Vivica I Kraak1, Boyd Swinburn2, Mark Lawrence3, Paul Harrison4. 1. 1World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Obesity Prevention,Deakin Population Health Strategic Research Centre,School of Health and Social Development,Faculty of Health,Deakin University,221 Burwood Highway,Melbourne,Victoria 3125,Australia. 2. 2Population Nutrition and Global Health,University of Auckland,Auckland,New Zealand. 3. 3Public Health Nutrition,School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences,Faculty of Health,Deakin University,Burwood,Victoria,Australia. 4. 4School of Business,Faculty of Business and Law,Deakin University,Burwood,Victoria,Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To review the available literature on accountability frameworks to construct a framework that is relevant to voluntary partnerships between government and food industry stakeholders. DESIGN: Between November 2012 and May 2013, a desk review of ten databases was conducted to identify principles, conceptual frameworks, underlying theories, and strengths and limitations of existing accountability frameworks for institutional performance to construct a new framework relevant to promoting healthy food environments. SETTING: Food policy contexts within high-income countries to address obesity and diet-related non-communicable diseases. SUBJECTS: Eligible resources (n 26) were reviewed and the guiding principles of fifteen interdisciplinary frameworks were used to construct a new accountability framework. RESULTS: Strengths included shared principles across existing frameworks, such as trust, inclusivity, transparency and verification; government leadership and good governance; public deliberations; independent bodies recognizing compliance and performance achievements; remedial actions to improve accountability systems; and capacity to manage conflicts of interest and settle disputes. Limitations of the three-step frameworks and 'mutual accountability' approach were an explicit absence of an empowered authority to hold all stakeholders to account for their performance. CONCLUSIONS: We propose a four-step accountability framework to guide government and food industry engagement to address unhealthy food environments as part of a broader government-led strategy to address obesity and diet-related non-communicable diseases. An independent body develops clear objectives, a governance process and performance standards for all stakeholders to address unhealthy food environments. The empowered body takes account (assessment), shares the account (communication), holds to account (enforcement) and responds to the account (improvements).
OBJECTIVE: To review the available literature on accountability frameworks to construct a framework that is relevant to voluntary partnerships between government and food industry stakeholders. DESIGN: Between November 2012 and May 2013, a desk review of ten databases was conducted to identify principles, conceptual frameworks, underlying theories, and strengths and limitations of existing accountability frameworks for institutional performance to construct a new framework relevant to promoting healthy food environments. SETTING: Food policy contexts within high-income countries to address obesity and diet-related non-communicable diseases. SUBJECTS: Eligible resources (n 26) were reviewed and the guiding principles of fifteen interdisciplinary frameworks were used to construct a new accountability framework. RESULTS: Strengths included shared principles across existing frameworks, such as trust, inclusivity, transparency and verification; government leadership and good governance; public deliberations; independent bodies recognizing compliance and performance achievements; remedial actions to improve accountability systems; and capacity to manage conflicts of interest and settle disputes. Limitations of the three-step frameworks and 'mutual accountability' approach were an explicit absence of an empowered authority to hold all stakeholders to account for their performance. CONCLUSIONS: We propose a four-step accountability framework to guide government and food industry engagement to address unhealthy food environments as part of a broader government-led strategy to address obesity and diet-related non-communicable diseases. An independent body develops clear objectives, a governance process and performance standards for all stakeholders to address unhealthy food environments. The empowered body takes account (assessment), shares the account (communication), holds to account (enforcement) and responds to the account (improvements).
Authors: George C Patton; Susan M Sawyer; John S Santelli; David A Ross; Rima Afifi; Nicholas B Allen; Monika Arora; Peter Azzopardi; Wendy Baldwin; Christopher Bonell; Ritsuko Kakuma; Elissa Kennedy; Jaqueline Mahon; Terry McGovern; Ali H Mokdad; Vikram Patel; Suzanne Petroni; Nicola Reavley; Kikelomo Taiwo; Jane Waldfogel; Dakshitha Wickremarathne; Carmen Barroso; Zulfiqar Bhutta; Adesegun O Fatusi; Amitabh Mattoo; Judith Diers; Jing Fang; Jane Ferguson; Frederick Ssewamala; Russell M Viner Journal: Lancet Date: 2016-05-09 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Rebecca Pradeilles; Paula L Griffiths; Shane A Norris; Alison B Feeley; Emily K Rousham Journal: Public Health Nutr Date: 2015-03-11 Impact factor: 4.022
Authors: Elena Tragni; Luisella Vigna; Massimiliano Ruscica; Chiara Macchi; Manuela Casula; Alfonso Santelia; Alberico L Catapano; Paolo Magni Journal: Nutrients Date: 2021-05-26 Impact factor: 5.717