¹ 32.3% according to the Obepi study 2012, INSERM, Kantar Health, Roche (2012), “Enquête épidémiologique sur le surpoids et l’obésité”.

² “Obésité: quelles conséquences pour l’économie et comment les limiter?”, letter from Trésor-Eco n°179, September 2016.

³ S Hercberg, “Propositions pour un nouvel élan de la politique nutritionnelle française de santé publique dans le cadre de la Stratégie nationale de santé - 1ère partie : mesures concernant la prévention nutritionnelle”, 28 January 2014, La Documentation française.

⁴ CGAAER n°12150, Rapport de mission d’expertise et d’appui. Premier bilan du Programme national pour l’alimentation, December 2013.

⁵ M Friant-Perrot and A Garde, “La publicité alimentaire et la lutte contre l’obésité infantile en droit français et en droit anglais”, in Actualités de droit économique : aspects de droit de la concurrence et de la consommation et de droit de l’agroalimentaire, Petites Affiches, Numéro spécial – Actes de colloque, 6 octobre 2011, 199, pp. 27–39; Agir sur les comportements nutritionnels. Réglementation, marketing et influence des communications de santé, INSERM, 2017 (see in particular the first chapter of this report, as well as the additional contribution by M Friant-Perrot, Les enjeux juridiques de la promotion d’une alimentation saine: messages sanitaires et marketing alimentaire en France).

⁶ See Amendement Proposal n° 250 and rejected on 8 April 2004, www.assemblee-nationale.fr/12/cri/2003-2004/20040191.asp. Martine Billard MP then stated: “The Government proposes to require that the advertiser of a commercial likely to harm children’s health shall finance another commercial aimed at counteracting this first message. This amounts to presenting an argument against another, as if both were equivalent, and by expecting the public to be able to understand. This cannot be serious.”

⁷ As the Senate’s Social Affairs Commission noted, “this measure is based on the idea that a nutritional information independent from the advertisement will be at least as effective as if it was contained in the commercial itself”: www.senat.fr/rap/l03-372/l03-3728.html#toc60.

⁸ The relevant delegated legislation should have been adopted “by the 1^st January 2006 at the latest” but was only adopted on 27 February 2007: JORF n°50 of 28 February 2007, p. 3716 (décret), and JORF n°50 of 28 February 2007, p. 3725 (arrêté).

⁹ The definition would be similar to the definition contained in Art. 2(1)(o) of Regulation 852/2004, OJ 30 April 2004, L139/1. As such, it would not extend to non-processed food such as fruit, vegetables or spices; to food that has merely been cut (e.g. fresh meat or fish), packaged (e.g. eggs, honey), frozen or canned if nothing (water aside) has been added. Similarly for non-alcoholic beverages: adverts for teas, coffee, milk and fruit juices to which no salt, sugar or sweeteners have been added are exempted from the obligation to affix a health message.

¹⁰ See Arts. L121-50 to L121-53 of the Consumer Code.

¹¹ See in particular Art. L3323-4 of the Public Health Code.

¹² “Pour votre santé, mangez au moins cinq fruits et légumes par jour”.

¹³ “Pour votre santé, pratiquez une activité physique régulière”.

¹⁴ “Pour votre santé, évitez de manger trop gras, trop sucré, trop salé”.

¹⁵ “Pour votre santé, évitez de grignoter entre les repas”.

¹⁶ On the absence of coverage of Art. L 2133-1 of sponsorship arrangements, see Agir sur les comportements nutritionnels. Réglementation, marketing et influence des communications de santé, INSERM, 2017. On the sponsorship of major sports events by the food industry, see Garde, A and Rigby, N, “Going for Gold – Should Responsible Governments Raise the Bar on Sponsorship of the Olympic Games and Other Sporting Events by Food and Beverage Companies?” (2012) 17 Communications Law 42 Google Scholar.

¹⁷ M Friant-Perrot and A Garde, “From BSE to Obesity – EFSA’s Growing Role in the EU’s Nutrition Policy in A Alemanno and S Gabbi, New Directions of EU Law – EFSA @10 (Ashgate Publishing, 2014).

¹⁸ Whether the health messages are effective is doubtful, as discussed below.

¹⁹ www.mangerbouger.fr/.

²⁰ UFC Que Choisir, study on the influence of television advertising on children’s food preferences and eating behaviours, Etude sur l’influence de la publicité télévisée sur les préférences et les comportements alimentaires des enfants, September 2006 and September 2007: www.quechoisir.org/alimentation/nutrition/etude-obesite-infantile-et-publicites-televisees-bilan-2006-2007.

²¹ www.lefigaro.fr/actualites/2008/02/04/01001-20080204ARTFIG00546-les-sucreries-bientot-interdites-de-publicite.php.

