Create a Healthier Food Environment: - Taylor's University ...

Benchmarking Food Industry Commitments to

Create a Healthier Food Environment:Business Impact Assessment (BIA)- Obesity Malaysia 2019An analysis of company commitments and disclosure practices related to population nutrition, obesity and diet-related non-communicable disease prevention.

Business Impact Assessment CVR 2019 v3 copy.pdf 1 22/07/2019 2:38 PM

BIA-Obesity Brochure 2019 A4 v3.indd 1 16/08/2019 11:45 AM

[ 2 ]

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

© Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia 2019

Contact details: Prof. Tilakavati [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

Visiting ProfessorFaculty of Health SciencesUniversiti Kebangsaan MalaysiaJalan Raja Muda Abdul Aziz50300 Kuala Lumpur

SRI ProfessorSchool of BiosciencesFaculty of Health & Medical SciencesTaylor’s University (Lakeside Campus)No.1, Jalan Taylor’s 47500 Subang JayaSelangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia

The study (1) benchmarked the commitments across top manufacturers, quick service restaurants and retailers, and (2) provided recommendations to align with government’s directions and international norms.

The study adopted the INFORMAS protocol – Business Impact Assessment (BIA) - Obesity with minor adjustments to suit the Malaysian context. Evidence on 6 domains (corporate strategy, product formulation, nutrition labelling, promotion practices, product accessibility and relationships with external organisations) were collected from publicly available information.

A robust process was undertaken with consenting companies (n=6) able to verify the evidence; whereas random market surveys complemented the evidence collection for non-consenting companies (n=27). An Expert Panel (including national and international members representing government, non-government organisation and academia) assessed the comprehensiveness, specificity and transparency of the commitments to Malaysia. Constructed recommendations were reviewed by senior government stakeholders (n=13).

Key Findings:

Most Malaysian food companies’ commitments to addressing population nutrition and health under the corporate strategy domain varied greatly, when matched against global best practice.

Companies’ overall weighted scores ranged from 1% to 60%, with only 8 companies scoring >25%.

Companies that fully engaged in the research may increase transparency of their commitments in population nutrition and health, and some practised substantial sustainability reporting (e.g. using the Global Reporting Initiative Standards).

Key Recommendations for Food Companies:

A holistic set of 14 recommendations were directed to Malaysian food companies towards setting SMART targets for product reformulation, standardise explicit nutrition labelling to inform choices, practise responsible marketing policies in all settings, apply sustainable pricing and increase availability of healthier products, and disclose all national CSR activities.

RESEARCH TEAM

Members:

Prof. Dr. Tilakavati Karupaiah1,2

(Project Leader)

Mr. Ng See Hoe3

(Research Fellow)

Contributors:

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Gary Sacks4

Ms. Ella Robinson4

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Bridget Kelly3

Prof. Dr. Heather Yeatman3

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Karuthan Chinna2

Prof. Dr. Boyd Swinburn5

Advisory members:

Emeritus Prof. Dr. Mohd Noor Ismail2

Dr. Stefanie Vandevijvere5

1Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Malaysia.2Taylor’s University, Malaysia.3University of Wollongong, Australia. 4Deakin University, Australia.5University of Auckland, New Zealand.

This benchmarking process provides baseline data on food companies’ commitments and disclosures related to population nutrition and health. It provides an opportunity to set accountability frameworks for public health nutrition in Malaysia. The research team welcomes efforts from all stakeholders including food industry, government, non-government organisation, and academia to create healthier food environments for Malaysia.

[ 2 ]


[ 3 ]

BACKGROUNDMalaysia has a high prevalence of overweight and obesity, coupled with a high burden of diet-related non-communicable diseases (NCDs).1,2

This burdens the health care system financially, with escalating costs to the Government of Malaysia,3,4 and also affects human productivity due to disease complications. Of concern, the estimated risk of premature death from NCDs is 17%.5

Dietary risks play a major role in the burden of NCDs in Malaysia.1 Unhealthy food environments cultivate poor diet quality associated with obesity and related chronic diseases. Prevention efforts that focus on improving food environments are likely to have a significant impact on the healthiness of population diets. Government, the food industry and civil society all have important roles to play in fostering healthier food environments. This report has a focus on food company policies and commitments related to population nutrition, obesity and diet-related NCDs prevention (hereon referred to as population nutrition and health).

