicly communicated through reports and peer-reviewed papers.

Evaluate provisions left out of restrictions

Evaluate aspects of the restriction that did not meet best practices to help make the case for extending its coverage.

For example, if the restriction focused on children under age 14, capturing information on changes in exposure of children over age 14 as a result of the restriction could help make the case for more comprehensive coverage.

Evaluations may measure:

1. Are marketing restrictions working as intended? (Process evaluation)

• • The extent of implementation of the policy, including:
    • Breaches of compliance and trends over time
    • Whether marketing shifted toward channels, times or age groups not covered by regulations

2. Are marketing restrictions meeting objectives? (Outcome evaluation)

• People’s exposure to marketing for unhealthy food and beverages, in places and during times covered and not covered by the restriction
• Techniques used by the food and beverage industry that are covered and not covered by the restriction (e.g., changes in use of brand characters)

3. Are marketing restrictions achieving longer-term goals? (Impact evaluation)

• People’s awareness, attitudes, beliefs and preferences toward food marketing and changes over time
• Effect on population-level dietary intake, including targeted nutrients of concern (e.g., saturated fat, salt and sugar), and on rates of diet-related chronic diseases