In recent years, the mantra of “ease of doing business” has become a cornerstone of economic policy and is promoted by institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) as a path to growth and prosperity. These institutions often prioritize free market principles and favor minimal regulatory intervention. While this approach may bring benefits in certain sectors, its application to the food industry, particularly in the context of ultra-processed foods (UPF) or foods high in fat, sugar and salt (HFSS), needs to be critically reconsidered.

The Ministry of Food Processing intends to increase foreign investment in the food processing industry by allowing 100% foreign direct investment (FDI) in trade, including e-commerce, for food products manufactured or produced in India. The government has exempted all processed food products from licensing requirement and imposed lower Goods and Services Tax rates on them. However, it is not clear whether highly processed or UPF products such as chips, biscuits, noodles, chocolates or juices will be considered as excessive consumption of these products has been found to be unhealthy.

The recently released ‘State of Food and Nutrition Security’ report by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), jointly prepared with UN agencies IFAD, UNICEF, WFP and the World Health Organization (WHO), raises concerns about the expansion of foreign direct investment in the UPF food sector, noting that it appears to be more clearly linked to the increase in overweight, obesity and non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Foreign direct investment is considered the preferred method of transnational food companies (TFCs) to invest in the new processed food markets as they have the ‘freedom’ to aggressively promote and market their products, thereby creating and increasing demand.

UPFs, which are high in sugar, fat, salt and artificial additives, are increasingly dominating the diets of populations around the world. These products are manufactured to be particularly tasty, cheap and convenient, making them very attractive to consumers and displacing traditional diets. According to a WHO report for India, UPFs are experiencing an annual growth rate of 13%. This growth is contributing to a health crisis that risks undermining the foundations of economic development. In Brazil, China, India and South Africa, an analysis of 35,550 food products from the 20 largest companies found that the vast majority of them were unhealthy.

Increasing evidence suggests that UPF consumption is associated with a range of chronic diseases, including obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and certain cancers. The British Medical Journal reported on an analysis of hundreds of epidemiological studies and meta-analyses that showed associations between UPF consumption and negative health outcomes.

The ease with which it is possible to do business in the food sector often leads to weakened regulatory frameworks that allow misleading advertising and marketing to put corporate interests ahead of the public good. This includes relaxing food safety standards and facilitating foreign direct investment that floods local markets with unhealthy products. Such measures may boost economic indicators in the short term, but they come with hidden costs borne by society as a whole. These reports highlight a worrying trend: as consumption of UPFs increases, so does the prevalence of diet-related non-communicable diseases. These diseases place a heavy burden on health systems, reduce workforce productivity and slow economic growth.

WHO calls for strong measures to control marketing and curb aggressive marketing. Governments must take decisive action to regulate the food situation. This includes implementing stricter marketing regulations, banning advertising of UPFs/HFSS foods, levying higher taxes on unhealthy foods, and mandating clear and effective front-of-pack warnings on UPFs or HFSS foods. At the same time, supporting initiatives that promote and incentivize the consumption of wholesome, minimally processed foods should be the new norm.

In conclusion, the pursuit of economic growth should not come at the expense of public health. As the evidence against UPFs mounts, it is imperative that we re-evaluate the policies that have allowed these products to proliferate. Politicians, public health advocates and international organizations must join forces to oppose commercial freedom in the food sector. Only through responsible regulation can we protect future generations from the dangers of UPFs and create a healthier, more sustainable world for all.

This article was written by Dr. Arun Gupta, a pediatrician and director of Nutrition Advocacy in Public Interest (NAPi) and former member of the Prime Minister’s Council on India’s Nutrition Challenges.