~x2

~x2

In every TWO adults aged ≥18, ONE will be classified either overweight (30.0%)

or obese (17.7%)8

Childhood obesity doubled from 6.1% in 20119

to 11.9% in 20158

Benchmarking company nutrition policies and commitments Commitments and disclosures of top Malaysian food companies, covering food and non-alcoholic beverage manufacturers, quick service restaurants and food retailers, were assessed in relation to population nutrition and health. This was a pioneering academic-led study in Malaysia, which aimed to identify gaps in food company policies and their Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) approaches, using available information and comparing across companies, government mandates and international norms. The findings will inform relevant stakeholders about food industry leadership in relation to nutrition and food environment policies, as well as provide recommendations for improving their commitments and disclosure practices. Due caution was taken when engaging with the food industry on these food policy issues. Public interest was foremost, while policies supportive of sustainable business models in achieving Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were also of importance. Underlying conflicts of interest were managed.

Globally-developed methods, tailored to the Malaysian context Business Impact Assessment (BIA) - Obesity is an instrument for evaluating food industry commitments and disclosures, developed by the International Network for Food and Obesity / Non-Communicable Diseases Research, Monitoring and Action Support (INFORMAS) group.6 This instrument is based on the Access to Nutrition Index (ATNI) method,7 WHO recommendations, and public health literature. The BIA-Obesity instrument covers domains related to: (1) corporate strategy; (2) product formulation; (3) nutrition labelling; (4) promotion practices; (5) product accessibility; and (6) relationships with external organisations. Specific indicators for each sector and domain are based on the level of transparency, comprehensiveness and specificity of the commitment(s) to Malaysia.

1Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) 2018, GBD Compare Data Visualization. Seattle, WA: IHME, University of Washington, viewed 9 November 2018, <http://vizhub.healthdata.org/gbd-compare>2Ng et al. 2014, ‘Global, regional, and national prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adults during 1980–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013’. Lancet 384, 766–781.3Mustapha et al. 2017, ‘What are the direct medical costs of managing Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Malaysia?’ Med J Malaysia 72(5): 271-277.4The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) 2017, Tackling obesity in ASEAN: Prevalence, impact and guidance on interventions, London: EIU.5World Health Organisation (WHO) 2018, Noncommunicable diseases country profiles 2018, Geneva: WHO.6Swinburn et al. 2013, ‘INFORMAS (International Network for Food and Obesity/ non-communicable diseases Research, Monitoring and Action Support): overview and key principles’, Obes Rev 14 (Suppl.1): 1-12.7Access to Nutrition Foundation (ATNF) 2018, Access to Nutrition Index – Global Index 2018, Netherlands: ATNF.8Institute for Public Health 2015, National Health and Morbidity Survey 2015: Non-Communicable Diseases, Risk Factors & Other Health Problems. Kuala Lumpur: National Institutes of Health, Ministry of Health.9Institute for Public Health 2011, National Health and Morbidity Survey 2011 Non-Communicable Diseases. Kuala Lumpur: National Institutes of Health, Ministry of Health.


[ 4 ]

PROCESS OF ASSESSMENT

Domains of the BIA-Obesity tool

In total, 33 companies were selected based on Euromonitor market share data (2016), for the assessment protocol of BIA-Obesity Malaysia. This included 22 Manufacturers (representing 62.9% retail selling price), 5 Quick Service Restaurants (QSR) (79.1%) and 6 Retailers (26.2%). Publicly available information (national and global commitments published between 2014 and 2017) was compiled for all 33 companies. For consenting companies, this information was cross-checked and verified. For non-consenting companies, random market surveys of their associated food brands were conducted to construct evidence for some of the indicators.

Trained members (n=6) of an Expert Panel performed the assessment with an external Expert called in whenever a ‘simple majority’ consensus could not be reached. A minimum of 5 Expert Panel members comprising of representatives from the government, non-government organisation, and academia assessed each company with 94% of indicators reaching ‘simple majority’. Scores were combined across domains to derive an overall weighted score of 100% for ranking purposes. A separate round table session with 13 government stakeholders serving as a Reviewer Panel reviewed recommendations of the Expert Panel, to be in line with the national policies and government’s direction. Prior to the public dissemination, individual scorecards were sent via email to each company for feedback. Companies who did not officially respond prior to the deadline (28th May 2019) were considered as “acquiescent by silence” to the scorecard rating and recommendations.

