The regulatory governance conditions that support effective food policies for population nutrition: a qualitative comparative analysis

Objective: To identify the regulatory governance factors that lead to food policies achieving improvements in food environment, consumer behaviour and diet-related health outcomes. Design: Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) was used to investigate the relationship between regulatory governance conditions and population nutrition outcomes. The regulatory governance conditions examined entailed: high industry involvement in the policy process, regulatory design, policy instrument design, policy monitoring, and enforcement. Participants: N=29 policy cases in the policy areas of food reformulation, nutrition labelling, food taxation and food marketing. Setting: Policies implemented in 13 countries. Results: Comprehensive monitoring was identified as a necessary regulatory governance condition for food policies to have an impact and was present in 94% of policy cases that had a positive impact on nutrition outcomes. We identified two sufficient combinations of regulatory governance conditions. The first sufficient combination of conditions comprised an absence of high industry involvement in the policy process, combined with the presence of strict regulatory design, best-practice instrument design, and comprehensive monitoring and enforcement. Ninety-six percent of policy cases with positive impacts on nutrition outcomes displayed this combination. The second sufficient combination of conditions comprised an absensce of high industry involvement in the policy process, best practice instrument design and comprehensive monitoring. Eighty-two percent of policy cases with positive impacts on nutrition outcomes displayed this combination. Conclusion: These findings show the importance of regulatory governance on policy outcomes. They suggest a need for more government-led nutrition policy processes and transparent monitoring systems that are independent from industry.

From Marrakesh to Glasgow: Looking Backward to Move Forward on Emissions Trading

The Paris Rulebook—nearly complete, but with the ‘markets’ text tied to Article 6 of the Paris Agreement unadopted after nearly three years—invites comparison with a similar effort under the Kyoto Protocol: the Marrakesh Accords. This article compares the Paris Rulebook and the 2001 Marrakesh Accords implementing the Kyoto Protocol as a way of exploring the similarities and differences in regulatory design between the two sub-regimes and their implications for sustainability and climate integrity. An in-depth analysis of the negotiating history and the text of the two instruments yields trenchant and perhaps unexpected conclusions. Issues that plagued the Marrakesh Accords also appear in similar form in the Paris Rulebook discussions around Article 6; however, because of the difference in structure between the two treaties, even more complex issues have arisen in the Rulebook negotiations. The article reflects on the fundamentally different purpose of the ‘markets’ text in the Rulebook in comparison with its Kyoto/Marrakesh precursor, as well as on the implications of those differences for the Article 6 negotiations.