FrieslandCampina

Policy Commitment

• FrieslandCampina’s overarching commitments to the Code have not changed since the 2021 assessment. The company continues to clearly state its support for exclusive breastfeeding in the first six months and continued breastfeeding to two years or beyond, as well as for the introduction of appropriate complementary foods from the age of six months.

• Although compared to the other companies assessed, FrieslandCampina's overarching commitments are almost fully aligned with the principles of the Code, the company still does not fully acknowledge the specifications to the Code provided by the World Health Assembly (WHA) in resolution 69.9 and the accompanying guidance on ending the inappropriate promotion of foods for infants and young children. WHA resolution 71.9, which calls for continued implementation of the recommendations of this guidance has not been acknowledged by the company either.

• FrieslandCampina was one of the two companies that received a full score on the new indicator that assessed whether companies apply their BMS marketing commitments to all types of formula, including formulas for special medical purposes.

Policy Commitment

• FrieslandCampina’s commitments relating to advertising and the promotion of BMS are relatively well-aligned with the principles of the Code. The company scored on all indicators except for indicating not to distribute articles or gifts that promote the use of BMS to caregivers.

• Compared to the last assessment in 2021, several of the indicators in this section have been adapted to capture companies’ explicit commitments in digital environments too, such as advertising on social media and point-of-sale promotions in online retail stores, as well as establishing contact with caregivers through baby clubs and social media groups – all actions that are not compliant with the Code. The company showed commitments on these indicators.

• Indicators were also revised to ensure accurate and complete inclusion of all recommendations of the guidance on ending the inappropriate promotion of foods for infants and young children supported by WHA resolution 69.9, for example by adding indicators to address cross-promotion of BMS products and educating caregivers on infant and young child feeding, both of which BMS companies should not do according to the Code. FrieslandCampina was the only company that included clear commitments addressing cross-promotion. Regarding educating caregivers, FrieslandCampina did not fully score on this since it did not explicitly commit to not directly nor indirectly provide education on infant and young child feeding to caregivers in any setting.

• FrieslandCampina is encouraged to consider the gaps identified to revise its policy to better align with the requirements of the Code.

Management System

• FrieslandCampina is the company that scored the highest on management systems in this topic. The company shared – under non-disclosure agreement (NDA) - global staff training materials and local procedure manuals developed by the company to guide its employees on the responsible marketing of BMS as outlined in the company’s related policy(ies). However, the company did not fully score on management systems as it did not show evidence of providing instructions to staff and procedures to implement commitments on gift distribution. However, in regard to the commitments met by the company on public advertising and promotion of BMS that are in line with the Code, the guidance provided by the company to follow and apply these commitments is clear, complete and consistent across different markets, thus FrieslandCampina scores on those elements.

Policy Commitment

• FrieslandCampina’s policy commitments relating to marketing BMS throughout the healthcare system, have not changed since the 2021 assessment and are relatively well-aligned with the requirements of the Code, except with Article 6.4 on paying personnel to work in the healthcare system which companies should not do according to the Code.

• Compared to the last assessment in 2021, indicators were slightly revised to ensure an accurate assessment of recommendation 6 of the guidance supported by WHA resolution 69.9 to evaluate whether companies have explicit commitments in place not to use health facilities to host events of any kind nor to give out gifts or any other offering to caregivers of infants and young children, to avoid conflicts of interest. FrieslandCampina was one of the two companies that showed commitments indicating that they would not use health care facilities to host events, contests, or campaigns by explicitly mentioning in its publicly available policy that health care facilities are not used to host events, contests or campaigns concerning covered products, for the display of covered products, placards or posters concerning covered products or for the distribution to consumers of material related to covered products provided by them or one of their distributors involved in the marketing of covered products. The company sets a good example by outlining the marketing materials it covers and mentioning that this commitment extends to its distributors as well. The company, however, did not show commitments to not giving gifts or any kind of offerings to caregivers through healthcare systems.