Domain DescriptionDomain Weightings by Sector (%)

Manufacturers QSR Retailers

A. Corporate strategy

Company’s overarching commitment to improving population nutrition for reducing obesity and diet-related NCDs. 10 10 10

B. Product formulationa

Policies related to product development and reformulation, in particular nutrients of concern (salt, saturated fat, trans-fat, added sugar) and portion size/ energy.

30 25 25

C. Nutrition labellinga,b

Disclosure and presentation of nutrient information, including quantitative ingredients lists, product and front-of-pack labelling, nutrition claims and online nutrition information.

20 15 15

D. Promotion practicesa

Policies related to reducing the exposure and power of non-core food promotion to children and the audit of compliance. 30 25 25

E. Product accessibilitya

Policies related to the affordability, availability of healthy compared to non-core products. 5 20 20

F. Relationships with external organisations

Details of policies related to funding and/or support provided to professional organisations, external research, community groups, nutrition education and active lifestyle programs, public-private partnership and industry membership.

5 5 5

Abbreviations: NCDs=Non-communicable diseases; QSR=Quick service restaurants Note: Non-core foods refer to products with high undesirable nutrients such as high fat, refined sugars and salt. For each domain and sector, the INFORMAS experts set by consensus the maximum points and weightings based on the impacts on obesity and population nutrition. aFor retailer sector, it refers to in-house brands or products. For promotion domain, it covers responsible to all consumers (including adults and children).bFor quick service restaurant sector, this domain is product and menu labelling.

1

TopCompaniesSelection

(as per Euromonitor data

2016)

2

Preliminary Data

Collection

(using national and global publicity

available information)

3

Industry Engagement

(consent to validate and supplement extra evidence)

4

Establish BIA-Obesity

Expert Panel

(international and national experts)

5

Pilot Testing

(review pre-de�ned marking scheme)

6

Assessment

(provide training and score each

company)

7

Review Recommen-

dations

(provide suggestions to each

company)

8

Preliminary Finding

Feedback

(private scorecard dissemination to each company)

9

Finalised BIA-Obesity

Report

(discuss launching plan)

10

Disseminate Results

(publicly release e.g. technical

report, academic publication, etc)

BIA rajah copy.pdf 1 16/08/2019 11:41 AM


[ 5 ]

KEY FINDINGS

The food industry in Malaysia portrays itself as committed to some aspects of population nutrition and health.

However, across all companies there was a lack of comprehensive effort to align with national policies and international norms for addressing healthy food environments. Large disparities in the comprehensiveness and specificity of companies’ commitments were identified. In addition, most companies lacked transparency in reporting of their policies and commitments.

• Few companies consented to participate (6/33) in BIA-Obesity Malaysia, despite significant efforts to engage with industry. Low interest, coupled with limited resources, were barriers that affected participation in this study.

• Company scores ranged widely from 60% for Nestlé to nearly zero for Ramly (1%), Domino’s (2%), Econsave (2%) and Mydin (2%).

• Only 8/33 companies recorded an overall weighted score of more than 25%. This represents a resounding ‘insufficiency’ in implementing policies and actions to support healthy food environments.

• Limited commitments and disclosure practices were evident across all selected companies from quick service restaurant and retailer sectors.

• Consenting companies (6/33) that fully engaged in the process improved resolution in the assessment, which may have contributed to their higher ranking.

• Overall, scoring indicated considerable room for improvement across the Malaysian food industry, with greater commitments required to integrate corporate strategy with population health and nutrition goals.

60

52

48

44

43

38

26

26

23

22

15

14

13

12

11

10

7

6

5

5

3

1

10

7

6

4

2

14

13

6

6

2

2

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Nestlé*

Unilever*

Dutch Lady*

Mondelēz

Coca-Cola*

Fraser & Neave*

Fonterra*

Kellogg's

Etika Group

Ferrero

Malaysia Milk

Gardenia

Ayam Brand

Munchy's

Campbell's Soup

Yeo Hiap Seng

Mamee

Barkath Co-Ro

Ayamas

Massimo

Hup Seng

Ramly

KFC

Pizza Hut

McDonald's

Dunkin' Donuts

Domino's

Tesco

Aeon Group

7-Eleven

Giant

Econsave

Mydin

Fo

od

an

d B

evera

ge

Ma

nufa

ctu

rer

Sec

tor

Re

taile

r S

ecto

rQ

SR

Sec

tor

†

†

†

†

†

†

†

*Consenting company; †Beverage manufacturers

Assessment was based on:

