This commentary highlights the crucial role of activists in addressing the commercial determinants of health, proposing key strategies and actions while acknowledging the challenges they are likely to face. We aim to provide fresh perspectives on the politics surrounding these determinants and explore how they continue to hinder necessary health prevention measures. Through relevant examples, we emphasize the urgency of bold actions and direct language, drawing from diverse experiences to offer insights into how activists across various fields can effectively move forward.1

If the substance of this commentary only aimed to describe and explain the causes of this interference, we think a disservice would be done to advancing and addressing the real social (and political) determinants of health as already masterfully suggested in WHO’s 2008 Report that is (frustratingly) largely ignored. As then pointed out by Sir Michael Marmot, “Health inequalities and the social determinants of health are not a footnote to the determinants of health. They are the main issue.2

Seventeen years later, the questions to ask are: What are the politics of the commercial determinants of health linked to? Is it not to the prevailing and still pervasive neoliberal system? And, if so, are we only to focus on these determinants in the health and nutrition field? Will this be enough—or rather necessary, but not sufficient?

The politics of ‘not enough being done’

This subheading has behavioral and procedural connotations and implications, if nothing else, because the actual politics of the commercial determinants of health are unmistakably linked to the human right to health and food—both so bypassed by Big Business.3 This, therefore, signals one of the avenues for us to pursue to address the processes and effects of the aggressive penetration by corporations into the right to health and nutrition, turning them instead into a lucrative business. Take, for example, the impact of the COVID pandemic on food poverty and on widely promoted hunger alleviation efforts, particularly those being based on the marketing and brand engagement of the aid being provided.4

The human rights activist community has been in the struggle of denouncing the commercial determinants for quite some time now.5 The question is: Do their efforts fall into the ‘not enough being done’ category? The answer to this question is a mixed one: some do, some do not.

What is different in what we propose as a path to address the commercial determinants of health?

The difference has to do with a roadmap to be pursued, namely a ‘wider political pathway’ as we explain further down. The food and health fields are perfectly good entry points to address the commercial determinants. But staying there is not enough. It is only by taking head-on the politics behind the growing commercial inroads being made by corporations that we will eventually have a chance to get somewhere longer-term and sustainably.

So, what does this mean?

It means that politics is fought with politics. Activists thus need to get involved in organizing campaigns of human rights learning centered around the political economy of preventable ill health, malnutrition, and deaths. Specifically, fostering activists’ campaigns is essential to raising the consciousness of claimholder groups. This is not only to be done nationally but also needs to encourage groups to coalesce globally to organize and mobilize claim holders to effectively demand what their/our inalienable rights are. The idea is to create an up-swell of political consciousness at the base that will use health and nutrition demands to further demand structural changes of the neoliberal system progressively choking the health and food system.

It also means that, in engaging with adversaries, we must grant them perhaps individual and/or institutional respect, but not necessarily political respect. Questions about which negotiating strategies to prioritize thus become pressing. So, what should organized claim-holder activists prioritize? Oftentimes, this translates into an understandable impulse to commit to all issues equally. However, we must mind the adage: ‘If everything is a priority, then nothing is a priority.’

It further means that we are not to worry about conflict: it is far worse to try to avoid it because we just create new conflicts that end up being more insidious and costly than the original conflictual issue.

What does ‘claim holders effectively demanding’ mean in the context of the commercial determinants of health?

Our force: Unity. Our goal: Victory… And you cannot win if you do not fight.

(Graffiti in Santiago, Chile)

A revolution of expectations comes only from creating and fighting for true and realistic alternatives to changing such systems of oppression and manipulation as we see in neoliberalism. Such a revolution does not come from building castles in the air or proposing unproven patch solutions, especially when coming from self-proclaimed ‘experts.’ What kills revolutions is not zeroing in on hard realities and commensurate alternatives; the killer is for us to pursue unrealistic, non-evidence-based dreams. Yes, we will find obstacles, but then they also open new avenues and concrete new ways to overcome them.

We are aware it is still very difficult for some of us in public interest civil society organizations (PICSOs) and social movements to maintain our political agility in a hostile environment where corporations are taking over intergovernmental and multilateral institutions,6 where they are gaining powerful seats at tables where global political economy decisions are made.7 But the role of an avant-garde is to cause fermentation. We cannot fall into the trap of believing someone else is going to take action for us against these things that are happening in front of our eyes with impunity; we have to get active. A strategic overhaul of our actions requires nothing less than a critical shift in our thinking, and if by now there is no such shift in the mind of key activists, then perhaps we have to focus on that as a priority. (Remember: ‘Divided we beg, united we demand!’). This is a call to help create a new politics to fight the illegitimate commercial determinants of health and nutrition.

