Planning and Governance Gaps in Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxation:

Planning and Governance Gaps in Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxation: | Authorea try { document.documentElement.classList.add('js'); } catch (e) { } var _gaq = _gaq || []; _gaq.push(['_setAccount', 'G-8VDV14Y67G']); _gaq.push(['_trackPageview']); (function() { var ga = document.createElement('script'); ga.type = 'text/javascript'; ga.async = true; ga.src = ('https:' == document.location.protocol ? 'https://ssl' : 'http://www') + '.google-analytics.com/ga.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(ga, s); })(); Skip to main content Preprints Collections Wiley Open Research IET Open Research Ecological Society of Japan All Collections About About Authorea FAQs Contact Us Quick Search anywhere Search for preprint articles, keywords, etc. Search Search ADVANCED SEARCH SCROLL This is a preprint and has not been peer reviewed. Data may be preliminary. 18 February 2026 V1 Latest version Share on Planning and Governance Gaps in Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxation: Authors : María José Díaz 0009-0001-9046-9560 [email protected] and Félix Rubial Bernárdez Authors Info & Affiliations https://doi.org/10.22541/au.177145212.23212700/v1 142 views 71 downloads Contents Abstract Information & Authors Metrics & Citations View Options References Figures Tables Media Share Abstract Purpose Fiscal policies targeting sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are widely promoted as effective tools for reducing diet-related non-communicable diseases. Despite growing global adoption, their impact on population health remains limited. This paper examines SSB taxation through a health planning and governance perspective, exploring how misalignment between fiscal policy design, preventive objectives, and health system planning constrains its effectiveness as a population-level prevention strategy. Design/methodology/approach An analytical systems-based synthesis was conducted, integrating evidence from international policy reports, with particular emphasis on the WHO Global Report on the Use of Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxes 2025 , alongside peer-reviewed literature on food environments, ultra-processed foods, and diet-related chronic disease prevention. Rather than reassessing the effectiveness of taxes per se, the analysis examines how fiscal instruments are designed, governed, and integrated—or disconnected—from broader health planning and preventive infrastructures. Findings The analysis identifies persistent planning and governance gaps that limit the preventive potential of SSB taxes. These include low and heterogeneous tax levels, weak alignment with sugar content, limited integration with food environments and institutional settings, and minimal linkage between fiscal measures and health system prevention strategies. As a result, SSB taxes often function as isolated economic measures rather than as coherent planning instruments capable of reshaping dietary environments or making health risk visible at population level. Originality/value This paper advances a systems-based framework that conceptualises SSB taxation as a health planning and governance challenge rather than a standalone fiscal intervention. By identifying leverage points across fiscal policy design, governance arrangements, and preventive integration, the analysis offers actionable insights for policy-makers and health system planners seeking to strengthen the role of taxation within comprehensive strategies for chronic disease prevention. Planning and Governance Gaps in Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxation: A Systems-Based Analysis of Fiscal Policy and Chronic Disease Prevention María José Ferreira Díaz, PhD, RN¹ Félix Rubial-Bernárdez² ¹ School of Nursing, University of Santiago de Compostela, Lugo, Spain ² Marqués de Valdecilla University Hospital, Santander, Spain Corresponding author: María José Ferreira Díaz School of Nursing, University of Santiago de Compostela, Lugo, Spain Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT Purpose Fiscal policies targeting sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are widely promoted as effective tools for reducing diet-related non-communicable diseases. Despite growing global adoption, their impact on population health remains limited. This paper examines SSB taxation through a health planning and governance perspective, exploring how misalignment between fiscal policy design, preventive objectives, and health system planning constrains its effectiveness as a population-level prevention strategy. Design/methodology/approach An analytical systems-based synthesis was conducted, integrating evidence from international policy reports, with particular emphasis on the WHO Global Report on the Use of Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxes 2025 , alongside peer-reviewed literature on food environments, ultra-processed foods, and diet-related chronic disease prevention. Rather than reassessing the effectiveness of taxes per se, the analysis examines how fiscal instruments are designed, governed, and integrated—or disconnected—from broader health planning and preventive infrastructures. Findings The analysis identifies persistent planning and governance gaps that limit the preventive potential of SSB taxes. These include low and heterogeneous tax levels, weak alignment with sugar content, limited