TransparencyComprehensiveness

Specificity

Relevance to the Malaysian context


[ 6 ]

KEY FINDINGS

Areas where food companies in Malaysia have indicated some evidence to population nutrition and health:

Corporate strategy: A high proportion of food companies (28/33) recognised their role to improve population nutrition and health, evidenced by various broad commitments and/or limited progress in one or more domains. Product formulation: Many companies (24/33) have initiated some efforts to reformulate at least one nutrient of concern (e.g. sodium, added sugars, saturated fat, or trans-fat) or reduce energy content/ portion size of products in their portfolio. Nutrition labelling: Most companies did not publish specific policy statements on nutrition labelling. However, data from the complementary market survey revealed some action (e.g. total sugars or trans-fat declarations; government-led front-of-pack labelling) to facilitate informed choices (30/33).

Promotion practices: Only one-third of the companies published some commitments to restrict unhealthy food marketing, and most of them were signatories of the ‘Responsible Advertising to Children Initiative – Malaysia Pledge 2013’. Product accessibility: Twenty-one of 33 companies disclosed some evidence on accessibility, such as incorporated a few ‘healthier’ products in the product portfolio (based on their own classification), disclosed broad commitments to improve product affordability and/or published company’s position on fiscal policies, particularly taxation on non-core foods. Relationships with external organisations: All companies reported at least one type of CSR activity including funding or in-kind support for health and nutrition to professional organisations, research, philanthropic activities, nutrition education and active lifestyle programs or public private partnerships, with some companies explicitly disclosing a business code or guideline to restrict political donations.

Company Name Ranking (sector)

Corporate Strategy

Product Formulation

Nutrition Labelling

Promotion Practices

Product Accessibility

Relationship with External Organisations

Nestlé* 1Unilever* 2Dutch Lady* 3Mondelēz 4Coca-Cola* 5Fraser & Neave* 6Fonterra* 7Kellogg's 8Etika Group 9Ferrero 10Malaysia Milk 11Gardenia 12Ayam Brand 13Munchy's 14Campbell's Soup 15Yeo Hiap Seng 16Mamee 17Barkath Co-Ro 18Ayamas 19Massimo 20Hup Seng 21Ramly 22KFC 1Pizza Hut 2McDonald's 3Dunkin' Donuts 4Domino's 5Tesco 1Aeon Group 27-Eleven 3Giant 4Econsave 5Mydin 6

*Consenting company 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Score equals to zero

QSR

Secto

rFo

od an

d Bev

erag

e Man

ufac

ture

r Se

ctor

Reta

iler

Secto

r


Prod

uctF

ormulation

1.Setandregularlyreportagainst

nationallevelSMARTtargetsfor

reformulationalignedwiththe

HealthierChoiceLogo(HCL)and

applytheWHOnutrie

ntprofiling

system

sforallrelevantproducts.

Nutrition

Lab

ellin

g1.Providecomprehensivenutrition

labellingonlineandon

packsuchassodium,tran

s-fat,sugarsandquantitativeingredient

declarations(QUIDs),consistentwithgovernmentdirections,initiativesand/orregulations.

2.Participateingovernment-ledinitiativessuchasMalaysianFoodCompositionDatabase(MyFCD)andfront-of-pack(FOP)labelling.

3.Only‘healthier’products(HCLand/orWHOcriteria)tocarrynutritionclaims.

Prom

otionPractice

s1.Establishresponsiblemarketing

policiesforallsettings.Criteriato

include:

•childrenupto18yearsold,

•time-basedrestrictionon

children’sprogramminghours,

•restrictadvertisingwhenthe

greatestnumbersofchildren

arewatchingsuchas15-25%or

moreofchildrenaudience

viewership,

•applicationoftheWHO

nutrientprofilingsystem

s.

2.Regularlydiscloseindependent

nationalauditsofcompliance.

Prod

uctA

ccessibility

1.Applysustainablepricingpracticestoaddress

theaffordabilityofhealthiercomparedto

non-coreproducts(i.e.notshort-term‘price

off’marketing).

2.Increaseavailability(e.g.placementstrategies)

of‘healthier’products(asperW

HOnutrie

nt

profiling).

3.SupportWHO’spositiononfiscalpolicies.

Relation

shipswith

ExternalOrgan

isations

1.Publicandregularconsolidated

disclosureofallnationalCSR

activities.