²² www.lemonde.fr/actualite-medias/article/2009/02/19/loi-ou-accord-le-difficile-encadrement-de-la-publicite-alimentaire-a-la-television_1157530_3236.html.

²³ Indeed, in France, €1.4 billion is invested in food marketing – 80% of which is for unhealthy food: services.poissonbouge.net/clients/448a3090-076f-e862-84e2adf718984d17/docs/ddab729b-9013-97b9-80097db644cc16e8.pdf. However, as discussed below, these figures neither took into account the societal costs of childhood overweight and obesity, nor did they recognise that a ban on unhealthy food marketing did not constitute a ban on the marketing of all foods. See CSA, Contribution au débat sur la publicité pour certains produits alimentaires, 13 May 2008: www.csa.fr/es/Etudes-et-publications/Les-dossiers-d-actualite/Contribution-au-debat-sur-la-publicite-pour-certains-produits-alimentaires.

²⁴ The 2009 Charter is available at www.csa.fr/es/Media/Files/Espace-Juridique/Chartes/Charte-alimentaire.

²⁵ See in particular the open letter to Mrs Albanel, 25 April 2008, www.quechoisir.org/action-ufc-que-choisir-publicites-televisees-pour-les-produits-alimentaires-le-collectif-obesite-protegeons-nos-enfants-salue-l-appel-des-150-scientifiques-n13323/.

²⁶ The 2013 Charter is available at www.csa.fr/Espace-juridique/Chartes/Charte-visant-a-promouvoir-une-alimentation-et-une-activite-physique-favorables-a-la-sante-dans-les-programmes-et-les-publicites-diffuses-a-la-television-1er-janvier-2014. The revised version entered into effect in January 2014.

²⁷ The Code is available in its original French version at www.arpp.org/nous-consulter/regles/regles-de-deontologie/comportements-alimentaires/. For an English translation of the Code, see www.arpp.org/nous-consulter/regles/regles-de-deontologie/food-behaviors-code/.

²⁸ For example, the AVMS Directive prohibits the direct targeting of children in advertising; the ARPP merely applies this principle to food advertising.

²⁹ Television Advertising of Food and Drink Products to Children, 22 February 2007, Ofcom. See the contribution in this Special Issue discussing specifically the regulation of unhealthy food marketing in the UK.

³⁰ In March 2006 Ofcom proceeded to consult on a range of different options for new restrictions on television advertising to children. On 9 May 2006 Ofcom announced that it would be publishing an update to its Impact Assessment intended to make it more straightforward to replicate the analysis undertaken by Ofcom, in particular by using the most up to date information for calendar year 2005. In order to provide consultees with an opportunity to consider the revised data and take it into account in their responses to the consultation, Ofcom announced that it would be extending the consultation period until 30 June 2006. This update to the consultation was published on 8 June 2006.

³¹ On the impact of unhealthy food marketing on the rights of the child, see the last contribution to this Special Issue.

³² Avis n°64 on food education, food marketing, food information and the evolution of food behaviours (“avis sur l’éducation alimentaire, la publicité alimentaire, l’information nutritionnelle et l’évolution des comportements alimentaires”), 8 April 2009. In one paragraph on p. 19, the CNA referred as follows to the regulatory frameworks of Quebec, Sweden, Norway and the United Kingdom (which – in passing – it grossly over simplified): “However, one should note that in Quebec, despite the fact that all television advertising to children has been prohibited since 1980, the rate of obesity has increased from 11.5% of the population to 29.4% from 1981 to 1991. In Sweden, a country where advertising to children of less than 12 years of age has never been allowed, the rate of overweight in children amounts to 18% – a rate similar to the one observed in France. The same conclusion should be made about Norway too, where 21% of the population is overweight despite the prohibition since 1990 on television advertising (on all products) to children before 9pm. Finally, let’s mention that, in the United Kingdom, restrictions on the advertising for certain foods was adopted 2006 and took effect in 2008.”

³³ See, for example, the final report of the WHO Commission on Ending Childhood Obesity (Geneva, 2016): apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/204176/1/9789241510066_eng.pdf?ua=1.

³⁴ France Télévisions is the French state-owned public national broadcaster.

³⁵ Report of the National Assembly n°3360 of 16 December 2015 on behalf the Committee on Culture and Education, p. 47.

³⁶ ibid, p. 52.

³⁷ Act of 20 December 2016 relating to the prohibition of commercial advertising in children’s programmes broadcasted on public television, JORF n°0296 of 21 December 2016.

³⁸ Report on the application on the Charter, “Rapport d’application de la Charte visant à promouvoir une alimentation et une activité physique favorables à la santé dans les programmes et les publicités diffusés à la télévision, Exercice 2011”, 26 June 2012

³⁹ Even though the Act explicitly mentions the possibility of regulating private channels by delegated legislation, this reference does not allow for an extension of the advertising ban on public channels to private channels, as such a reform would have to be adopted by an Act of Parliament rather than by delegated legislation.

