EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Nestle is a multinational corporation , headquarted in Switzerland, is one of the largest food

company in the world measured by revenues. Though various controversies revolves around

this multinational company, one of the most confusing and prolonged one is the “Breast

milk substitute infant formula”. This controversy has turned up the heads of millions of

people all around the world, as several infants died in developing countries after using

Nestle’s breast subsitute milk for infants. Babies died because their mothers were not literate

enough to use the prodcut. They didn’t even have the proper means of making that infant

formula because of shortage of various basic necessties in developing countries such as clean

water, electricity, fuel and etc.

Leading organizations all around the world took part in the boycott of Nestle’s products

during the late 1970’s. Nestle admitted its mistake of doing aggressive marketing in

developing countries and obeyed to follow the code of conducts in its marketing practices,

recommended by World Health organization. The boycott was first initiated by USA, which

gain its momentum worldwide. Also in Pakistan this controversy gained ground when one of

the employee of Nestle , accused the company that it uses malpractices to promote its infant

formula. Several pamplets named as “Baby Killers” were distrubuted in UK and Nestle sued

the publisher of German-language translation and after two year trials court advocated in

favor of Nestle because they could not be held responsible for the infant deaths in terms of

criminal law.

The controversy did exist even after the company accepted the codes of WHO. Some

organizations condemned Nestle, that it has been selling free samples to the mothers of new

born children while they are in hospital, and the family has to purchase new packets from the

market because the intial dose of it has made their children addictive to it. However Nestle

denied such allegations.

The International Nestlé Boycott Committee, the secretariat for which is the UK GROUP

Baby Milk Action, currently coordinates the Nestlé boycott. Company practices are

monitored by the International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN), which consists of more

than 200 groups in over 100 countries.

Though this controversy had badly impacted the image of Nestle, but still Nestle is one of the

leading multi national corporation and has its huge market share all over the world.

Page 1 of 17

INTRODUCTION OF NESTLE:

Nestle is the world's leading nutrition, health and wellness company. "Good Food, Good

Life" is the promise we commit to everyday, everywhere – to enhance lives, throughout life,

with good food and beverages.

Nestle is a Swiss multinational nutritional and health-related consumer goods company

headquartered in Vevey, Switzerland. It is the largest food company in the world measured

by revenues.

In 1866, the first European condensed milk factory was opened in Cham, Switzerland, by the

Anglo-Swiss Condensed Milk Company.

In Vevey, Switzerland, our founder Henri Nestlé, a German pharmacist, launched his Farine

lactée, a combination of cow’s milk, wheat flour and sugar, saving the life of a neighbour’s

child. Nutrition has been the cornerstone of our company ever since.

“Henri Nestlé, himself an immigrant from Germany, was instrumental in turning his

Company towards international expansion from the very start. We owe more than our name,

our logo and our first infant-food product to our founder. Henri Nestlé embodied many of the

key attitudes and values that form part and parcel of our corporate culture: pragmatism,

flexibility, the willingness to learn an open mind and respect for other people and cultures.”

Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, Nestlé Chairman

Nestle was formed in 1905 by the merger of the Anglo-Swiss Milk Company, established in

1866 by brothers George Page and Charles Page, and Farine Lactee Henri Nestle, founded in

1866 by Henri Nestlé. The company grew significantly during the First World War and again

following the Second World War, expanding its offerings beyond its early condensed milk

and infant formula products. The company has made a number of corporate acquisitions,

including Crosse & Blackwell in 1950, Findus in 1963, Libby's in 1971, Rowntree Mackintosh

in 1988 and Gerber in 2007.

Page 2 of 17

Nestlé has a primary listing on the SIX Swiss Exchange and is a constituent of the Swiss

Market Index. It has a secondary listing on Euro next.

Nestlé's products include baby food, bottled water, breakfast cereals, coffee, confectionery,

dairy products, ice cream, pet foods and snacks. 29 of Nestlé's brands have annual sales of

over 1 billion Swiss francs (about $ 1.1 billion),

Nestlé has around 450 factories, operates in 86 countries, and employs around 328,000

people. It is one of the main shareholders of L’Oreal, the world's largest cosmetics company.