If (as we should) we opt for adopting a human rights-based approach to address the commercial determinants of health, the only way we have to ultimately drive meaningful institutional and structural change is to ‘get inside’ traditionally closed spaces or spaces where we are uninvited. We must thus consider the best ways to continue challenging the cozy and too-close relationship between industry and governments, as well as between corporations and UN agencies. In this effort, if we set the bar too low for our human rights and political aims, what will prevail are mediocre results and achievements, i.e., well-intentioned and selfless actions that seem intuitively laudable but will have a negligible impact.

Putting disparity reduction (not poverty reduction!) within and among countries, as well as human rights, upfront in the battle against the commercial determinants is critical. So is avoiding uncritically accepting yet more purportedly ‘innovative’ quick-fix technical packages that the guardians of the neoliberal paradigm so ably put forward every time they feel threatened (e.g., greenwashing). 8

Furthermore, we are not to operate with a logic of winning or losing, because what it is all about is rather to start by giving a clear signal, a gesture that conveys the incitement to fight against the overwhelming neoliberal project behind these determinants, a signal that popular resistance can and will overcome corporate forces. Only such a resistance will give an outlet to people’s cry for dignity and move a step closer to true/direct democracy and, if necessary, to the streets.

Are you an activist doing some of these things?

Activists confronting and condemning these commercial determinants are ultimately a defense of the rights to health and food.

To inject a positive note, growing numbers of activists are devoting a large part of their time to the struggle for human rights and social justice (but not nearly enough on the commercial determinants of health and nutrition). So, the outlook is not grim. Human rights activists can indeed bring out and use the many ‘weapons of the weak’ that can, against all odds, contribute to recalibrating structural inequalities.

If human rights activists simply behave rebelliously without a plan, their actions will, most likely, become ineffective, and they may lose respect. Activists ought to become defiant with a purpose and direction, with moral courage and good leadership. Perseverance alone does not guarantee results.

Sometimes, like in the case of the authors of this piece, you just feel that everything you do just goes to waste. We all have to be prepared to cope with this feeling. The challenge we face as activists is to help pull potential claim holders from where they are to where they have not managed to get by their desire or will yet. We must not only be organizers but also permanent persuaders, and this is not easy. Never forget that it is possible to be right and still suffer defeat. (‘Failure festivals’ are worth trying, where everyone shares failures; this numbs some of the pain and helps us come up with new ideas).

To succeed, human rights activists are in the business of eliciting effective demands from claim holders (effective demands are understood not only as placing demands in front of pertinent duty bearers but also consist of claim holders showing a willingness to invest/give up resources they hold when necessary).

Yes, activists’ leadership is necessary, but so is accountability

Demanding accountability is the cornerstone for success. For it to work, we need to set annual and multiannual benchmarks for the progressive realization of human rights—and in our case, for the right to health, nutrition, and food. Benchmarks set for reversing the commercial determinants must thus be monitored (‘watchdogged’) by human rights and/or health and nutrition activist organizations. Ultimately, it is this mechanism that must take charge. Experts may be needed to set these benchmarks for the future. Expertise matters, but when it comes to charting the future, community involvement, especially in monitoring, is ultimately much more effective and needed.

It is tempting to say that the UN system ought to be viewed as the key accountability agent when the national right to health and right to food enforcement is failing. But is the UN effectively such an agent? Seen from another angle, global and regional human rights law courts and litigation are supposed to be the last resort in these cases. But are they? So far, this has not worked well at all.9

And then, there are intellectuals. Most of their human rights writings are about how other people could/should do things for claim holders—not so much about supporting them to act on their behalf. In the latter endeavor, what ultimately convinces claim holders is not logic but ‘rationally supported emotions’—thus, the importance of addressing mass psychology in the work of activists. When we act for claim holders, we risk disempowering them instead of encouraging them to speak up for themselves.

In the work of activists with duty bearers, the key is to ask them:

  • Who should get what goods and services?

  • Who is to provide those?

  • How?

  • Using what resources?

  • Is there anything that would motivate them (in our case, commercial entities) to change?

  • What will keep them on track?

  • Who is to be held accountable, for what, and in what way?

Human rights have neither lost their importance nor their centrality as a framework for reform. The human rights movement surged as socialism died as a cause to fight for in the post-WWII world. This is the reason why more attention must be given to the simple fact that many people do not know their rights—or, they may know them, but only in an abstract way; they may not know how to make use of them. To begin with, effective human rights work will require a massive human rights learning campaign. Participants not only need to learn to better understand but also to address the limits of the current political discourse. Such training must sensitize them to the need to demand change in what they see happening in the health sector. And this learning must ultimately be carried out by mass movements.

Yesterday as today, the question remains open as to what extent the various social groups can come together in the struggle against an ever more ruthless capitalism with its commercial, neocolonial, and patriarchal characteristics.