⁴⁰ In the Senate report on the legislative, Mrs Bouchoux stated: “Our proposal focuses on the most vulnerable public, children, who are not able to tell the difference between a character from a cartoon and the same character which appears a few moments later to promote a sugary drink or a processed chocolate bar”: Rapport n°162 du 30 novembre 2016 fait au nom de la commission de la culture, de l’éducation et de la communication (1) sur la proposition de loi, modifiée par l’assemblée nationale, relative à la suppression de la publicité commerciale dans les programmes jeunesse de la télévision publique.

⁴¹ The ANIA believes that “restrictive measures have no proven effect on overweight and obesity”, lettre nutrition n° 25 – November/December 2009.

⁴² Rapport “Publicités alimentaires à destination des enfants et des adolescents”, Inpes, 22 May 2014, Hélène Escalon, p. 8.

⁴³ A channel like Gulli is not targeted by the law, but concentrates 13.4% of the audience share of 4–10 year olds (Source : Médiamétrie/Médiamat 2012).

⁴⁴ Boomerang, Canal J, Gulli TV, M6 Kid, Monludo, Tiji, Cartoon Network, Nickelodeon.

⁴⁵ S Hercberg, “Propositions pour un nouvel élan de la politique nutritionnelle française de santé publique dans le cadre de la Stratégie nationale de santé - 1ère partie : mesures concernant la prévention nutritionnelle”, 28 January 2014, La Documentation française. In particular, he noted both the consensus regarding the scientific evidence on the influence of marketing on eating behaviours and the political consensus that led to the adoption of the WHO recommendations by the then 193 States of the World Health Assembly in May 2010.

⁴⁶ ibid, p. 25.

⁴⁷ More generally, the Hercberg report proposes to regulate food marketing to children on the basis of nutrient profiling (at p. 62), as the WHO itself has recommended.

⁴⁸ M Friant-Perrot and A Garde, Impact du marketing sur les préférences alimentaires des enfants, INPES, 2014: inpes.santepubliquefrance.fr/30000/pdf/marketing-alimentaire-des-enfants.pdf.

⁴⁹ H Escalon, “Publicités alimentaires à destination des enfants et des adolescents- Canaux utilisés, investissements et ressorts publicitaires, aliments promus, impact sur les préférences alimentaires et les requêtes d”achats des enfants, perception d’une réglementation par les parents”, INPES, 2014.

⁵⁰ At p. 12.

⁵¹ At p. 14.

⁵² At p. 27.

⁵³ Inserm, Expertise collective- Agir sur les comportements nutritionnels. Réglementation, marketing et influence des communications de santé, EDP INSERM, 2017: www.inserm.fr/index.php/thematiques/sante-publique/expertises-collectives.

⁵⁴ During the 20 seconds of the advert’s duration, the health messages were looked at for an average of barely half a second, whilst a quarter of the participants did not even see the message.

⁵⁵ On health inequalities and non-communicable diseases, see in particular: Gokani, N, “Regulation for Health Inequalities and Non-Communicable Diseases: in Want of (Effective) Behavioural Insights” (2007) 23(2) European Law Journal (forthcoming)Google Scholar; Beauchamp, A et al., “The effect of obesity prevention interventions according to socioeconomic position: a systematic review” (2014) 15 Obesity Reviews 541 Google Scholar; McGill, R et al., “Are interventions to promote healthy eating equally effective for all? Systematic review of socioeconomic inequalities in impact” (2015) 15 BMC Public Health 457 Google Scholar; Loring, B and Robertson, A, Obesity and inequities: Guidance for addressing inequities in overweight and obesity (WHO Regional Office for Europe 2014)Google Scholar.

⁵⁶ Art. L3232-9 of the Public Health Code.

⁵⁷ The controversy exists in many EU Member States: in the absence of a mandatory designated nutrition logo, it is feared that Member States and business actors could develop their own systems of information, running the risk that they may hinder the free movement of goods in violation of the Food Information Regulation and the general Treaty provisions on the free movement of goods. This is why the Food Information Regulation provides that the European Commission shall present to the Parliament and the Council, at the latest on 13 December 2017, a report on the use of forms of expression and complementary presentation of food information, to determine whether it is appropriate and feasible to propose harmonising legislation.

⁵⁸ UFC Que choisir, Etiquetage nutritionnel, les surprises du code couleur, 24 February 2015.

⁵⁹ ANSES, Faisabilité de la classification des aliments selon l’algorithme proposé par la FCD. Comparaison des résultats obtenus à ceux du système 5-C intégrant les ajustements du HCSP, March 2016: www.anses.fr/fr/system/files/AUTRE2015SA0253.pdf.

⁶⁰ On 24 April 2017, France notified the proposal to the European Commission under Directive 2015/1535 to ensure its compatibility with EU internal market law (2017/159/F).