integration with food environments and institutional settings, and minimal linkage between fiscal measures and health system prevention strategies. As a result, SSB taxes often function as isolated economic measures rather than as coherent planning instruments capable of reshaping dietary environments or making health risk visible at population level. Originality/value This paper advances a systems-based framework that conceptualises SSB taxation as a health planning and governance challenge rather than a standalone fiscal intervention. By identifying leverage points across fiscal policy design, governance arrangements, and preventive integration, the analysis offers actionable insights for policy-makers and health system planners seeking to strengthen the role of taxation within comprehensive strategies for chronic disease prevention. Keywords Health Planning; Fiscal Policy; Sugar-Sweetened Beverages; Chronic Disease Prevention; Health System Governance; Noncommunicable Diseases Highlights • Sugar-sweetened beverage taxes are widely adopted but weakly integrated into health planning • Fiscal policies often operate in isolation from preventive health system strategies • Governance and design gaps limit the capacity of taxes to make dietary risk visible • A systems-based planning framework identifies leverage points for stronger prevention Introduction Diet-related non-communicable diseases (NCDs) represent one of the most persistent and preventable threats to health system sustainability worldwide. Cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, obesity, and certain cancers account for a growing share of avoidable morbidity, mortality, and healthcare expenditure, particularly in middle- and high-income countries [1,2]. Despite decades of nutritional guidelines and health promotion strategies, population-level dietary risk has continued to intensify, suggesting that prevailing policy approaches have been insufficient to modify the structural conditions shaping everyday food consumption. In recent years, scientific consensus has increasingly shifted from isolated nutrients toward broader dietary patterns and food processing as key determinants of health. Large-scale prospective and meta-analytic evidence demonstrates that high consumption of ultra-processed foods is consistently associated with increased risks of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and all-cause mortality [2,3,4]. Conversely, integrated dietary patterns characterised by low ultra-processed food intake, a high-quality plant-based diet, and greater dietary biodiversity are associated with substantial reductions in disease incidence. The 3V dietary framework, derived from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort, illustrates how these dimensions interact synergistically, highlighting the cumulative preventive potential of coherent dietary patterns rather than isolated behavioural changes [5]. Importantly, this evidence indicates that effective prevention requires sustained population-level shifts in food environments, not merely improvements in individual knowledge or motivation. Dietary risk, however, does not arise solely from individual choice. A growing body of policy and systems research has demonstrated that everyday food environments—particularly supermarkets and institutional settings—play a decisive role in normalising ultra-processed foods and rendering dietary risk largely invisible [6,7]. In many contexts, ultra-processed products dominate availability, promotion, and pricing structures, while their associated health risks remain weakly signalled to consumers. This invisibility extends into healthcare institutions themselves, including hospitals, where the routine availability of ultra-processed foods contradicts health promotion messages delivered during periods of patient vulnerability [8].Together, these environments shift responsibility onto individuals while obscuring the structural and regulatory determinants of dietary harm, revealing a broader failure of food and health governance rather than a failure of personal choice [9]. Within this context, fiscal policies—particularly taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs)—have emerged as one of the most widely endorsed structural tools for reducing dietary risk. International organisations increasingly frame SSB taxes as cost-effective interventions capable of reducing consumption, generating public revenue, and contributing to health equity[1]. As of 2024, more than 116 countries had implemented national-level excise taxes on at least one type of sugar-sweetened beverage, reflecting unprecedented global policy diffusion [10]. Nevertheless, the preventive impact of these measures has remained uneven and, in many cases, limited. The Global Report on the Use of Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxes 2025 provides the most comprehensive global assessment to date of how these taxes are designed, implemented, and governed. While the report confirms widespread adoption, it also identifies substantial heterogeneity and persistent weaknesses. Excise tax levels remain low in most countries; fewer than one quarter of tax systems account for sugar content; automatic adjustment mechanisms to inflation are rare; and earmarking of tax revenue for health promotion is uncommon [10]. As a result, sugar-sweetened beverages often remain affordable over time, limiting the capacity of taxation alone to reshape dietary