THIS IS A REPORT ON PROBLEMS FACED BY NESTLE “ 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. ”

1. 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.
Page 1 of 19

2. 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.
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
Page 2 of 19

3. corporate acquisitions, including Crosse & Blackwell in 1950, Findus in 1963, Libby's in
1971, Rowntree Mackintosh in 1988 and Gerber in 2007.
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
--------
ON WEAKNESESS
----------
TO
BUILD
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
Page 3 of 19

4. 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.
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.
Page 4 of 19

5. 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 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
Page 5 of 19

6. 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 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
Page 6 of 19

7. 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, 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
Page 7 of 19

8. 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 sterilization at night. UNICEF estimates that a formula-fed child living in diseaseridden 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
Page 8 of 19

9. 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.
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
Page 9 of 19

10. 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.
"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)
Page 10 of 19

11. •
Infant Formula Action Coalition (INFACT)
•
World health organization (WHO)
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
Page 11 of 19

12. 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.
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
Page 12 of 19

13. 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.
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
Page 13 of 19

14. 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.
•
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.
Page 14 of 19

15. •
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 15 of 19

16. • 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 16 of 19

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
Page 17 of 19

18. CONCLUSION:
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 18 of 19

19. Page 19 of 19