2.Practisenocommercialbranding

andproductpromotioninCSR

activities.

CorporateStrategy

1.Referencenationalandinternationalrecommendations(e.g.WHONCDactionplan,SDGs)toformulatecompany’snutritiontargetsandplans.

2.Linktargetstokeyperformanceindicatorsofseniormanagers.

3.RegularlyreportonprogresstowardstargetsattheMalaysianlevel.

KEY

REC

OM

MEN

DA

TIO

NS

FOR

FO

OD

CO

MPA

NIE

S A

CR

OSS

TH

REE S

EC

TOR

S

Abbr

evia

tions

: CS

R=Co

rpor

ate

Soci

al R

espo

nsib

ility

; FO

P=Fr

ont-o

f-pac

k la

belli

ng;

HCL=

Heal

thie

r Cho

ice

Logo

; M

yFCD

=Mal

aysia

n Fo

od C

ompo

sition

Dat

abas

e;

NCD

=Non

-com

mun

icab

le d

iseas

es;

SDGs

=Sus

tain

able

Dev

elop

men

t Goa

ls;

QU

IDs=

Qua

ntita

tive

ingr

edie

nt d

ecla

ratio

ns;

SMAR

T=Sp

ecifi

c, m

easu

rabl

e, a

chie

vabl

e, re

leva

nt, ti

me

boun

d;W

HO=W

orld

Hea

lth O

rgan

isatio

n


[ 8 ]

BEST AVAILABLE COMPANY’S COMMITMENTS AT GLOBAL LEVELExamples of best practice commitments from other countries as identified through INFORMAS database or extracted from the global commitments of the companies for BIA-Obesity Malaysia are summarised as below:

Domain Sector Selected Commitments of Food Industry Across Sectors

A. C

orpo

rate

stra

tegy M

anuf

actu

rer New Zealand: Nestlé and Fonterra published annual reports against their national objectives and targets related to nutrition,

and indicated KPIs of senior managers that linked to their nutrition strategy.

Australia: Nestlé and Lion Dairy & Drinks published annual reports against their national objectives and targets related to nutrition, and indicated KPIs of senior managers that linked to their nutrition strategy.

QSR Global: McDonald’s published 2020 Aspirational Goals in top 9 markets and the McD-Alliance Partnership on Clinton Global

Initiative Commitment to Action in 20 markets. (Note: Markets did not include Malaysia)

Reta

iler

Japan: Seven & i Holdings Co. Ltd.’s committed to having a good balance of nutrients in food products through in-house products i.e. calorie and sodium content of Seven-Meal adjusted, with menu development and nutrient content supervised by physicians and dietitians.

United Kingdom: Tesco committed to improving the health and wellbeing of its customers, and aligned its approach to the UN’s SDGs. Tesco UK has nutrition and health related commitments and associated targets, which are regularly reported in their sustainability report.

B. P

rodu

ct fo

rmul

ation

Man

ufac

ture

r

New Zealand and Australia: Nestlé set specific, time bound reformulation targets for the reduction of saturated fat, sodium and added sugar across the company’s global portfolio, and has reported removal of all artificially produced trans-fats from its food and beverage products. Compliance with reformulation targets is audited and publicly disclosed on a regular basis.

QSR

Global: McDonald’s committed to offering healthier drinks and side items for children’s meals, like fruit, water and low-fat dairy.

United States: Dunkin’ Donuts introduced DDSMART that includes measurable criteria (e.g. 25% fewer calories, sugar, fat, saturated fat or sodium than the comparable fare and/or wholegrain ingredients).

United States: Domino’s Pizza Smart Slice Program meets the USDA meal pattern regulation by reducing 35% sodium in sauces, using wholegrain dough, reducing 33% fat and 55% sodium in the toppings and using 50% lower fat and sodium lite cheese in the recipes.

Germany: KFC introduces grilled KFC Gourmet Chicken, Grilled Chicken Salad and Yummy Twister with a dedicated special green menu board space.

Reta

iler

United Kingdom: Tesco Choice or Everyday Value brands in line with the ‘Healthy Living’ brand have at least 30% less calories and meet the Public Health Responsibility Deal 2012 guideline by limiting salt, sugar, saturated fat and trans-fat content.