environments or meaningfully reduce population-level exposure to free sugars. From a health planning perspective, these findings point to a critical but underexplored problem. Sugar-sweetened beverage taxes are frequently treated as standalone fiscal instruments rather than as components of coherent prevention strategies embedded within health system planning and governance. Fiscal measures are introduced without systematic alignment with food environments, institutional practices, or preventive infrastructures, limiting their capacity to reinforce evidence-based dietary patterns such as those identified by the 3V framework [5].In this fragmented policy landscape, taxation modifies prices at the margin while leaving the broader drivers of dietary risk largely intact. This paper argues that the limited impact of sugar-sweetened beverage taxation reflects not a failure of fiscal policy in principle, but a failure of health planning and governance. By examining SSB taxes through a systems-based planning lens, the analysis explores how misalignment between fiscal design, governance arrangements, and preventive objectives constrains their effectiveness as population-level health interventions. Rather than reassessing whether SSB taxes “work,” this study focuses on how they are planned, governed, and integrated—or disconnected—from wider health system strategies for chronic disease prevention. Accordingly, the objective of this paper is to develop a systems-based analysis of sugar-sweetened beverage taxation as a health planning and governance challenge. By synthesising international fiscal policy evidence with research on food environments and diet-related disease prevention, the study aims to identify key governance gaps and leverage points through which fiscal policies could be more effectively aligned with comprehensive strategies for non-communicable disease prevention. Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxation through a health planning and governance perspective, and to explore how misalignment between fiscal policy design, governance arrangements, and preventive health objectives may be constraining its effectiveness as a population-level strategy for chronic disease prevention. Rather than assessing the behavioural impact of taxation in isolation, this study seeks to conceptualise SSB taxes as planning instruments whose preventive potential depends on their integration within broader health system strategies, food environments, and institutional practices. By synthesising international fiscal policy evidence with research on ultra-processed foods, food environments, and diet-related disease prevention, the paper aims to identify governance gaps and leverage points through which SSB taxation could be more effectively aligned with comprehensive prevention frameworks. In doing so, the analysis positions fiscal policy not merely as a revenue or price mechanism, but as a core component of health system planning capable of contributing to sustained reductions in diet-related non-communicable diseases. Methods This study employed an analytical, systems-based synthesis to examine sugar-sweetened beverage taxation as a health planning and governance challenge. Rather than replicating or updating existing evaluations of tax effectiveness, the analysis was designed to integrate heterogeneous sources of evidence in order to identify planning misalignments, governance gaps, and structural mechanisms that limit the preventive impact of fiscal policies targeting diet-related risk. The synthesis drew on three complementary bodies of evidence published between 2013 and 2025. First, international fiscal policy data and governance analyses were sourced primarily from the WHO Global Report on the Use of Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxes 2025 and related World Health Organization guidance on fiscal policies to promote healthy diets [1,10]. These documents provided standardized indicators on tax coverage, design, levels, affordability effects, and governance features across countries. Second, peer-reviewed literature examining ultra-processed foods and food environments was used to contextualise how dietary risk is produced and normalised within everyday and institutional settings. This body of evidence included policy analyses and systems-oriented studies addressing supermarkets, healthcare institutions, and the regulatory invisibility of dietary risk [6,7,8,9]. Third, epidemiological evidence on integrated dietary prevention was drawn from large prospective cohort studies and meta-analyses, with particular emphasis on the 3V dietary framework derived from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort. This framework operationalises the joint effects of low ultra-processed food consumption, healthful plant-based diets, and dietary biodiversity on disease incidence, providing a reference model for population-level prevention [2,3,4,5]. Data extraction followed a structured analytical matrix designed to capture: (1) fiscal policy design features (tax base, level, structure, adjustment mechanisms); (2) governance characteristics (integration with health objectives, earmarking, policy coherence); (3) interactions with food environments and institutional settings; and (4) alignment with evidence-based prevention frameworks. Quantitative indicators from international reports were interpreted descriptively to illustrate system-level patterns rather than to generate new estimates. Qualitative