SWOT ANALYSIS OF NESTLE

STRENGTHS -------- TO BUILD

ON WEAKNESESS ---------- TO COVER

ONOPPORTUNITIES ------------- TO CAPTURE

THREATS ----------------------------- TO DEFEND ON

STRENGHTS

The greatest strength of nestle is that it includes a

culture that is team focused and an open door

policy. Nestle focus on collectivism and performance orientation attitude, which encourages employees to

work harder. Another thing is high level of market share and that people all over the world trust and recognizes

Nestle as a big brand name. Strength is that people trust on Nestle. It looks at achieving higher

volumes by renovating existing products and innovating new products. Strength is that they are low

cost operators which allow them to not only beat competition but also edging ahead operating

excellence, innovation, renovation, product availability and communication are major

strengths. IT is an important aspect that people all around the world are becoming more conscious about

health, that’s why they prefer Nestle.

WEAKNESESS

One major weakness of Nestle is that it is entering into markets that are already mature and can give a tough

competition to new entrants. Nestle Plain Yogurt has proved to be a Nestle weakness because it has been

unable to make its market place in USA. But Nestle by analyzing the sensitive areas can overcome its

weaknesses.

Page 3 of 17

OPPORTUNITIES

Nestle in Pakistan has a great opportunity for expanding its markets because in Pakistan there is a large ready

market of food and beverages due to trends of eating and the increasing .I t also has opportunities

largely in China and India as well. Through proper marketing research Nestle can cash on to these

opportunities.

Threats

Nestle is facing the threats by worldwide community due to its violation of international marketing standards.

Many conferences and campaigns have been held against Nestle in this regard which can damage the name

and trust of its customers. Another threat is due to the increasing popularity of its competitor OLPERS

in local and international markets.

PROBLEM STATEMENT

“ Worldwide boycott of nestle products after the company failed to properly

communicate and market its breast milk substitute (infant formula) product, which has

resulted in the deaths of millions of infants. ”

  PROBLEMS FACED BY NESTLE

The problems for Nestle in today’s world are the claims faced

by it as being charged with the responsibility of violating the

“International Marketing Codes”. Nestle claims that I is doing nothing

wrong and unethical in the way it markets is baby foods around the

world. Baby milk action has raised the case of “SYED AAMAR

RAZA” who has publicizes evidence of Nestlé’s malpractice in

Pakistan also as well. It has been claimed that company marketing is

causing unnecessary deaths and sufferings of babies, largely among

poor because they do not use the proper amount of powder in order

to save some volume for future use which causes great

danger to baby life.

BACKGROUND OF THE PROBLEM:

Beginning in the late 1970s Nestlé began to attract global criticism for its infant-formula

marketing policies, especially those conducted in developing countries. Public outcry peaked

Page 4 of 17

with the Nestle boycott of 1977 which (though suspended for several years in the mid-1980s)

remains in effect today. Nestle is the most boycotted company in the world as a result

Entitled with “Baby Killer’’ in 1970 in developing countries

Nestlé advertised and still advertises its formula as a risk-free substitute (or even a preferable

alternative) to breast milk, resulting in increased use and often replacing available breast milk.

Nestle advertised widely infant product was valuable in its nutrients which have complete

benefits for baby from birth to one year

Formula was contaminated in poor countries, leading to disease in vulnerable infants.

Because of the high illiteracy rates in developing nations many mothers are not aware of the

sanitation methods needed in the preparation of bottles

UNICEF estimates that a non-breastfed child living in disease-ridden and unhygienic

conditions is between six and 25 times more likely to die of diarrhea and four times more likely to die

of pneumonia than a breastfed child

Many poor mothers try to save money by economizing on the formula by using less than the

recommended dose or substituting it with other inferior alternatives such as cow’s milk, rice

water or corn starch with

Nestle, among other companies that market infant formulas, has been the focus of attack from

different groups. The source of this controversy sprang from the number of deaths of babies

from Third World countries that are alleged to have been the result of aggressive advertising

of the Nestle infant formula. Nestle stands by its position that it has been responsible in its

product marketing stressing, among other things, that (1) it has never advocated bottle

feeding instead of breast feeding and (2) that the infant formula has a vital role in proper

infant nutrition as a supplement. Nevertheless, Nestle adopted measures to address the

concerns of different groups, like WHO, by

discontinuing its mass media advertising of infant

formula, carrying out comprehensive health

education programs, and supported the WHO code.