New Zealand: Foodstuffs New Zealand committed to reformulating in-house brand products to support the government’s 2015 Childhood Obesity plan. For instance, set a target to reduce sodium and sugar by 10% by the end of 2018 across their home brand product.

C. N

utriti

on la

belli

ng

Man

ufac

ture

r

Australia: Sanitarium committed to implementing the Australian government-endorsed Health Star Rating system across all products and providing comprehensive online nutrition information.

QSR

Australia: Subway, KFC and Pizza Hut provide kilojoule menu board labelling.

United States: Walt Disney restaurants, resorts and theme parks introduced an icon to easily identify healthier menu items (in-store and online).

Reta

iler

New Zealand: Countdown and Foodstuffs supermarkets committed to implementing the Health Star Ratings (HSR) across all own-brand products. In addition, Countdown has committed to add the HSR to products on its online shopping website.

Australia: Woolworths and Coles committed to implementing the Australian government-endorsed HSR system across all in-house brand products. In addition, Coles has a clear system for determining whether nutrition content claims are made in a responsible way for in-house brand products e.g., only making claims of “99% fat free” on products considered ‘healthy’ overall.

United States and Canada: Hannaford Supermarkets (United States) and Loblaw Inc. (Canada) have implemented the Guiding Stars program, a licensed, independent shelf tag nutrition rating system to identify healthy foods and beverages in all categories (including fresh produce or meat products and packaged foods).


[ 9 ]

Abbreviations: CSR=Corporate Social Responsibility; F&V=fruits and vegetables; HSR=Health Star Rating; KPI=Key Performance Index; QSR=Quick Service Restaurants; USDA=United States Department of Agriculture; UN’s SDG=United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals; WHO=World Health Organisation.

Note: Food and beverage options listed above might require further improvement in one or more nutrients of concern (e.g. sugars, saturated fat, trans-fat and sodium) to better align with the Healthier Choice Logo criteria (Malaysia) and/or WHO nutrient profiling systems. For comparison with the assessed companies’ commitments, please refer to the Technical Report - Individual Company Scorecard.

BEST AVAILABLE COMPANY’S COMMITMENTS AT GLOBAL LEVEL

Domain Sector Selected Commitments of Food Industry Across Sectors

D. P

rom

otion

pra

ctice

s Man

ufac

ture

r Global: Danone implemented a marketing policy applying to children under 12 years that covers broadcast and non-broadcast media. It committed to not using promotional techniques that appeal to children, and to not market in the vicinity of schools, in secondary schools, or in places where children gather (e.g., day care centers, activity centers). Danone reports compliance with its policies, and discloses and audits its marketing spending on ‘healthy’ products, with a view to increased spending on marketing for these products over time.

QSR

United States: DineEquity, the parent company of Applebee’s (restaurants) and IHOP (family restaurant chains famous for pancakes etc.), removed soft drinks from kids’ meals and children’s menus, whereas soft drinks can still be ordered (menus only list milk and juice).

Australia: Since 2008, KFC committed to not advertise or market children’s meals in the media or target advertising campaigns directly to children under 14 years of age. They removed toys from their kid’s meals. Their compliance to the commitments is assessed by external audit on an annual basis.

Reta

iler

Australia: In 2015, Woolworths launched a ‘free fruit for kids’ initiative, providing free fresh fruit to children under 12 in all of their major stores nationally.

E. P

rodu

ct a

cces

sibi

lity

Man

ufac

ture

r Global: Unilever set a clear, time-bound target towards transition of a portion of its portfolio to a healthier product category. The company made a commitment to increase the affordability and availability of ‘healthy’ products across its global markets and identifies accessibility issues as a key part of its business strategy, aligning with the UN’s SDG.

New Zealand: Coca-Cola committed to not directly supply any school with full sugar carbonated beverages or energy drinks. Frucor Suntory commits to have one in three products to be low or no sugar by 2030.

QSR Australia and United States: Subway provided a healthier side and drink option as the default in its children’s meals, and in the

US explicitly aligned children’s meals (including side and drink items) with USDA Dietary Guidelines for Americans.

Reta

iler

United Kingdom: Tesco removed all confectionery from its checkouts across all stores nationally from 2015. Tesco also implemented Little Helps Plan and Weekly Little Helps to promote healthy products. ALDI committed to increasing the consumption of fruit and vegetables through pricing and promotion initiatives such as discounted fruits and vegetable (F&V), price promotions at point of sale, and weekly low-cost F&V deals.