evidence was analysed using an iterative thematic approach to identify recurring planning and governance gaps, policy silos, and reinforcing mechanisms that constrain preventive effectiveness. The analytical process focused on how fiscal instruments interact with broader health system components, rather than on country-specific case evaluation. Through triangulation of fiscal policy data, environmental analyses, and epidemiological prevention evidence, the study developed a systems-based conceptual interpretation of SSB taxation as a health planning function. Given the integrative and conceptual nature of the analysis, no formal risk-of-bias assessment was applied. The study relied exclusively on secondary analysis of publicly available reports and published literature; ethical approval was therefore not required. Outcomes and Discussion System-level insights: how fiscal prevention remains structurally constrained Synthesising international fiscal policy data with evidence on food environments and diet-related disease prevention reveals that the limited impact of sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxation is not primarily attributable to lack of adoption, but to persistent planning and governance constraints. While more than 116 countries have implemented some form of national-level excise tax on sugar-sweetened beverages, these policies remain weakly embedded within broader health system planning and preventive strategies [10]. As a result, taxation frequently operates as an isolated economic intervention rather than as a coordinated population-level prevention instrument. The WHO Global Report on the Use of Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxes 2025 documents substantial heterogeneity in tax design, coverage, and level. Globally, median excise tax shares remain low, sugar-content–based taxation is rare, and automatic adjustment mechanisms to inflation are largely absent [10]. From a planning perspective, these design features limit the capacity of taxes to meaningfully affect affordability over time, particularly in contexts of economic growth. Consequently, sugar-sweetened beverages often become more affordable despite the presence of taxes, undermining their preventive intent. Importantly, these fiscal limitations interact with food environments characterised by high availability and normalisation of ultra-processed foods. Evidence from supermarket and institutional settings demonstrates that ultra-processed products continue to dominate visibility, promotion, and default options, while health risks remain weakly signalled [6,7]. In this context, modest price signals introduced through taxation are insufficient to counteract the broader environmental drivers shaping dietary behaviour. The persistence of ultra-processed food availability within healthcare institutions further reinforces this incoherence, contradicting preventive messages delivered by health systems themselves [8]. Misalignment between fiscal policy and evidence-based prevention A central finding of this analysis is the misalignment between fiscal policy design and contemporary epidemiological evidence on diet-related disease prevention. Large prospective studies demonstrate that meaningful reductions in disease incidence are associated with integrated dietary patterns characterised by low ultra-processed food intake, high-quality plant-based foods, and dietary biodiversity [2,3,5]. The 3V framework illustrates that preventive effects are cumulative and systemic, rather than attributable to isolated product-level changes. However, current SSB tax policies rarely align with this evidence. Taxes are typically designed around beverage categories rather than sugar content, processing level, or their role within broader dietary patterns [10]. As a result, fiscal measures target a narrow subset of products while leaving the wider ultra-processed food environment largely untouched. From a planning perspective, this reflects a fragmented approach in which fiscal instruments are deployed without reference to integrated prevention models or long-term disease incidence reduction. This misalignment is further compounded by weak governance integration. Earmarking of SSB tax revenues for health promotion or prevention remains uncommon, and where it exists, it is often limited in scope [10]. The absence of systematic links between taxation, preventive programmes, and institutional food policies limits the capacity of fiscal measures to reinforce coherent health system messaging. Consequently, taxation modifies prices without reshaping the normative and institutional context in which dietary risk is produced. Governance gaps and reinforcing feedback loops Viewed through a systems lens, these findings suggest that current approaches to SSB taxation are embedded within reinforcing feedback loops that constrain preventive effectiveness. Low tax levels and weak adjustment mechanisms limit price impact; persistent affordability sustains consumption; continued normalisation of ultra-processed foods reinforces political and commercial resistance to stronger regulation; and the absence of visible health gains reduces policy momentum for reform. These dynamics mirror governance failures observed in other domains of health system planning, where fragmented interventions fail to disrupt self-reinforcing cycles of risk [7,9]. In this context, taxation functions reactively rather than anticipatorily. Fiscal policies