IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i18p9607-d633936.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Policy Inertia on Regulating Food Marketing to Children: A Case Study of Malaysia

Author

Listed:
  • SeeHoe Ng

    (Early Start, School of Health and Society, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia)

  • Bridget Kelly

    (Early Start, School of Health and Society, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia)

  • Heather Yeatman

    (Early Start, School of Health and Society, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia)

  • Boyd Swinburn

    (School of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland 1072, New Zealand)

  • Tilakavati Karupaiah

    (School of Biosciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Taylor’s University, Subang Jaya 47500, Malaysia
    Dietetics Program, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur 50300, Malaysia)

Abstract

Unhealthy food marketing shapes children’s preference towards obesogenic foods. In Malaysia, policies regulating this food marketing were rated as poor compared to global standards, justifying the need to explore barriers and facilitators during policy development and implementation processes. The case study incorporated qualitative methods, including historical mapping, semi-structured interviews with key informants and a search of cited documents. Nine participants were interviewed, representing the Federal government ( n = 5), food industry ( n = 2) and civil society ( n = 2). Even though the mandatory approach to government-led regulation of food marketing to children was the benchmark, more barriers than facilitators in the policy process led to industry self-regulations in Malaysia. Cited barriers were the lack of political will, industry resistance, complexity of legislation, technical challenges, and lack of resources, particularly professional skills. The adoption of industry self-regulation created further barriers to subsequent policy advancement. These included implementer indifference (industry), lack of monitoring, poor stakeholder relations, and policy characteristics linked to weak criteria and voluntary uptake. These underlying barriers, together with a lack of sustained public health advocacy, exacerbated policy inertia. Key recommendations include strengthening pro-public health stakeholder partnerships, applying sustained efforts in policy advocacy to overcome policy inertia, and conducting monitoring for policy compliance and accountability. These form the key lessons for advocating policy reforms.