By late 1990s, Nestle was again accused of

continuously violating the WHO code and

concerned groups have called for the boycott of

Nestle products. By 2001, the HIV crisis in certain

parts of the world, like South Africa, has caused a

Page 5 of 17

shift in preference from breast-feeding to infant formula. Consequently, Nestle faces the

challenge of addressing such high demand. Finally, Nestle, as an MNC, carries new

responsibilities   that come along with marketing its products like participating in the fight

against HIV and AIDS especially in developing countries.

NESTLE CONTROVERSIES:-

There are many criticism on the nestle company such as

Ethiopian debt, Melamine in Chinese milk, Green

washing, Zimbabwe farms, Child labor but one of the

most prominent controversies involving Nestle concerns

the promotion of the use of infant formula to mothers

across the world, including developing countries an issue

that attracted significant attention in 1977 as a result of

the Nestle boycott, which is still ongoing.

NESTLE BOYCOTT:-

The Nestle boycott is a boycott launched on July 7, 1977, in the United States against the

Swiss- based Nestle Corporation. It spread in the United States, and expanded into Europe in

the early 1980s. It was prompted by concern about Nestlé’s "aggressive marketing" of breast

milk substitutes (infant formula), particularly in less economically developed countries

(LEDCs), which campaigners claim contributes to the unnecessary suffering and deaths of

babies, largely among the poor.

The newly formed Infant Formula Action Coalition

(INFACT) started a consumer boycott against Nestlé

and demanded the end of infant formula promotion.

They also lobbied U.S. Senator Edward Kennedy,

chair of the Subcommittee on Health and Scientific

Research of the Committee of Human Resources, to

hold Public Hearings on the infant formula issue.

The Public Hearings took place in May 1978. In July,

Kennedy met with representatives from the industry,

including Nestlé, to determine what to do next. At the

request of the Infant Council of Infant Food Industries,

Page 6 of 17

and with a support letter from Nestlé, Kennedy asked the director general of the World

Health Organization (WHO) to sponsor an international conference to discuss the issue and

come up with an international recommendation for marketing infant formula in developing

countries.

In 1979, Nestlé developed internal guidelines limiting advertising and sales promotions,

curbing free samples and supplies, spelling out the content of informational materials and

ending all financial incentives for health professionals to sell formula. In the same year,

WHO and UNICEF held a meeting on Infant and Young Child Feeding.

IBFAN CRITICISM ON NESTLE:-

Groups such as the International Baby Food Action

Network (IBFAN) and Save the Children, advocacy

groups and charities claim nestle unethical methods of

promoting infant formula over breastfeeding that has

led to health problems and deaths among infants in

less economically developed countries. They claim

that Nestlé distributes free formula samples to hospitals and maternity wards; after leaving

the hospital, the formula is no longer free, but because the supplementation has interfered

with lactation, the family must continue to buy the formula. IBFAN also allege that Nestlé

uses "humanitarian aid" to create markets, does not label its products in a language

appropriate to the countries where they are sold, and offers gifts and sponsorship to influence

health workers to promote its products. Nestlé denies these allegations.

There are four problems that can arise when poor mothers in developing countries switch to

formula:

Formula must normally be mixed with water, which is often contaminated in poor countries,

leading to disease in vulnerable infants. Because of the low literacy rates in developing

nations, many mothers are not aware of the sanitation methods needed in the preparation of

bottles. Even mothers able to read in their native tongue may be unable to read the language

in which sterilization directions are written.