respond to rising disease burden without being embedded within forward-looking prevention strategies designed to modify food environments over time. This reactive orientation contrasts sharply with the preventive implications of epidemiological evidence, which emphasises the long-term, cumulative benefits of sustained dietary pattern change [5]. Toward a systems-based framework for fiscal health planning Taken together, these outcomes indicate that the preventive limitations of SSB taxation stem from governance and planning failures rather than from inherent shortcomings of fiscal policy. Taxes are introduced without sufficient alignment across policy domains, institutional settings, and prevention infrastructures. From a health planning perspective, fiscal measures should be conceptualised as part of a broader system of preventive governance, interacting with food regulation, institutional procurement, health promotion, and education. A systems-based planning framework highlights several leverage points. These include aligning tax design with sugar content and processing levels; embedding fiscal measures within comprehensive prevention strategies; strengthening governance mechanisms that link taxation to health promotion and institutional food environments; and integrating fiscal policy with evidence-based prevention models such as the 3V framework. Without such integration, fiscal policies risk remaining symbolically important but operationally marginal in addressing diet-related non-communicable diseases. Implications for health planning and policy For health system planners and policy-makers, the findings underscore the need to move beyond narrow assessments of fiscal effectiveness toward integrated governance approaches. Sugar-sweetened beverage taxes should be evaluated not only in terms of price elasticity or revenue generation, but also in relation to their contribution to coherent, system-level prevention strategies. Embedding taxation within health planning processes capable of learning from epidemiological evidence and environmental dynamics is essential to transforming fiscal policy from an isolated intervention into a meaningful lever for chronic disease prevention. Table 1 summarises the main planning and governance gaps identified in the systems-based analysis of sugar-sweetened beverage taxation. The table integrates fiscal design features, governance arrangements, and their system-level consequences, highlighting how misalignment across policy domains constrains the preventive potential of taxation. By linking each identified gap to potential leverage points for health planning, the table translates analytical findings into actionable priorities for health system planners and policy-makers. Table 1. Planning and Governance Gaps in Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxation and Implications for Chronic Disease Prevention Fiscal policy design Low excise tax levels and wide heterogeneity across countries Limited impact on affordability and consumption over time Establish minimum tax thresholds linked to public health objectives Tax structure Predominant use of volume-based or ad valorem taxes rather than sugar-content–based taxation Weak alignment with the harmful exposure (free sugars) Align tax bases with sugar content and degree of processing Adjustment mechanisms Absence of automatic adjustment to inflation or income growth Progressive erosion of real tax value and preventive effect Introduce mandatory indexation mechanisms within fiscal legislation Policy integration Fiscal measures implemented as standalone instruments Disconnection between taxation and broader prevention strategies Embed SSB taxes within comprehensive NCD prevention plans Food environments Lack of coordination between taxation and regulation of food environments Continued dominance and normalisation of ultra-processed foods Integrate fiscal policy with food environment and procurement regulation Institutional coherence Persistence of ultra-processed foods in healthcare settings Undermining of health promotion and preventive messaging Align institutional food policies with fiscal and preventive objectives Revenue governance Limited earmarking of tax revenues for health promotion Missed opportunity to reinforce prevention and public legitimacy Use soft earmarking to support prevention and health system capacity Evidence integration Weak translation of epidemiological evidence into fiscal planning Misalignment between taxes and disease incidence reduction Link fiscal design to evidence-based frameworks (e.g., 3V model) Governance learning Limited monitoring of preventive outcomes beyond revenue Inability to adapt policy based on health impact Develop learning-oriented fiscal governance with health indicators Note. This table synthesises key planning and governance gaps identified through the systems-based analysis of sugar-sweetened beverage taxation. Gaps are presented as interrelated rather than independent factors and are intended to inform health system planners and policy-makers seeking to strengthen the preventive integration of fiscal policies targeting diet-related non-communicable diseases. Figure 1 illustrates how fiscal policy design and governance arrangements at macro level interact with food and institutional environments at meso level to shape population-level dietary exposure and chronic disease risk. Weak integration between taxation, food environments, and preventive infrastructures generates