WHO’s Attempt to Navigate Commercial Influence and Conflicts of Interest in Nutrition Programs While Engaging With Non-State Actors: Reflections on WHO Guidance for Nation States Comment on "Towards Preventing and Managing Conflict of Interest in Nutrition Policy? An Analysis of Submissions to a Consultation on a Draft WHO Tool"

Marc A Rodwin

doi:10.34172/ijhpm.2020.162

Abstract

This commentary situates the comments submitted in response to the World Health Organization (WHO) draft guidance on conflicts of interest in national nutrition programs in light of: (1) WHO policies to protect WHO integrity; (2) the Framework of Engagement with Non-State Actors (FENSA); (3) WHO’s attempt to seek funds due to cuts in member contributions; and (4) attempts—often by corporate entities—to redefine conflicts of interest to avoid oversight of conflicts of interest and increase corporate influence. The WHO guidance defines conflicts of interest in ways that deviate from standard legal usage which confuses its analysis and facilitates the creation of conflicted public-private partnerships. The guidance suggests that nations can allow engagement with non-state actors when the benefits are greater than risks without separate check due to conflicts of interest. Instead, the WHO should have recommended that nations seek alternative ways to achieve their goals when non-state actors have significant institutional conflicts of interest.

Highlights

For many years the World Health Organization (WHO) policy held that it should not establish official relations with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) unless their aims were “in conformity with ... principles of the WHO Constitution” and “free from concerns which are ... of a commercial or profit-making nature.”[1]. Informal contacts were allowed without the prerogatives of formal status.[1]
Business actors resisted efforts to distinguish between business interest NGOs and public interest NGOs, and between cooperation with business as opposed to official relations with public-interest associations
Rodwin profit firms eagerly joined public-private partnerships, such as the Global Alliance on Nutrition and Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) initiative,[18] while studies revealed that their joining would create conflicts of interest and compromise public policy.[2,19,20,21,22,23]

Summary

Introduction

For many years the World Health Organization (WHO) policy held that it should not establish official relations with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) unless their aims were “in conformity with ... principles of the WHO Constitution” and “free from concerns which are ... of a commercial or profit-making nature.”[1]. It legitimized for-profit firms’ (and affiliated not-for-profit trade associations’) participation in WHO policy development, failed to adequately control conflicts of interest frequently arising from engagement with commercial firms, and did not employ the standard definition of COI used in the law and dictionaries, thereby confusing analysis and undercutting effective responses.

Results

Conclusion