• FrieslandCampina is encouraged to consider the gaps identified to revise its policy to better align with the requirements of the Code.

Management System

• FrieslandCampina shared – under NDA- global staff training materials and some local procedure manuals developed by the company to guide its employees on the responsible marketing of BMS as outlined in the company’s related policy(ies). The company does not fully score on management systems as it does not have all Code provisions in place. However, in regard to the commitments met by the company on marketing BMS throughout the healthcare system that are in line with the Code, the guidance provided by the company to follow and apply these commitments is clear, complete and consistent across different markets, thus FrieslandCampina scores on those elements. Although it is one of two companies among the18 assessed that score the highest on management systems in this topic, these can be improved by providing more concrete examples of what company personnel should or should not do in each context.

Policy Commitment

• Compared to the last assessment in 2021, commitments on donations of BMS are now assessed in a separate topic and across several indicators, to ensure a more accurate assessment of the specific requirements relating to BMS donations

• FrieslandCampina showed Code compliant commitments stating that it will not provide BMS donations in humanitarian settings and emergencies unless officially requested by a competent government authority of the country affected by the emergency or by the designated emergency response coordinating body acting on behalf of the government. Although the company showed its commitment to meeting most of the required criteria for BMS product donations in emergencies, it did not provide evidence that it will not donate expired or nearly expired products and did not commit to ensuring that donated BMS products will not display company brands.

• The company also shows explicit commitments regarding not distributing BMS product donations or low-cost supplies for use outside of the social welfare institutions (e.g., food banks and orphanages.) where infants and young children require them.

• However, FrieslandCampina continues to provide BMS product samples for research and product evaluation purposes while the Code does not allow their provision to healthcare institutions under any circumstances and for any reason, even if the products are not directly provided to consumers or patients.

• FrieslandCampina also falls short of meeting the Code requirements on donations by allowing the provision of educational materials and/or practice-related items to healthcare professionals, which is specifically addressed in recommendation 6 of the guidance supported by WHA resolution 69.9 to avoid due to potential conflict of interest.

• FrieslandCampina is encouraged to consider the gaps identified to revise its policy to better align with the requirements of the Code.

Management System

• The company shared – under NDA - global staff training materials and some local procedure manuals developed by the company to guide its employees on the responsible marketing of BMS, as outlined in the company’s related policy(ies). The company does not fully score on management systems since it does not have all Code provisions in place. However, regarding the commitments met by the company on donations that are in line with the Code, the guidance provided by the company to follow and apply these commitments is clear, complete and consistent across different markets, thus FrieslandCampina scores on those elements.

Policy Commitment

• FrieslandCampina’s policy commitments relating to marketing BMS to healthcare workers, which are relatively well-aligned with the requirements of the Code, have not changed since the 2021 assessment.

• Compared to the last assessment in 2021, a new indicator was introduced for this topic to specifically assess the instructions provided to healthcare workers on the appropriate preparation of powdered formulas and if these are based on WHO/FAO guidelines and Codex Standards as referenced by WHA resolutions 58.32 and 61.20. Similar to the other companies, FrieslandCampina did not score on this indicator.

• FrieslandCampina however is one of only four companies out of the 18 assessed to explicitly state that any material which contains information about formula use provided to health workers will include information on the social and financial implications of formula use and the health hazards of inappropriate feeding methods, unnecessary or improper use of BMS and their inappropriate preparation, as per the requirements of the Code.

• Two other indicators were slightly revised to ensure an accurate assessment of recommendation 6 of the guidance supported by WHA resolution 69.9 to evaluate whether companies have explicit commitments in place not to offer any financial or material inducements (no gifts or incentives of any form or value) to healthcare workers or their families, and not to sponsor any scientific meetings, fellowships, study tours, and research grants for health professionals, to avoid conflicts of interest. Similar to the 2021 assessment, and like most of the BMS companies assessed in this Index, FrieslandCampina did not score on these indicators that capture the Code commitments that specifically relate to WHA resolution 69.9.