Japan: 7-Eleven offered Seven-Meal home delivery in Japan with more than 15 ingredients and over 120g vegetables, supervised by dietitians.

New Zealand: Countdown provided free fruit for kids programme in store and the Odd Bunch programme provided odd looking F&V at a cheaper price. They pledged to expand health and wellness sections in the supermarket and to increase F&V sales through active promotions to increase accessibility and affordability of healthier options. They also committed to have at least one confectionary-free checkout in every store.

France: Intermarché hypermarket launched Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables selling unattractive fruits and vegetables at a discounted rate (by around 30 percent).

F. R

elati

onsh

ips w

ith o

ther

or

gani

satio

ns Man

ufac

ture

r Global: Coca-Cola International published a list of the external groups it funds/supports, including details of the nature, date and amount of support/funding given to research institutions, health professionals, scientific experts, professional associations and partnerships related to health and nutrition. The company disclosed all nutrition and active lifestyle programs they are affiliated to, and updates all information annually.

New Zealand: Campbell Soup Company’s subsidiary - Arnott’s has a strict policy prohibiting political donations.

QSR

Canada: Les Rotisserises St. Hubert specified descriptions of donation recipient eligibility for their charitable organisation (St-Hubert Foundation), which excluded sports organisations or political organisations.

Canada: Boston Pizza publicly stated they do not make any corporate donations to political affiliates.

Reta

iler

Canada: Loblaw Companies Ltd. (Canadian food retailer) published its membership in industry and stakeholder alliances in its CSR Report.


[ 10 ]

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

This study is the first in Malaysia to assess the population nutrition and health commitments and disclosure practices of the food industry, covering food and non-alcoholic beverage manufacturers, quick service restaurants and retailers. The following points summarise the major findings from this study:

Most Malaysian food companies (28 out of 33 companies) recognise their role in addressing population nutrition and health, evidenced by various broad commitments reported in one or more domains to fulfil this obligation, under the corporate strategy domain.

Malaysian food companies’ commitments to population nutrition and health vary greatly, with overall weighted scores ranging from 1% to 60%. Reporting discrepancies were identified, particularly when matching the collective evidence of local practice against best practice available globally, even from the same company.

Only 8 out of 33 companies achieved more than 25% for their overall weighted score. This reflects room for improvement to increase transparency, comprehensiveness and specificity of commitments from all assessed companies. Consenting companies (6/33) who fully engaged in the process improved resolution in their assessments, which may have contributed to their higher ranking.

Food companies that practised sustainability reporting (e.g. Global Reporting Initiative Standards) fulfilled one or more of the characteristics below:a. Acknowledged and aligned some corporate positions with National Plan of Action

for Nutrition of Malaysia III 2016-2025, WHO’s recommendations and/or Sustainable Development Goals.

b. Practised or adhered to Malaysian government-led initiatives, such as energy front-of-pack labelling, Healthier Choice Logo, BeSS (Clean, Safe and Healthy), Guideline on the Nutrition Information Labelling of Fast Foods and/or Malaysian Food Composition Database (MyFCD) programmes.

c. Reported as a signatory to the Malaysia Pledge on Responsible Advertising to Children and/or practised an internal marketing policy with compliance audits.

d. Collectively reported CSR and engagement activities, including a published policy or guideline on restricting political donations.

This study provides baseline data on food companies’ commitments and disclosures. It provides a useful reference to all food industry stakeholders (small and medium enterprises, local companies and multinational companies operating in Malaysia), policy makers and implementers, professional bodies, non-governmental organisations and academia. If decision makers in Malaysian food industries assessed in this report could reflect on, examine and compare practice profiles, as well as act on the constructive recommendations, this will contribute positive changes to the Malaysian food environment.

Where relevant, the research team strongly encourages the integration of the principles and areas assessed in this study with nationally endorsed sustainability reporting systems (e.g. incorporated into the Global Reporting Initiative Standards) for publicly listed and other companies, to promote transparency of commitments on population nutrition and health to the public and investors.


[ 11 ]

Many challenges were faced and steps were taken to mitigate risks, resulting in a longer period of evidence retrieval and analysis. Key issues are detailed below:

a) Low participation, with the non-consenting companies citing reasons such as limited resources, tight schedules and scepticism of the assessment.

b) Implementation performance was not assessed, despite some companies reporting commitments and disclosures in population nutrition and health.

c) As there is no universally accepted system to determine nutritional quality of products, BIA-Obesity Malaysia integrated the WHO nutrient profiling systems such as WHO Western Pacific Regional Office1 (WPRO) and South East Asia Region2 (SEAR) models as the best practice standards.

