Stakeholder engagement related to food marketing to children in Canada: A mixed-methods analysis of formal consultations and lobbying activities, 2019-2025
This mixed-methods study of Canadian stakeholder engagement from 2019 to 2025 reveals that while non-industry groups were more active in direct interactions with Health Canada, industry stakeholders dominated formal lobbying efforts by employing corporate political activity strategies to delay the implementation of regulations restricting unhealthy food marketing to children.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
In Canada, as in many places, the food and drink that children see on television, online, and in stores is a major public health issue. Decades of research show that when young people are constantly exposed to advertisements for foods high in sugar, salt, and fat, they begin to prefer those items, ask their parents to buy them, and eat more of them. This pattern contributes to poor diets and a rising rate of obesity among children. Because children are still developing their ability to understand that advertising is trying to persuade them, they are uniquely vulnerable to these messages. While the World Health Organization has urged governments to restrict such marketing, Canada has struggled to pass laws that would actually limit it. Despite strong public support and repeated attempts by politicians to create rules, the country has not yet implemented federal restrictions. This gap between the known health risks and the lack of action suggests that something else is happening behind the scenes, likely involving the companies that sell these products and their efforts to shape the rules.
A new study by researchers at several Canadian universities investigates exactly what has been happening between 2019 and 2025. The team wanted to understand how different groups interact with the government when trying to decide on food marketing rules. They looked at two distinct types of activity: formal meetings and letters sent to Health Canada, and the more private, organized efforts known as lobbying. Lobbying involves representatives from companies or groups meeting with politicians and senior government officials to try to influence their decisions. The researchers gathered data from two public government records: one that lists meetings and correspondence with Health Canada, and another that tracks who is registered to lobby federal officials. By combining these records, they could see not just who was talking to the government, but also how much power and resources different groups had to make their voices heard.
The results reveal a striking difference between who shows up for formal conversations and who dominates the lobbying landscape. When looking at the records of meetings and letters sent directly to Health Canada, non-industry groups—such as public health organizations, charities, and academic institutions—were actually the most active, accounting for about 55 percent of the interactions. This is a shift from earlier years, when food and beverage companies were the primary voices in these rooms. However, the picture changes completely when looking at the broader lobbying records. In the official registry of lobbyists, industry groups made up nearly three-quarters of all communications. These industry stakeholders, which include food manufacturers, advertising firms, and media companies, demonstrated a much larger capacity to engage. They employed more individual lobbyists, registered more organizations, and contacted a wider range of government officials, including members of Parliament, senators, and senior civil servants. While public health advocates were busy talking to Health Canada, industry representatives were actively engaging with the people who hold the keys to passing laws and regulations.
The researchers also analyzed the content of the communications to understand the tactics used by the food and beverage industry. They found that companies relied on four main strategies to influence policy. The most common approach was information and messaging, where industry representatives framed themselves as responsible partners in public health. They often highlighted their own voluntary efforts to improve children's diets while downplaying the role their products played in the problem. They frequently argued that government rules would create unintended negative consequences, such as job losses or administrative burdens, and suggested that existing self-regulation was sufficient. Another key strategy was policy substitution, where the industry promoted voluntary codes and private initiatives as better alternatives to government laws. They also engaged in constituency building, which involved cultivating relationships with key opinion leaders, health organizations, and government officials to build a network of support. Finally, though less common, some efforts were made to fragment opposition by criticizing public health advocates and creating the impression that there was broad disagreement about the need for restrictions.
The study suggests that the reason Canada has not yet implemented restrictions on food marketing to children is not a lack of public concern or political will, but rather the persistent and powerful influence of industry lobbying. Even though non-industry groups have become more active in formal consultations with Health Canada, they have not matched the industry's reach or resources across the wider government system. The industry continues to use well-established tactics to delay, weaken, or prevent regulatory action. The researchers conclude that simply having more public health advocates in the room is not enough to balance the scales. To move forward, the study suggests that the government needs stronger safeguards to manage conflicts of interest and greater transparency to ensure that policymaking is not disproportionately influenced by those with a financial stake in the outcome. Without addressing this imbalance, the cycle of proposed laws that fail to become reality is likely to continue.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.