Will the next generation of preferential trade and investment agreements undermine prevention of noncommunicable diseases? A prospective policy analysis of the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement

Thow, Anne Marie; Snowdon, Wendy; Labonté, Ronald; Gleeson, Deborah; Stuckler, David; Hattersley, Libby; Schram, Ashley; Kay, Adrian; Friel, Sharon

doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2014.08.002

Cited by 91 publications

(140 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

137

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We found that previous analyses had highlighted potential implications of intellectual property rights (IPRs), investorstate dispute settlement (ISDS), technical barriers to trade (TBT), sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS), and regulatory coherence provisions on a range of issues, including access to medicines and health services, tobacco and alcohol control, diet-related health, and domestic health policymaking. 5,6,11,[19][20][21][22] We screened several additional sections of the agreement, including provisions on trade in goods, trade in services, government procurement, labour, environment, and transparency and anti-corruption.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A body of literature exploring the relationships between international trade and investment agreements and health has been accruing over the past few years. [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] But with the exception of one of those studies, 11 the literature to date has largely been conceptual in nature, and has rarely explored specific treaty text.…”

Section: Key Messagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…33 Technical Barriers to Trade Several concerns were raised around the TBT Chapter guaranteeing avenues for vested interests to have a legitimised role in policy-making, and further reducing the capacity for domestic innovation in tobacco, alcohol, and food labelling policies. 5,11,19 The final text of the TBT appears to deliver on these concerns. The terms of this Chapter are extensive and largely speak to harmonisation and transparency in the development of technical regulations, standards, and conformity assessments, arguably to the benefit of big industry rather than states.…”

Section: Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Trans-Pacific Partnership: Is It Everything We Feared for Health?

Labonté

Schram

Rückert

2016

Int J Health Policy Manag

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Negotiations surrounding the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade and investment agreement have recently concluded. Although trade and investment agreements, part of a broader shift to global economic integration, have been argued to be vital to improved economic growth, health, and general welfare, these agreements have increasingly come under scrutiny for their direct and indirect health impacts. Methods: We conducted a prospective health impact analysis to identify and assess a selected array of potential health risks of the TPP. We adapted the standard protocol for Health impact assessments (HIAs) (screening, scoping, and appraisal) to our aim of assessing potential health risks of trade and investment policy, and selected a health impact review methodology. This methodology is used to create a summary estimation of the most significant impacts on health of a broad policy or cluster of policies, such as a comprehensive trade and investment agreement. Results: Our analysis shows that there are a number of potentially serious health risks associated with the TPP, and details a range of policy implications for the health sector. Of particular focus are the potential implications of changes to intellectual property rights (IPRs), sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS), technical barriers to trade (TBT), investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), and regulatory coherence provisions on a range of issues, including access to medicines and health services, tobacco and alcohol control, diet-related health, and domestic health policymaking. Conclusion:We provide a list of policy recommendations to mitigate potential health risks associated with the TPP, and suggest that broad public consultations, including on the health risks of trade and investment agreements, should be part of all trade negotiations. Implications for policy makers • There are numerous connections between trade and investment agreements, specifically the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and public health. • Health impact assessment (HIA) methodology can be a valuable tool for exploring prospective health impacts of such agreements. • Domestic health policy that is not compliant with trade rules is vulnerable to international trade disputes. • There are opportunities for health policy-makers to play an active role in advocating for public health during domestic ratification of the TPP and to advocate for greater involvement in future trade negotiations. Implications for the publicThe content within contemporary trade and investment agreements goes far beyond the traditional trade agreement measures, such as cutting tariffs on goods, creating wide-reaching and long-lasting consequences for all aspects of life. The recently negotiated Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) will have implications for public health issues, such as pharmaceutical prices and food safety standards, and may divert public tax dollars away from the provision of public services to payment of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) legal services and awards. The...

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Key Messagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Trans-Pacific Partnership: Is It Everything We Feared for Health?

