Constructing and contesting industry’s role in multistakeholder governance: a qualitative analysis of responses to WHO consultations
Our findings underscore the contested nature of MSG, with actors calling on similar values and terminology to support fundamentally opposing positions. The ambiguity of concepts like participation, accountability and conflicts of interest may risk creating an opportunity for private sector interests to promote MSG as an ambiguous governance concept to fit their agenda. Given the normative role of WHO and other UN agencies in shaping what is considered 'good governance', it is essential for the WHO and other UN agencies to critically examine the evidence on multistakeholder approaches before deciding on its appropriateness and use unambiguous terminology when discussing their interpretation of the approach.
Authors
- Britta Matthes (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2346-066X)
- Amber Van Den Akker (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8365-3418)
- Kathrin Lauber (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0073-3004)
- Anna Gilmore (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0281-1248)
- Xinmei Sun (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0001-3976-0686)
Institutions
- University of Bath (GB)
- Lancaster University (GB)
- University of Edinburgh (GB)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Globalization and Health
- Published
- 2025-11-11
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-025-01159-8
- Primary Topic
- Global trade, sustainability, and social impact
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00
Funders
- University of Bath