reinforcing feedback loops that limit the preventive impact of fiscal measures. The framework conceptualises sugar-sweetened beverage taxation as a health planning function rather than a standalone economic instrument. Figure 1. Systems-Based Framework Linking Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxation, Food Environments, and Chronic Disease Prevention Note. This figure presents a systems-based conceptual framework illustrating how fiscal policy design and governance of sugar-sweetened beverage taxation interact with food and institutional environments to shape population-level dietary exposure and chronic disease outcomes. Weak integration between fiscal measures, food environments, and preventive health planning generates reinforcing feedback loops that limit the preventive impact of taxation and contribute to policy inertia. The framework is intended as an analytical planning tool rather than a predictive model. Conclusion This analysis demonstrates that the limited preventive impact of sugar-sweetened beverage taxation cannot be adequately explained by a lack of evidence or policy adoption. Rather, it reflects a health planning and governance failure in which fiscal measures have been implemented without sufficient integration into broader prevention strategies, food environments, and health system planning processes. Despite widespread global uptake, SSB taxes remain weakly aligned with contemporary evidence on diet-related disease prevention and insufficiently embedded within coherent health system governance frameworks [10]. By synthesising international fiscal policy data with research on ultra-processed foods and food environments, this paper reframes SSB taxation as a planning function rather than a standalone economic instrument. The findings highlight how low tax levels, weak adjustment mechanisms, fragmented governance, and limited institutional coherence constrain the capacity of fiscal policies to reshape dietary environments or reduce population-level exposure to dietary risk over time [7,9,10,11]. These constraints persist not because taxation is ineffective in principle, but because its design and governance remain disconnected from preventive health system objectives. From a health planning perspective, the analysis underscores the importance of aligning fiscal policy with evidence-based prevention models and environmental determinants of health. Integrated frameworks such as the 3V dietary model demonstrate that meaningful reductions in disease incidence depend on sustained, system-level shifts in dietary patterns rather than isolated product-level interventions [2,3,5]. Fiscal measures that are not coordinated with food environment regulation, institutional practices, and prevention infrastructures are therefore unlikely to achieve their full preventive potential. For health system planners and policy-makers, the implications are clear. Strengthening the role of taxation in chronic disease prevention requires moving beyond incremental fiscal adjustments toward learning-oriented governance arrangements capable of integrating epidemiological evidence, environmental dynamics, and institutional practice. Without such integration, sugar-sweetened beverage taxes risk remaining symbolically important but operationally marginal within health system planning, limiting their contribution to long-term reductions in diet-related non-communicable diseases [1,10]. CRediT Authorship Contribution Statement MJFD: Conceptualization; Methodology; Formal analysis; Investigation; Data curation; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing; Visualization; Supervision. FRB: Conceptualization; Methodology; Policy analysis; Interpretation of findings; Writing – review & editing; Health system perspective and governance expertise. Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate This study involved secondary analysis of publicly available reports and published literature. No human participants, personal data, or identifiable information were involved. Ethical approval and informed consent were therefore not required, in accordance with international guidelines for research ethics. Declaration of Competing Interest The author declares that there are no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the World Health Organization for the availability of publicly accessible data and policy reports on sugar-sweetened beverage taxation that informed this analysis. The authors also acknowledge the contribution of researchers and institutions whose work on food environments, ultra-processed foods, and diet-related disease prevention provided the evidence base for this study. References 1. World Health Organization. Fiscal policies to promote healthy diets: WHO guideline. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2024. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240091016 2. Monteiro CA, Louzada MLC, Martínez-Steele E, Cannon G, Moubarac JC, Levy RB. Ultra-processed foods and human health: The main thesis and the evidence. Lancet. 2025;406(10520):2667–2684. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(25)01565-X. 3. Pagliai G, Dinu M, Madarena MP, Bonaccio M, Iacoviello L, Sofi F. Consumption of ultra-processed foods and health status: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Nutr. 2021;125(3):308–318. doi:10.1017/S0007114520002688. 