Although some mothers can understand the sanitation standards required, they often do not

have the means to perform them: fuel to boil water, electric (or other reliable) light to enable

Page 7 of 17

sterilization at night. UNICEF estimates that a formula-fed child living in disease-ridden and

unhygienic conditions is between six and 25 times more likely to die of diarrhea and four

times more likely to die of pneumonia than a breastfed child.

Many poor mothers use less formula powder than is necessary, in order to make a container

of formula last longer. As a result, some infants receive inadequate nutrition from weak

solutions of formula.

Breast milk has many natural benefits lacking in formula. Nutrients and antibodies are passed

to the baby while hormones are released into the mother's body. Breastfed babies are

protected, in varying degrees, from a number of illnesses, including diarrhea, bacterial

meningitis, gastroenteritis, ear infection, and respiratory infection. Breast milk contains the

right amount of the nutrients essential for neuronal (brain and nerve) development. The bond

between baby and mother can be strengthened during breastfeeding. Frequent and exclusive

breastfeeding can also delay the return of fertility, which can help women in developing

countries to space their births. The World Health Organization recommends that, in the

majority of cases, babies should be exclusively breast fed for the first six months.

Marketing of breast-milk substitutes

The debate over the marketing of breast-milk

substitute in developing countries entered the

public sphere in 1973 with the publication of

“The Baby Food Tragedy” – an interview

with two child nutrition experts – by The New

Internationalist.

However, the controversy did not boil over

until the publication in 1974 of a pamphlet, “The Baby Killer”, by the British organization

War on Want. This pamphlet was widely distributed and translated. In particular, a German

left-wing student organization, Arbeitsgruppe Dritte Welt (Third World Working Group),

published the same year a translated and altered version under the name “Nestlé tötet Babies”

(Nestlé kills babies).

Nestlé sued the organization for libel.  Although it won the court case in 1976, the publicity

around it contributed to making the pamphlet known in the United States and elsewhere.

Page 8 of 17

At the same time, Nestlé continued to review its marketing practices in developing countries.

In 1974 and 1975, Nestlé revised the contents of its educational and informational materials

to strengthen the emphasis on the importance of breastfeeding and to remove advertising or

promotional material. By 1976, Nestlé was phasing out infant formula mass media

advertising, and by 1978, this was withdrawn in all developing countries.

In addition, the International Council of Infant Food Industries (ICIFI) was created by Nestlé

and seven other infant formula manufacturers in 1975. A code of ethics was adopted to guide

companies’ marketing and advertising practices.

However, scientific evidence was pointing out to a more complex issue. Dana Raphael,

Director of the Human Lactation Center of Connecticut, was one of the first scientists to hold

infant formula manufacturers responsible for high infant mortality rates in developing

countries. Yet, in 1976 after a two-year study, which observed how infants were fed in 11

different cultural settings around the world, she found that in the cultures studied a decline in

breastfeeding was not a major part of the problem. In some, breastfeeding was still

universally practiced. Most importantly, the study showed that mixed feeding was common:

infants were breastfed but were also given other, and inappropriate, foods from a very early

age. A WHO/UNICEF two-year Collaborative Study on Breastfeeding revealed the same

patterns in 1979.

Artificial baby milk controversy: 2006

As the world's largest artificial baby milk producer,

Nestlé has been pinpointed as a leading cause of the

increasing worldwide infant mortality rates. The

World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that

1.5 million infants die each year because of

inappropriate feeding, given the fact that children

vulnerable to disease are being fed with artificial

breast milk substitutes rather than naturally breastfed.

Page 9 of 17

"A World Health Organization (WHO) International

Code governing the marketing of artificial baby milk,

drawn up in 1981 and agreed by 118 countries, says

breastfeeding should be promoted above all other

products and that leaflets and labels relating to breast milk

substitutes should do nothing to undermine this. But

Nestlé and other companies have been accused of flouting

the rules with advertising, free samples, promotions and sponsorships. The latest monitoring

report from the International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN) uncovered about 2,000

violations of the code in 69 countries, with Nestlé responsible for more violations than any

other of the big 16 baby food companies studied"

MAIN PLAYERS:-

Following are the main players involved in the boycott of nestle milk which is greatly

affecting the born babies so they play a significant role to give awareness to the people or

especially mothers not to take nestle infant formula;

In parallel with the boycott, campaigners work for implementation of the Code and

Resolutions in legislation.