Is the alternative to engage in acts of disobedience to say no to the power of commercial entities?

Yes, our work will confront us with moral dilemmas if and when applying uncivil means to achieve civic/human rights outcomes. Confrontations with the authority and with the private sector can take many forms and initiatives—using the weapons of the weak—no more. In our struggle with them, always go from a health-centered political dialogue with strategic political enemies to a structural critique indicating how it is the system that is responsible for the commercial interests impinging on health.

Bottom line, what is needed is to release and mobilize claim holders’ counter-power to achieve positive collective structural change. There is no one approach to overcoming the chokehold of the corporate system. It will involve coalition building, articulation of an ambitious shared vision, strategic use of multi-level institutional processes, social mobilization among like-minded and perhaps unusual bedfellows, organized campaigns with clear political leaders, and a compelling framing of the political issues at stake.

Social movements that today take so many good initiatives, that take to the streets to fight for their demands for social, economic, and environmental justice, must also learn to organize themselves locally, nationally, regionally, and globally. 10 Without organization, without structure, nothing can ever change sustainably. The transition may begin in your street, but it will be of no avail without the simultaneous fostering of a national and global approach: a roadmap. Social movements are weak in part because of their lack of coordination and because they focus on protesting and give less importance to tactically planning a concrete strategy.

Beware: apathy can turn our work into stagnation

We need to transform apathy into activism and consolidate negotiated social contracts between people (as claim-holders) and decision-makers (as duty-bearers) at all levels.

Many single-issue movements have sprung up at the national and international level, but they rarely see themselves as a unified movement. Human rights activists have only begun to explore and set up ways of weaving theoretical and practical approaches into a wider struggle for social and political change.

Social movements must start to build together, laying out fresh, bold visions for the future—visions that present credible pathways out of these crises (not least to counter the commercial determination of health)—and, most importantly, they must begin engaging with progressive political parties to try to increase counter-power.

Finally, we must fight against the forces of conformity keeping us divided. To keep ourselves protected, we simply have to demand more of ourselves. Succeeding in this laudable endeavor is a moral imperative. The stakes are too high, and time is too short to settle for anything less.

Postscript: Note that this piece has not said anything about multistakeholder platforms and PPPs. Other authors have written more wisely on this issue.

References

1 Lacy-Nichols, J., & Marten, R. Power and the commercial determinants of health: Ideas for a research agenda. BMJ Global Health (2021), Kickbusch, I., Allen, L., & Franz, C. The commercial determinants of health. Lancet Global Health (2016), Labonté, R. Purveyors of the commercial determinants of health have no place at any policy table: Comment on "Towards preventing and managing conflict of interest in nutrition policy? An analysis of submissions to a consultation on a draft WHO tool". International Journal of Health Policy and Management. (2020).
2 World Health Organization (WHO). (2008). Closing the gap in a generation: Health equity through action on the social determinants of health - Final report of the commission on social determinants of health. World Health Organization.
3 FIAN. (2018). When food becomes immaterial: Confronting the digital age (Vol. 10).
4 Williams, C. R., Kestenbaum, J. G., & Meier, B. M. (2020). Populist nationalism threatens health and human rights in the COVID-19 response. American Public Health Association, 1766-1768. Fleetwood, J. (2020). Social justice, food loss, and the sustainable development goals in the era of COVID-19. Sustainability. Mialon, M., & Pinsky, I. (2022). Food industry responding to the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil: Public health or public relations? World Nutrition, 13(1), 2-75.
5 Kickbusch, I. (2015). Addressing the commercial determinants is critical to emerging economies. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva. Michéle, L., Prato, S., Patti, R., & Valente, F. L. (2019). When the SUN casts a shadow: The human risks of multi-stakeholder partnerships: The case of Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN). FIAN.
6 Canfield, M., Anderson, M. D., & McMichael, P. (2021). UN Food Systems Summit 2021: Dismantling democracy and resetting corporate control of food systems. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems. Mele, V., Anderfuhren-Biget, S., & Varone, F. (2016). Conflicts of interest in international organizations: Evidence from two United Nations humanitarian agencies. Public Administration.
7 Sethi, S. P., & Schepers, D. H. (2014). United Nations global compact: The promise–performance gap. Journal of Business Ethics, 122(2), 193-208.
8 de Freitas Netto SV, Sobral MFF, Ribeiro ARB, Soares GRdL. Concepts and forms of greenwashing: a systematic review. Environmental Sciences Europe 2020; 32(1): 19.
9 Bradley, C. A. (2001). The costs of international human rights litigation. Chicago Journal of International Law, 2, 457. Yoshida, K., & Setzer, J. (2020). The trends and challenges of climate change litigation and human rights. European Human Rights Law Review, 2020(2), 140-152.
10 La Via Campesina. (2022). Quiénes somos.