GLOBAL INDEX 2016

METHODOLOGY
TABLE 1 Overview of methodology
Category
(weight in total score) Description Criteria
Section 1: Nutrition governance and management
A (12.5%)
Corporate strategy, governance and
management
A1 Corporate nutrition strategy*
A2 Nutrition governance and management systems*
A3 Quality of reporting*
Section 2: Formulating and delivering appropriate, affordable, accessible products
B (25%) Formulation of appropriate products B1 Product formulation*
B2 Nutrient Profiling System
C (20%)
Delivering affordable,
available products
C1 Product pricing*
C2 Product distribution*
Section 3: Influencing consumer choice and behavior
D (20%)
Responsible marketing policies,
compliance and spending
D1 Responsible marketing policy: all consumers
D2 Auditing and compliance with policy: all consumers
D3 Spending: Advertising focus: all consumers* | **
D4 Responsible marketing policy: children
D5 Auditing and compliance with policy: children
D6 Spending: Advertising focus (children) and policy impact**
E (2.5%)
Support for healthy diets and
active lifestyles
E1 Supporting staff health & wellness
E2 Supporting breastfeeding mothers in the workplace
E3 Supporting consumer-oriented healthy eating and active lifestyle programs*
F (15%)
Informative labeling and appropriate use
of health and nutrition claims
F1 Product labeling
F2 Health and nutrition claims
G (5%)
Engagement with governments,
policymakers and other stakeholders
G1 Lobbying and influencing governments*
G2 Stakeholder engagement*
* Criteria with specific undernutrition indicators
** Criteria D3 and D6 were assessed but are not scored as very little information was able to be collated, indicating that the companies are not yet able to collect
the necessary information across their global operations in terms of reporting on marketing expenditures.
Approach to scoring and ranking
The same approach to scoring and ranking has been kept. To generate each company’s
overall score and ranking, the following process was used:
Indicator scoring
• The methodology was adapted for each company, as necessary. Indicators that were
not considered applicable to a company’s product portfolio (such as those relating
to adding vegetables to products where this would not be feasible and all those
relating to fat and wholegrains for companies that only make beverages) were not
included a company’s overall score. Similarly market presence was taken into
account – so companies with less than 5% of their food and beverage sales in
non-OECD markets are not scored against the undernutrition indicators. This is to
ensure that the methodology reflects the realities of all companies operations and is
not a one size fits all approach.
• Each company is scored against all relevant indicators in the methodology. The top
performance level on an indicator is ten points, with lower scores awarded on a
sliding scale for lower levels of performance.
36
ACCESS TO NUTRITION INDEX GLOBAL INDEX 2016