Many European universities, colleges, and schools have banned the sale of Nestlé products

from their shops and vending machines

Media also play a major role in the boycott of the unethical behavior of nestle

International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN)

Infant Formula Action Coalition (INFACT)

World health organization (WHO)

Page 10 of 17

LITERATURE REVIEW:

Nestled in   controversy

Issue 436

International Nestlé-Free Week takes place from 25 to 31 October. Ian Fitzpatrick looks back

at the boycott and explains why challenging the

aggressive marketing of babymilk formula is still

so important.

John Birdsall/Press Association Images

In August 1973, New Internationalist published an

interview with leading child nutrition experts who

talked of a ‘worrying swing away from

breastfeeding’ in favour of commercial breast-milk

substitutes. The ‘Baby Food Tragedy’ article, along with a 1974 War on Want report called

‘The Baby Killer’ and the 1975 documentary film Bottle Babies, drew widespread attention

to the issue and led to an international campaign that continues today.

Henri Nestlé’s ‘Milk Food’ was invented around 1867 and was soon being exported to

European colonies. In the 1930s Dr Cecily Williams described the alarming rise in illness and

death amongst babies whose mothers had been persuaded not to breastfeed and by the 1960s

Dr Derrick Jelliffe, an expert in infant nutrition, had coined the term

‘commerciogenic malnutrition’.

Launched on 4 July 1977, the US Nestlé Boycott demanded that Nestlé stop promoting infant

formulas in developing countries. In 1979, the campaign went global.

That same year, the World Health Organization hosted a meeting to develop a code

regulating the marketing of infant formula, and in 1981, 118 countries voted in favour of the

International Code – with only the US voting against it. The Code’s aim was ‘to contribute to

the provision of safe and adequate nutrition for infants, by the protection and promotion of

breastfeeding, and by ensuring the proper use of breast-milk substitutes’. Today, it is national

law in over 60 countries. In 1984 Nestlé agreed to abide by the Code and the boycott was

called off, but it was relaunched in 1988 with boycott co-ordinators saying the agreement had

not been honoured.

Page 11 of 17

Nestlé is the market leader in sales of breast-milk substitutes and controls nearly 30 per cent

of the babyfood market. The UK-based campaign Baby Milk Action is currently asking the

public to email Nestlé over its latest global marketing strategy: the company has added logos

to its packaging claiming its formula ‘protects’ babies and is promoting it to health workers,

with claims that it reduces diarrhoea and is ‘the new ìGold Standardî in infant nutrition’. Yet

the World Health Assembly reiterated in May 2010 that improved breastfeeding practices

could save 1.5 million babies every year.

‘Nestlé is an aggressive company in all areas of its business,’ says Mike Brady from Baby

Milk Action. ‘It promises shareholders five to six per cent growth per year and evaluates the

profit from pushing its babymilk – in violation of the Code – against how this fuels the

boycott, harms its image and loses it sales of other products. Boycotters have forced changes

in Nestlé policies and practices – for example, compelling it to add warnings to labels in the

appropriate language about the importance of breastfeeding – but more pressure is needed.

International Nestlé-Free Week is an opportunity to spread the word. Our aim this year is to

have Nestlé remove the claims that its formula ìprotectsî babies, which undermine the

message that breastfeeding protects.’

Nestle Policy

Breastfeeding is Best

We believe that breastfeeding is the best start a baby can have in life. We support the World

Health Organization’s recommendation calling for exclusive breastfeeding for the first six

months of life, followed by continued breastfeeding along with the introduction of

complementary foods as advised by a healthcare professional or health authority.

We manufacture high-quality infant formula for babies who are not breastfed, and it is our

commitment to make these products available in a responsible manner. Infant formula is a

vital product for infants who are not breastfed. It is in fact the only product recognized to be a

suitable breast-milk substitute by the World Health Organization (WHO).