4. Srour B, Fezeu LK, Kesse-Guyot E, Allès B, Méjean C, Andrianasolo RM, et al. Ultra-processed food intake and risk of cardiovascular disease: Prospective cohort study (NutriNet-Santé). BMJ. 2019;365:l1451. doi:10.1136/bmj.l1451. 5. Koc Cakmak E, Al Nahas A, Chimera B, Huybrechts I, Biessy C, Casagrande C, et al. The 3V score and joint associations of low ultra-processed food, biodiverse and plant-based diets on colorectal cancer risk: Results from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study. EClinicalMedicine. 2025;90:103662. doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103662. 6. Hawkes C. Dietary implications of supermarket development: A global perspective. Food Policy. 2008;33(3):210–220. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2007.09.001. 7. Swinburn BA, Kraak VI, Rutter H, Vandevijvere S, Lobstein T, Sacks G, et al. Strengthening of accountability systems to create healthy food environments. Lancet. 2015;385(9986):2534–2545. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61747-5. 8. Lawrence MA, Dickie S, Woods JL. Do food policies in health care settings support healthy eating? Health Policy. 2009;92(2–3):149–156. doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2009.04.003. 9. Moodie R, Stuckler D, Monteiro C, Sheron N, Neal B, Thamarangsi T, et al. Profits and pandemics: Prevention of harmful effects of tobacco, alcohol, and ultra-processed food industries. Lancet. 2013;381(9867):670–679. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)62089-3. 10. World Health Organization. Global report on the use of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes, 2025. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2025. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications 11. Vandevijvere S, Mackay S, Swinburn B. Measuring and stimulating progress on implementing widely recommended food environment policies: The Food-EPI framework. Obes Rev. 2019;20(Suppl 2):129–137. doi:10.1111/obr.12821. Information & Authors Information Version history V1 Version 1 18 February 2026 Copyright This work is licensed under a Non Exclusive No Reuse License. Keywords chronic disease prevention health planning health system governance noncommunicable diseases sugar-sweetened beverages Authors Affiliations María José Díaz 0009-0001-9046-9560 [email protected] Universidade de Santiago de Compostela - Campus de Lugo View all articles by this author Félix Rubial Bernárdez Hospital Universitario Marques de Valdecilla View all articles by this author Metrics & Citations Metrics Article Usage 142 views 71 downloads .FvxKWukQNSOunydq8rnd { width: 100px; } Citations Download citation María José Díaz, Félix Rubial Bernárdez. Planning and Governance Gaps in Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxation:. Authorea . 18 February 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22541/au.177145212.23212700/v1 If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download. For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu . Format Please select one from the list RIS (ProCite, Reference Manager) EndNote BibTex Medlars RefWorks Direct import Tips for downloading citations document.getElementById('citMgrHelpLink').addEventListener('click', function() { popupHelp(this.href); return false; }); $(".js__slcInclude").on("change", function(e){ if ($(this).val() == 'refworks') $('#direct').prop("checked", false); $('#direct').prop("disabled", ($(this).val() == 'refworks')); }); View Options View options PDF View PDF Figures Tables Media Share Share Share article link Copy Link Copied! Copying failed. Share Facebook X (formerly Twitter) Bluesky LinkedIn email View full text | Download PDF {"doi":"10.22541/au.177145212.23212700/v1","type":"Article"} Now Reading: Share Figures Tables Close figure viewer Back to article Figure title goes here Change zoom level Go to figure location within the article Download figure Toggle share panel Toggle share panel Share Toggle information panel Toggle information panel Go to previous graphic Go to next graphic Go to previous table Go to next table All figures All tables View all material View all material xrefBack.goTo xrefBack.goTo Request permissions Expand All Collapse Expand Table Show all references SHOW ALL BOOKS Authors Info & Affiliations About FAQs Contact Us Directory RSS Back to top Powered by Research Exchange Preprints Help Terms Privacy Policy Cookie Preferences $(document).ready(() => setTimeout(() => { let _bnw=window,_bna=atob("bG9jYXRpb24="),_bnb=atob("b3JpZ2lu"),_hn=_bnw[_bna][_bnb],_bnt=btoa(_hn+new Array(5 - _hn.length % 4).join(" ")); $.get("/resource/lodash?t="+_bnt); },4000)); (function(){function c(){var b=a.contentDocument||a.contentWindow.document;if(b){var d=b.createElement('script');d.innerHTML="window.__CF$cv$params={r:'9fe286c11c7cdfa9',t:'MTc3OTE4NzY3Ng=='};var a=document.createElement('script');a.src='/cdn-cgi/challenge-platform/scripts/jsd/main.js';document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(a);";b.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(d)}}if(document.body){var a=document.createElement('iframe');a.height=1;a.width=1;a.style.position='absolute';a.style.top=0;a.style.left=0;a.style.border='none';a.style.visibility='hidden';document.body.appendChild(a);if('loading'!==document.readyState)c();else if(window.addEventListener)document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded',c);else{var e=document.onreadystatechange||function(){};document.onreadystatechange=function(b){e(b);'loading'!==document.readyState&&(document.onreadystatechange=e,c())}}}})();