• FrieslandCampina is encouraged to consider the gaps identified to revise its policy to better align with the requirements of the Code.

Management System

• FrieslandCampina shared – under NDA - global staff training materials and some local procedure manuals developed by the company to guide its employees on the responsible marketing of BMS as outlined in the company’s related policy(ies). The company does not fully score on management systems as it does not have all Code provisions in place. However, in regard to the commitments met by the company on marketing BMS to healthcare workers that are in line with the Code, the guidance provided by the company to follow and apply these commitments is clear, complete and consistent across different markets, thus FrieslandCampina scores on those elements. However, these can be improved by providing more concrete examples of what company personnel should or should not do in each context.

Policy Commitment

• FrieslandCampina policy commitments that address the incentives of company employees involved in BMS marketing, which are well aligned with the requirements of the Code, have not changed since the 2021 assessment.

• FrieslandCampina was the only company to obtain a full score as it was the only company found to explicitly state that sales representatives would not receive bonuses based on the volume or value of sales (clarifying the different forms of sales measures) for products covered by the company's BMS marketing policy, and that quotas for the sale of these products are also not permitted.

Management System

• FrieslandCampina presented as evidence multiple clear examples (under NDA) of instructions to staff on how to interpret and apply relevant commitments on bonus calculations. Examples shared included local training materials with Do’s and Don’ts for new employees and reminders to employees about non-compliant activities amongst others. In addition, the company offers KPIs that stimulate compliance with FrieslandCampina Corporate Policy and Guideline. The company fully scored on management systems as it had all Code provisions in place and the guidance provided by the company to follow and apply these commitments is clear, complete and consistent across different markets.

Policy Commitment

• FrieslandCampina’s policy commitments relating to the labeling of BMS products, which are relatively well-aligned with the requirements of the Code, have improved since the 2021 assessment as the company now commits to include all necessary information in line with the Code article 9.2 on the labels/inserts of its BMS products that are covered by its BMS marketing policy.

• Compared to the last assessment in 2021, the information required by the Code on labels of powdered formula is assessed in more detail to evaluate whether companies have specific commitments covering each requirement as per WHA resolutions 58.32 and 61.20. FrieslandCampina was one of two companies found to have explicit commitments on requirements for powdered formula labels, such as stating the hazards of inappropriate preparation and using graphics to illustrate appropriate methods of preparation, the company fully scored on this indicator.

• The company was found to have explicit commitments on all the commitments described in Article 9 of the Code. However, some commitments relating to the Code labeling requirements strengthened by the guidance on ending the inappropriate promotion of foods for infants and young children that is supported by WHA resolution 69.9 were not found such as including on its BMS products labeling a statement on the importance of exclusive breastfeeding in the first 6 months of life and continued breastfeeding for up to 2 years or beyond.

• Furthermore, FrieslandCampina was the only company found to publicly and explicitly meet all requirements from recommendation 4 of WHA 69.9. In addition, FrieslandCampina was one of the three companies that showed commitments not make any health or nutrition claims on products for infants or young children except where specifically provided for in national legislation requirements set out by the national authorities

• FrieslandCampina is encouraged to consider the gaps identified to revise its policy to better align with the requirements of the Code.

Management System

• FrieslandCampina provided evidence of some procedures in place to implement commitments set out in its BMS marketing policy that relate to labeling, by outlining the steps involved in the approval process for labels, which involves various business units. This ensures that all relevant stakeholders contribute to the approval process, thereby enhancing the robustness of the labeling standards. This represents a good practice example for procedures related to labeling standards.

Policy Commitment

• Compared to the BMS/CF Marketing Index 2021, companies’ commitments on this topic are evaluated in more detail to ensure their commitments relating to Article 10 of the Code are accurately assessed.