The Nestlé Policy and Instructions on implementing the WHO Code

We learned a great deal from our experience concerning breast-milk substitutes marketing in

lower and middle-income countries, recognizing our responsibility to go beyond what were

accepted marketing standards at the time.

Page 12 of 17

Following the adoption of the International Code for the Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes

- English (pdf, 128 Kb) (‘WHO Code’) by the World Health Assembly in 1981, Nestlé was

the first company to develop policies based on the WHO Code and apply them across our

entire operations in developing countries.

152 higher-risk countries: The designation of a country as ‘higher-risk’ is based on UNICEF's

data on levels of mortality and rates of acute malnutrition of children less than 5 years of age.

It is our strong commitment to apply the WHO Code as implemented by national

governments everywhere in the world. In addition, we follow the WHO Code as a minimum

requirement in 152 ‘higher-risk’ countries. For this purpose we have voluntarily issued the

Nestlé Policy and Instructions on implementing the WHO Code - English (pdf, 2 Mb), which

provide implementing instructions for aligning our marketing practices with the WHO Code.

We have put in place rigorous internal procedures to ensure compliance with our policy,

including internal and external audits, whistle-blowing procedures and reporting.

Addressing key challenges: Marketing of breast-milk substitutes and the WHO

Code

Nestlé supports the World Health Organization recommendation of exclusive breastfeeding

followed by continued breastfeeding for the first six months of life along with the

introduction of complementary foods as advised by a health professional. We seek to promote

safe, adequate nutrition for infants by encouraging breastfeeding as the best start in life, and

by manufacturing high-quality breast-milk substitutes (BMS) when a safe alternative is

needed.

We have developed a strong policy articulating our commitment to and implementation of the

World Health Organization’s International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes

(WHO Code), and applies a detailed global Management System, comprising explicit

procedure manuals, an internal Ombudsman System, internal and external audits, training of

staff and reporting on breast-milk substitute marketing and compliance. Corporate internal

auditors audited some 22 countries in 2011, and Bureau Veritas conducted independent Code

compliance audits in Laos, Cameroon and Jamaica.

Additional materials have been developed to facilitate guidance to marketing staff, including

a web-based training and testing tool.

Page 13 of 17

22 internal audits were carried out in 2011, and Bureau Veritas conducted independent Code

compliance audits in Laos, Cameroon and Jamaica.

19 concerns about non-compliance with the WHO Code, attributable to Nestlé and requiring

remediation, were raised in 2011; corrective action was taken in all instances.

We will continually work to improve our practices and encourage all stakeholders to

communicate their concerns to us.

ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS:

If we are in place of NESTLE we would reply

to the boycott by the following:

We must support WHO's global public health recommendation calling for exclusive breastfeeding for six months and introduction of safe and appropriate complementary foods there after

We support efforts by governments to implement the International Code through legislation, regulation, or other appropriate measures

We must respond to all allegations of non-compliance

We would encourage Breastfeeding at the time of giving free samples

Give stress on communication

Give Live demonstration in public through media

We would clearly mentioned in packages that “Breastfeeding is an ultimate best

We would follow the international code of conduct for advertisement and promotion

We would give the necessary instruction to be required in the regional language for the benefit of illiterate mother

Not labeling, promoting or selling of complementary foods or drinks for infants under six months of age unless otherwise mandatory required by local code or measures;

Issuing detailed Procedure manuals containing internal Instructions for the implementation of WHO recommendations both at the corporate level and at the regional and country level;

Page 14 of 17

Aligning its marketing practices in detail on the recommendations of the WHO Code and relevant subsequent WHA Resolutions, and providing systematic training towards Code compliance to its marketing personnel;

Auditing on a regular basis its subsidiaries’ INFANT FORMULA marketing practices by corporate as well as local auditors, and submitting summary reports of those audits to review by the Audit Committee of the Nestlé Board of Directors;

Putting in place an Internal WHO Code Ombudsman System allowing Nestlé employees to alert the Company on potential non-compliance with the WHO Code in a confidential way, outside line management

Commissioning regular audits by an independent external auditor and making a summary of the audit findings publicly available;

Implementing a system for investigating all allegations of non-compliance, externally or internally reported, when sufficient information has been received, as well as taking corrective action on all substantiated non-compliance cases;

Commissioning independent external audits in case of allegations of multiple and/or serious non-compliance with the WHO Code by Nestlé;

Using results of information from Stakeholder input, as well as the recommendations deriving from internal and external audits to identify opportunities to improve our Code management system.