• WHO recommended Member States to “establish a national nutrient-profiling model to regulate marketing, taxation, labelling and provision in public institutions based on WHO’s regional or global nutrient-profile models”, as articulated in the Report of the Commission on Ending Childhood Obesity: Implementation Plan.3

• Where these models are not applicable to one or more specific product’s portfolio (e.g. against standards articulated in the national regulations), the food industry is encouraged to publicly disclose clear justification statements to improve the reviewing process in the future.

d) Product portfolios between companies were very heterogeneous, and different baselines of the nutritional quality limited direct comparisons of the magnitude of companies’ commitments.

e) The data sourced for the BIA-Obesity Malaysia study were primarily from 2014 to 2017. Some companies may have subsequently implemented new policies or approaches or published new evidence of these activities. Such information would not have been included in this technical report but would be included in the next period of assessment. BIA-Obesity Malaysia serves to benchmark the first assessment findings to monitor future progress through periodic follow up assessments that will track new policies or approaches of companies in population nutrition and health.

LIMITATIONS

DISCLAIMERThe research team believed that the information collected was reliable and extensive using a robust methodology, but cannot guarantee its completeness and accuracy as detailed in the limitations. A point to note is that findings did not address whether commitments were being implemented in practice and the performance warrants further evaluation.

The research team strongly recommends the use of this report be limited to informational purposes only (e.g. discuss about the strengths, acknowledge gaps in commitments and actions to be taken based on recommendations indicated in this report), rather than to be incorporated as a promotional material in a marketing campaign for any commercial intention. The research team does not endorse any product, brand nor company.

1World Health Organisation (WHO) 2016, WHO nutrient profile model for the Western Pacific Region 2016: a tool to protect children from food marketing, WHO, Regional Office for the Western Pacific: Manila.2World Health Organisation (WHO) 2017, WHO Nutrient Profile Model for South-East Asia Region, WHO, Regional Office for South-East Asia: New Delhi.3World Health Organisation (WHO) 2017. Report of the Commission on Ending Childhood Obesity: implementation plan. Seventieth World Health Assembly A70/31, 27 March 2017.


[ 12 ]

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The project is supported by INFORMAS (International Network for Food and Obesity/NCDs Research, Monitoring and Action Support), a global network of public-interest organisations and researchers that seek to monitor and benchmark public and private sector actions to create healthy food environments and reduce obesity and non-communicable diseases (NCDs) globally.

Firstly, this Project was enabled through the country clearance provided by the Economic Planning Unit (EPU), Prime Minister’s Department. Access to industry stakeholders was supported through the Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers Food Manufacturing Group (FMM MAFMAG).

The critical role played by the Business Impact Assessment (BIA) – Obesity Expert Panel in this Project was invaluable. Seven members (six internal and one external) were appointed to the Expert Panel to evaluate evidence and perform the scoring. In addition, government stakeholders who contributed their valuable inputs to improve recommendations in line with government’s direction. For the purposes of anonymity, these experts will remain unnamed.

Special thanks to Ms. Nongnuch Jindarattanporn (International Health Policy Program Foundation, Thailand) for sharing Thailand’s experience and giving valuable inputs to improve methods in data collection and/or revise the BIA-Obesity tool. Lastly, Ms. Ruth Merry Paranjothi Yanok, Ms. Lian Si Yi, and Mr. Ong Gild Rick, were the backbone for this Project covering both administrative and technical support.

FUNDING AND INTEREST DECLARATIONS

This research was solely funded by International Development Research Centre (IDRC) (Grant number 108176-001), a Crown Corporation of the government of Canada.

In addition, in-kind contributions were received from the School of Healthcare Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), Malaysia; School of Biosciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Taylor’s University, Malaysia; and the Early Start Research Institute and School of Health and Society, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Wollongong. SHN was the recipient of the Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship for his PhD study.

The authors declare none of the interested parties had any role in the study design, data acquisition and analysis, or publication. Please refer to the technical report for full declarations of interest.

Soft copies of this Report are available on request from the Project Leader - Prof. Tilakavati Karupaiah.Emails: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

[ 12 ]


Create a Healthier Food Environment: - Taylor's University ...

Documents