Suggested Citation

  • SeeHoe Ng & Bridget Kelly & Heather Yeatman & Boyd Swinburn & Tilakavati Karupaiah, 2021. "Policy Inertia on Regulating Food Marketing to Children: A Case Study of Malaysia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-18, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:18:p:9607-:d:633936
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/18/9607/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/18/9607/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Phulkerd, Sirinya & Sacks, Gary & Vandevijvere, Stefanie & Worsley, Anthony & Lawrence, Mark, 2017. "Barriers and potential facilitators to the implementation of government policies on front-of-pack food labeling and restriction of unhealthy food advertising in Thailand," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 101-110.
    2. Thow, Anne Marie & Swinburn, Boyd & Colagiuri, Stephen & Diligolevu, Mere & Quested, Christine & Vivili, Paula & Leeder, Stephen, 2010. "Trade and food policy: Case studies from three Pacific Island countries," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 556-564, December.
    3. Sisnowski, Jana & Street, Jackie M. & Braunack-Mayer, Annette, 2016. "Targeting population nutrition through municipal health and food policy: Implications of New York City’s experiences in regulatory obesity prevention," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 24-34.
    4. Alsukait, Reem & Bleich, Sara & Wilde, Parke & Singh, Gitanjali & Folta, Sara, 2020. "Sugary drink excise tax policy process and implementation: Case study from Saudi Arabia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    5. Cobb, Roger & Ross, Jennie-Keith & Ross, Marc Howard, 1976. "Agenda Building as a Comparative Political Process," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 70(1), pages 126-138, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Choi, Seul Ki & Frongillo, Edward A. & Blake, Christine E. & Thrasher, James F., 2019. "Why are restricted food items still sold after the implementation of the school store policy? the case of South Korea," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 161-169.
    2. Jody Harris & Tabitha Hrynick & Mai Thi My Thien & Tuyen Huynh & Phuong Huynh & Phuong Nguyen & Anne-Marie Thow, 2022. "Tensions and coalitions: A new trade agreement affects the policy space for nutrition in Vietnam," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 14(5), pages 1123-1141, October.
    3. Alsukait, Reem & Wilde, Parke & Bleich, Sara N. & Singh, Gitanjali & Folta, Sara C., 2020. "Evaluating Saudi Arabia’s 50% carbonated drink excise tax: Changes in prices and volume sales," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 38(C).
    4. Abay, Kibrom A. & Ibrahim, Hosam & Breisinger, Clemens, 2022. "Food policies and obesity in low- and middle-income countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    5. Diana Pamela Villa Alvarez & Valentina Auricchio & Marzia Mortati, 2022. "Mapping design activities and methods of public sector innovation units through the policy cycle model," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(1), pages 89-136, March.
    6. Junk, Julian & Blatter, Joachim, 2010. "Transnational attention, domestic agenda-setting and international agreement: Modeling necessary and sufficient conditions for media-driven humanitarian interventions [Transnationale Aufmerksamkeit," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Global Governance SP IV 2010-301, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    7. Garrett Ward Richards, 2019. "The Science–Policy Relationship Hierarchy (SPRHi) model of co-production: how climate science organizations have influenced the policy process in Canadian case studies," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(1), pages 67-95, March.
    8. Megan Ferguson & Kerin O'Dea & Jon Altman & Marjory Moodie & Julie Brimblecombe, 2018. "Health-Promoting Food Pricing Policies and Decision-Making in Very Remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Community Stores in Australia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-14, December.
    9. Daniel Peplow & Sarah Augustine, 2020. "The Submissive Relationship of Public Health to Government, Politics, and Economics: How Global Health Diplomacy and Engaged Followership Compromise Humanitarian Relief," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-16, February.
    10. Michael B. Jones, 2021. "Standing in the environment: new fashion grassroots and old fashion court advocacy in the time of Trump," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 11(2), pages 173-182, June.
    11. Merz, Nicolas, 2017. "Gaining voice in the mass media: The effect of parties’ strategies on party–issue linkages in election news coverage," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 52(4), pages 436-460.
    12. Nisha Garud-Patkar, 2022. "Is digital diplomacy an effective foreign policy tool? Evaluating India’s digital diplomacy through agenda-building in South Asia," Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 18(2), pages 128-143, June.
    13. Barbara Bechter & Bernd Brandl & Gerhard Schwarz, 2009. "Determinanten der Einstellung zu wirtschaftspolitischen Maßnahmen," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 37321, March.
    14. Tobias Krause, 2015. "A Natural Experiment on Media Attention and Public Enterprise Accountability," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 297-315, June.
    15. Elide Di-Clemente & José Manuel Hernández-Mogollón & Tomás López-Guzmán, 2020. "Culinary Tourism as An Effective Strategy for a Profitable Cooperation between Agriculture and Tourism," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-15, March.
    16. Pomeranz, Jennifer L. & Wilde, Parke & Mozaffarian, Dariush & Micha, Renata, 2019. "Mandating front-of-package food labels in the U.S. – What are the First Amendment obstacles?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1-1.
    17. Chen, Xuan & Liu, Yizao & Jaenicke, Edward C. & Rabinowitz, Adam N., 2019. "New concerns on caffeine consumption and the impact of potential regulations: The case of energy drinks," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 1-1.
    18. Talia Goren & Itai Beeri & Dana R. Vashdi, 2023. "Framing policies to mobilize citizens' behavior during a crisis: Examining the effects of positive and negative vaccination incentivizing policies," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), pages 570-591, April.
    19. John K. Glenn, 2003. "Contentious Politics and Democratization: Comparing the Impact of Social Movements on the Fall of Communism in Eastern Europe," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 51(1), pages 103-120, March.
    20. Heenan, Maddie & Jan, Stephen & Ralph, Martyn & Sacks, Gary & Swinburn, Boyd & Shanthosh, Janani, 2023. "Priority setting for non-communicable disease prevention – Co-producing a regulatory agenda informing novel codes of practice in Australia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 333(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:18:p:9607-:d:633936. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.