Labonté

Schram

Rückert

2016

Int J Health Policy Manag

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The interests of the injured party in order to maximize the avoidance of losses, which led to the interests of the interests of the main dispute; In addition, the national economic adjustment in the adjustment of economic activities, once the abuse of economic adjustment, will lead to national interests, public interest Damage will lead to the emergence of economic law disputes; different economic law between the main interests of the conflict will lead to the emergence of economic law disputes. Economic law disputes, if there is no effective solution, will directly affect the economic law compliance and implementation, can't create a balanced and harmonious socio-economic environment, can't be a reasonable allocation of resources, is not conducive to sustainable development of social economy [8] .…”

Section: The Necessity Of Lawsuit Solution To Economic Law Disputementioning

confidence: 99%

A Study on the Settlement Mechanism of Economic Law Dispute by Lawsuit

Jia-ming¹

2017

Proceedings of the 2017 2nd International Conference on Education, Sports, Arts and Management Engineering (ICESAME 2017)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Economic prosperity can't only lay the material foundation for social progress, but also produce more and more economic disputes. In general, there are four solutions to economic disputes, namely, negotiation, arbitration, administrative settlement and lawsuit settlement. A fair and effective solution to economic disputes should also be a lawsuit solution. This paper firstly introduces the concept of economic disputes, elaborates the inevitability of lawsuit settlement of economic disputes, and discusses the establishment of dispute settlement mechanism according to the characteristics of China's economic disputes.

show abstract

“…Unlike infectious disease epidemics, however, these corporate disease vectors implement sophisticated campaigns to undermine public health interventions" (Moodie et al, 2013, p. 671). Further, a substantial body of research identifies trade liberalization and reduced restrictions on foreign investment, key elements of the legal infrastructure for neoliberal globalization, in the diffusion of ultra-processed foods and the domination of food systems and dietary choices by transnational supermarket and fast-food chains (Hawkes, 2005;Hawkes, 2007;Hawkes, Chopra, & Friel, 2009;Thow et al, 2014).…”

Section: For Future Investigation: the Social Production Of Scientifimentioning

confidence: 99%

The double burden of neoliberalism? Noncommunicable disease policies and the global political economy of risk

Glasgow

Schrecker

2015

Health & Place

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Publisher's copyright statement: NOTICE: this is the author's version of a work that was accepted for publication in Health place. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A denitive version was subsequently published in Health place, 34, July 2015, 10.1016/j.healthplace.2015.06.005Additional information: Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. AbstractThe growing prevalence of NCDs in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) is now recognized as one of the major global health policy issues of the early 21 st century. Current official approaches reflect ambivalence about how health policy should approach the social determinants of health identified by the WHO Commission on the topic that released its report in 2008, and in particular the role of macro-scale economic and social processes. Authoritative framing of options for NCD prevention in advance of the September, 2011 UN high-level meeting on NCDs arguably relied on a selective reading of the scientific (including social scientific) evidence, and foregrounded a limited number of risk factors defined in terms of individual behaviour: tobacco use, unhealthy diet, alcohol (ab)use and physical inactivity. The effect was to reproduce at a transnational level the individualization of responsibility for health that characterizes most health promotion initiatives in high-income countries, ignoring both the limited control that many people have over their exposure to these risk factors and the contribution of macro-scale processes like trade liberalization and the marketing activities of transnational corporations to the global burden of NCDs. An alternative perspective focuses on "the inequitable distribution of power, money, and resources" described by the WHO Commission, and the ways in which policies that address those inequities can avoid unintentional incorporation of neoliberal constructions of risk and responsibility.2

show abstract

Will the next generation of preferential trade and investment agreements undermine prevention of noncommunicable diseases? A prospective policy analysis of the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement

Cited by 91 publications

References 28 publications

The Trans-Pacific Partnership: Is It Everything We Feared for Health?

The Trans-Pacific Partnership: Is It Everything We Feared for Health?

A Study on the Settlement Mechanism of Economic Law Dispute by Lawsuit

The double burden of neoliberalism? Noncommunicable disease policies and the global political economy of risk

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About