IMPLICATION FOR FUTURE USE:

INFANT FORMULAS must not be advertised or promoted

directly to mothers or the general public either through

public media or by personal contact between company

representatives and the public. This restriction also applies

to Nestlé websites.

General information on infant feeding and baby care, which

includes information on the proper use of INFANT

FORMULA (such as mother books and posters) may only

be distributed to mothers by health workers or displayed by them in health care facilities

subject to the provisions of Art. 4.2, 4.3, 6.2 and 7.2. Such information may not feature

Page 15 of 17

INFANTFORMULA brands and may not be used as advertising or promotion aimed at the

general public.

No samples of INFANT FORMULAS should be given to the general public. Such samples may only be given to health workers,

We must investigate all of our product before launching the product

We must warn mother of the consequences of incorrect or inappropriate use of infant formula

A product should be promoted according to the people but which should not be harmful to them

NESTLE DOES NOT advertise or promote infant formula and follow-on formula for infants up to 12 months to the public

NESTLE DOES NOT market complementary foods and drinks for infants younger than 6 months

NESTLE DOES NOT permit staff whose responsibilities include the marketing of infant formula to make direct contact with mothers, except in response to consumer complaints

NESTLE DOES NOT use pictures of babies on its infant formula packs

NESTLE DOES NOT distribute free infant formula samples to mothers

NESTLE DOES NOT allow educational material relating to the use of infant formula to be displayed publicly in hospitals and clinics

NESTLE DOES NOT give financial or material incentives to health professionals for the purpose of promoting infant formula

NESTLE DOES NOT donates free infant formula to health care facilities for use by healthy newborn babies. Free infant formula may exceptionally be given to bona fide social welfare institutions upon their request to serve social or humanitarian purposes (e.g. where the government policy allows manufacturers to respond to a specific social request, for example if the mother dies in child birth)

NESTLE DOES NOT give incentives to its staff based on infant formula sales

CONCLUSION :

Page 16 of 17

It is clear from the case presented that the reputation of a company is decided not in terms of

its sales or profits maximization but in terms of the good will it earns by adopting morals and

values in its production, marketing and pricing.

The product and marketing should not violate the societal standards

Should not promote or undermine breastfeeding

The organization is responsible for any happenings or consequences in the society

The issue of mixed feeding before six (6) months should be investigated and discouraged

through sensitization programs at the community level not only at the facility level. The

breastfeeding advocacy should adequately reflect the need for continuous breastfeeding after

the six months period as well as the timely and appropriate introduction of complementary

foods. Regulatory bodies must begin to extend enforcement to cover feeding bottles teats and

condensed milks. To be effective the Regulations must be adequately disseminated. Besides,

there is the need for health workers particularly nurses who manage health facilities in the

rural areas to understand the circumstances under which infant formula could be used since

under some conditions it becomes very relevant to offer artificial formula to save a life.

Expression of breast milk should also be made part of antenatal grooming rather than the

case-to-case basis.

In response to the controversies mentioned above Nestle has affirmed that, “In order to continually improve our practices, we call on our stakeholders and the general public to directly communicate to us in detail any concern or allegation of non-compliance with our commitments. We commit to investigate and respond to all concerns raised by external stakeholders directly with us, provided that we receive enough information to carry out an investigation.

This interaction with our external stakeholders helps us improve our monitoring of our WHO Code compliance, and through this external report we aim at providing to those stakeholders a feedback on their concerns, as well as giving to the general public better insights into our Code compliance record”.

Page 17 of 17