Breastfeeding is the most cost-effective intervention available to protect and promote health and well-being of children, women and populations worldwide. The evidence shows that breastfeeding save lives, reduces the burden of infectious and chronic diseases, supports optimal cognitive development, and contributes to maternal health by reducing the risk of breast and ovarian cancer, type 2 diabetes, and postpartum depression. The 2023 Lancet Breastfeeding Series has documented that scaling up breastfeeding to near universal levels could prevent over 800,000 child deaths annually and avert an estimated 20,000 maternal deaths from breast cancer each year. Beyond its individual health benefits, breastfeeding carries implications for planetary health. It is a sustainable, zero-waste, low-carb food system that requires no packing, no supply chains, and no manufacturing.

Yet despite the strong evidence, breastfeeding rates remain far below recommended levels in almost every region of the world. Among the main and well-documented barriers to optimal breastfeeding are the inappropriate marketing practices of the breastmilk substitutes (BMS). Aggressive, misleading, and pervasive commercial promotion of the commercial milk formula and related products, targeting mothers, families, and health workers through advertising, free samples, sponsorships, and increasingly through digital and social media, systematically undermines breastfeeding initiation, exclusivity, and duration.

The World Health Organization responded to this challenge more than four decades ago with the adoption of the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes (the Code) by the World Health Assembly (WHA) in 1981, subsequently strengthened through multiple WHA resolutions. The Code and resolutions establish a framework to restrict inappropriate BMS marketing, protect health systems from commercial influence, and ensure that parents and caregivers receive accurate, unbiased information about infant feeding. Most recently, WHA resolution reaffirmed the urgency of regulating digital marketing of BMS and commercial foods for infants and young children.

Despite this international regulatory framework, frequent and continuous violations of the Code and of local legislation have been extensively documented globally. The 2026 WHO/UNICEF/IBFAN status report confirms that while 148 countries have enacted at least some Code-related legal measures, only 37 countries are substantially aligned with the Code, and 46 still have no legal measures. More critically, even among countries with legislation in place, implementation remains insufficient. One of the most significant and persistent gaps is the absence of clear, functional mechanism for monitoring compliance with the Code and local legislation. Equally concerning is the widespread lack of meaningful sanctions for violations. While 95 countries define sanctions, enforcement remains weak, inconsistent, and in many cases absent, allowing the BMS industry to operate with impunity. These structural failures allow unethical marketing practices to persist, undermine breastfeeding practices, and contravene obligations under international human rights instruments, including the Convention of the Rights of the Child.

The International Breastfeeding Journal invites submissions for this special collection dedicated to advancing the science, and practice of Code implementation and enforcement globally. The central purpose of this special collection is to build a comprehensive knowledge base that documents real-world experiences of Code implementation: what has been attempted, what has worked, what has failed, and what lessons can be drawn for strengthening regulatory and enforcement framework worldwide.

This special collection seeks contributions from all global regions, with particular interest in experiences from low-and-middle income countries and from context that are frequently underrepresented in international literature. We are interested not only in success experiences but also in the challenges, barriers, and setbacks that countries, institutions, and advocates have faced in their efforts to implement and enforce the Code.

We welcome original research articles, systematic and narrative reviews, and countries case studies addressing, but not limited, to the following themes:

• National legislative processes: Experiences of the Code enactment, strengthening, and reform including political, legal, and industry-related barriers and facilitators.
• Monitoring and enforcement mechanisms: Design, implementation, effectiveness, and outcome of compliance monitoring systems.
• Sanctions and accountability: Experiences with the application of sanctions for Code violations, and their impact on industry behavior and breastfeeding outcomes.
• Conflicts of interest in health systems: Evidence of industry influence on health workers, professionals’ associations, and health facilities, and strategies for protecting against commercial interference.
• Civil society, community, and media roles in Code monitoring, reporting, and advocacy.
• Health system protections: Implementation and enforcement of bans on free supplies, gifts, and incentives to health workers, and industry sponsorship of professional and scientific meetings.
• Digital and social media marketing surveillance and regulation: Scope, strategies, and methodologies for detecting and documenting online and social media Code violations, and regulatory responses.

This Collection supports and amplifies research related to SDG 3, Good Health and Well-Being and SDG 2, End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture.

All submissions in this Collection undergo the journal’s standard peer review process. Similarly, all manuscripts authored by a Guest Editor(s) will be handled by the Editor-in-Chief. As an open access publication, this journal levies an article processing fee. We recognize that many key stakeholders may not have access to such resources and are committed to supporting participation in this issue wherever resources are a barrier. For more information about what support may be available, please visit OA funding and support, or email OAfundingpolicy@springernature.com or the Editor-in-Chief.

A significant body of evidence suggests that culture expanded mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) are short-lived, paracrine signalers that briefly calm inflammation following in vivo administration before disappearing. However, emerging preclinical and early clinical evidence suggests that MSCs may also induce longer-term immunological changes through mechanisms such as trained immunity and epigenetic imprinting of hematopoietic or precursor stem cells in the bone marrow.

This Collection welcomes original research or review articles describing novel findings and insights on immune re-programming mediated by MSCs and evidence of long-term effects in vivo.

All submissions in this Collection undergo the journal’s standard peer review process. Similarly, all manuscripts authored by a Guest Editor(s) will be handled by the Editor-in-Chief. As an open access publication, this journal levies an article processing fee (details here). We recognize that many key stakeholders may not have access to such resources and are committed to supporting participation in this issue wherever resources are a barrier. For more information about what support may be available, please visit OA funding and support, or email OAfundingpolicy@springernature.com or the Editor-in-Chief.