• In this iteration, FrieslandCampina did not have a full score on this topic since not all relevant Codex standards relating to the quality of BMS products were explicitly stated.

• FrieslandCampina is encouraged to consider the gaps identified to revise its policy to better align with the requirements of the Code.

Management System

• FrieslandCampina shared – under NDA - global staff training materials and local procedure manuals developed by the company to guide its employees on the responsible marketing of BMS as outlined in the company’s related policy(ies). The company was one of four companies among the 18 assessed found to have clear procedures on implementing the applicable Codex standards that the company has explicitly listed.

Policy Commitment

• FrieslandCampina's policy commitments relating to monitoring compliance of its marketing practices to the principles of its BMS marketing policy have not changed since the 2021 assessment. The company was found to have all commitments assessed in place. These commitments, which specifically pertain to Article 11 of the Code, remain publicly disclosed.

Management System

• Compared to the 2021 assessment, FrieslandCampina has improved its score showing all management systems in place. The company shared – under NDA - global staff training materials and some local procedure manuals developed by the company to guide its employees and contractual third-parties on the responsible marketing of BMS as outlined in the company’s related policy(ies), as well as effective monitoring and management of incidences of non-compliance with the company policy(ies). The company also clearly assigns executive responsibilities and oversight to ensure the effective implementation of its BMS marketing policy.

• FrieslandCampina was the only company found that showed evidence of clear guidelines on the process for taking corrective action in the event an observed non-compliance incident is confirmed and had guidelines for employees and all relevant third parties on potential corrective actions that can be taken.

Policy Commitment

• Compared to 2021, FrieslandCampina has improved its score as it now has a publicly available policy (2022) on responsible advocacy which is also applied when engaging on issues relating to BMS and the Code. Based on this policy, FrieslandCampina covers some commitments assessed in this topic.

• Similar to most companies, FrieslandCampina did not show commitments not to undermine or support existing public policy frameworks, the work of WHO or similar agencies, and Government efforts to develop regulations to implement the Code in full nor commitments including a statement prohibiting CoI which clearly apply to lobbying.

Management System

• Based on FrieslandCampina’s related policies, the company clarifies that the company’s Board has oversight of its policy on responsible advocacy and that it names an executive function with the responsibility of implementing this policy. The company also provides clarity on control mechanisms in place (e.g. reporting to the Board, internal audits). However, no evidence was found in the public domain, nor provided by the company, that the company’s Board has oversight of its lobbying positions and activities. To receive a full score on this topic, FrieslandCampina is encouraged to improve on this aspect.

Disclosure

• In regard to commitments that were found for FrieslandCampina that are in line with the Code, the level of disclosure on these commitments and on the company’s compliance with its BMS marketing policy is high and has improved since the 2021 assessment. The company now has evidence of responses to any third-party reports on alleged cases of non-compliance with the Code published in the last two years. The company also publicly discloses complaints made to the company by other stakeholders and publishes independent audits to a certain extent (only the summary).

• Areas, where FrieslandCampina can improve on this topic, include disclosing how it internally assessed compliance with commitments related to donations, labelling, quality and lobbying. The company should also publish the full auditor reports, and not just summaries of them.

• Since the last BMS/CF Marketing Index 2021, a few indicators have been added to further assess companies’ level of disclosure in lobbying on BMS marketing issues and the Code. Similar to the 2021 assessment, FrieslandCampina falls short in disclosing all lobbying-related activities. Although FrieslandCampina publicly discloses following OECD principles for transparency and integrity in lobbying, The Transparency International Standards for Lobbying Regulation and the Responsible Lobbying Framework, ATNI advises the company to also follow other key public policy frameworks in private sector engagement and lobbying such as the principles of the Code WHO framework of engagement with non-state actors, among others.

• FrieslandCampina is encouraged to consider the gaps identified in its level of disclosure and have this information available and easily accessible in the public domain.