The impact of the commercial sector on the politics of the government in the 21st century cannot be underestimated. The rules of production and distribution, ethical standards, and consumption policy are often dictated by multinational, worldwide organizations, which have a significant influence on the global market. Nestle (2013), in her book, investigates the process of lobbying laws, creating food politics, and implementing specific nutritional traditions around the planet. The purpose of this paper is to examine the main points of the author and analyze particular situations that she describes in her scientific work.
To provide a general overview of the topic, it is crucial to start with the definition of the term “lobbying.” According to the author, this notion means the attempt of some group of people to influence the decisions or the actions of the authorities (Nestle, 2013). This process aims to safeguard the interests of the representatives of some organizations and to have benefited from the innovations of the government (Nestle, 2013). Lobbying can be observed as the synonym of communication where one of the sides wants another to act in a particular way. Nevertheless, it is necessary to mention that manipulative strategies and unfair methods are used to achieve the required result.
Expertise is one of the essential steps in the process of making decisions and finding the solution to the problem in governmental structures. There is a dilemma of “Revolving Door,” which shows the issue of the relationship between the authorities and commercial food organizations. The government can provide the expertise that may be useful for the companies. Business owners have the data and the information that can be beneficial for the authorities. However, by describing the dilemma using the example of a specific situation, Nestle (2013) claims that the exchange of expertise is not always the best way to improve the system of regulation. “Revolving door” is an illustration of the imperfection of the existing structure.
In case of the Banana Wars, the monopoly is the most crucial problem. The unlimited control of the market by one company may affect in a negative way not only the economic situation but also the lives of ordinary people. It is impossible to check the quality of the product when there are no competitors in the whole country. What is more, the absence of other organizations does not leave any choice to the consumers of bananas.
The link between heart diseases and the consumption of sugar is already proved. It is possible to assume that at the legislative level, it is hard to change the position of the Sugar Association. However, the government has to provide financial aid to independent laboratories in order to have an alternative opinion. Moreover, people should be warned about the potential consequences of the consumption of products that contain sugar. It is possible to implement this idea by introducing free educational programs or changing the rules about the information on the label.
If the author of the book wrote the chapter last year, she would have written about the relationships between the USA and China that have a confrontation about the distribution of Chinese junk food in the country. This situation is especially crucial for the modern world as the rules of global contribution are still not established and appreciated by the majority of the states (Lynch & Gramer, 2019). If Nestle published her book in 2020, the issue would be even more significant in the circumstances of the coronavirus pandemic.
References
Lynch, K, & Gramer, R. (2019). Outfoxed and outgunned: How China routed the U.S. in a U.N. Agency. Foreign Policy. Web.
Nestle, M. (2013). Food politics: How the food industry influences nutrition and health. University of California Press.