EPHA has reviewed the European Commission’s recent report on the implementation and evaluation of the Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan (EBCP). Launched in 2021, the plan was initially met with enthusiasm from EPHA and various civil society organizations, not only for its substantial budget of €4 billion but also for its ambitious approach to prevention. In fact, the EBCP aims to tackle not just cancer but also a broad spectrum of preventable non-communicable diseases (NCDs). This initiative, a cornerstone of the European Health Union, was praised for its comprehensive strategy: through its prevention pillar, the European Commission demonstrated a clear commitment to long-term health improvements across Europe, proposing various directives and legislations to protect the health and rights of Europeans on issues ranging from NCD risk factors to environmental health. However, four years after its launch, significant changes have occurred, and EPHA, along with its members, is now assessing the current status of implementation and identifying what is still missing from what was promised.
Key Points of the EBCP Implementation:
1. Implementation Phases:
-
-
- Initial Phase (2021-2022): Focused on establishing governance structures, launching flagship initiatives, and securing support from Member States.
- Ongoing Implementation (2023-2024): Shifted to executing various actions across all pillars and themes.
- Future Development: Focuses on continuing current actions and addressing emerging challenges without expanding to new initiatives.
-
2. Challenges Identified:
-
-
-
- Delays and Removals: Significant policy initiatives, particularly in tobacco and alcohol control, expected to be part of the implementation roadmap were notably delayed or entirely removed in 2024. Read more about it here: Urgent call for advancing public health policies in tobacco and alcohol control – EPHA
- Lack of Clear Outcomes and Timelines: There is an absence of defined outcomes and timelines, which raises concerns about the future progress and effectiveness of the EBCP.
- No Mention in the 2025 Workplan: The 2025 European Commission’s workplan fails to reference any of the undelivered prevention policies, further weakening the EBCP’s original ambition and raising concerns about the EU’s commitment to long-term public health strategies.
-
-
3. Prevention and Risk Factors:
-
-
- Tobacco Control: Despite some progress, such as the extension of the EU tobacco traceability system and new directives, there are ongoing challenges in fully realizing the goals for a tobacco-free generation by 2030.
- Alcohol Consumption: Progress in labelling and reducing alcohol-related harm remains insufficient. Additionally, EPHA criticizes the framing of alcohol consumption within the plan, which employs the term ‘harmful alcohol consumption’, implicitly suggesting, contrary to scientific evidence, that there is a safe level of alcohol consumption.
- Obesity and Physical Activity: There has been progress in setting contaminant levels in food and promoting healthy lifestyles, but more comprehensive actions are needed, particularly in informing consumers and regulating advertisement of unhealthy food to children.
- Pollution and Hazardous Substances: Initiatives like the Zero Pollution Action Plan and revisions to air quality directives show progress, yet the full impact of these actions remains to be assessed.
- Cancers Triggered by Infectious Agents: Expansion of HPV and Hepatitis B vaccinations has been supported, but further efforts are needed to meet vaccination targets.
-
EPHA remains committed to advocating for a more robust implementation of the EBCP. We call for an urgent advancement in public health policies, particularly in prevention areas like tobacco and alcohol control, which are crucial for reducing cancer and other NCDs across Europe. The review highlights the need for maintaining an ambitious approach to fulfil the promises of a healthier future for all in Europe.
Members of EPHA, including the Association of European Cancer Leagues (ECL), European Respiratory Society (ERS), and International Federation of Anthroposophic Medical Associations (IVAA), have provided valuable feedback and inputs for this analysis.”