Everything before the comment deadline is advocacy.
Everything after it is compliance. Prodeen watches the official record, the science, the pressure and the stakeholders behind every instrument in your markets, and tells you what moved and how long you have.
We report what moved, and your team writes the position. Every entry is quoted from its source and approved by your team.
Teal the instruments, ring by stage · amber the science and its authors · coral the campaigns and the outlets that carried them · slate the people who decide. A global beverage leader's advocacy team told us this map took six months of research to build. Here it is a filter over the record.
A rule can be influenced while it is still being written.
Today the job runs on five inboxes, a trade-association call and a slide that takes a year to draw. Studies, campaigns and drafts arrive as separate alerts, and the consultation is often found when it is already closing.
Once it closes, the text is settled and the work turns into compliance. So we track the instrument itself: its stage, its window and its next date. And the clock starts before the regulator's, because the science and the pressure are on it first, often a year or two ahead of the agenda.
Horizon scanning tells you something moved. We also tell you how long the window stays open. Every instrument carries its window (open, closing within thirty days, closed), its next known date and who decides, and the register sorts by the next date.
Three things, on three clocks, all from one record.
Horizon digest
The past seven days, opening with the windows that close within thirty days. When nothing moved, it says so.
Horizon map
All your markets against all your topics, every instrument coloured by whether its window is open, and the twelve months of dates ahead.
Instrument brief
The moment something opens for consultation or is adopted: the official text, the formal channel for input, who decides. Built to be forwarded.
What one entry looks like
A worked event from public sources. Your expert approves or rejects the edit; the reason stays on the instrument.Draft published for consultation; the comment period runs 60 calendar days.
Diario Oficial de la Federación, draft text, retrieved 5 Dec 2025, quoted in full on the instrument, with the link kept.
Open until the comment deadline; flagged as closing thirty days out.
Criteria for evaluating critical nutrients, and therefore which products carry seals. Connected to your product data, the same block names the products it touches.
Stage: consultation open · next date: deadline · window: open.
Only the official record moves an instrument.
A press report or an NGO campaign is recorded as pressure on that instrument, dated and attributed. It never changes the stage; the gazette does that. Media volume is never read as regulatory movement.
We report what moved, and your team decides the position.
Every entry carries its source, quoted, with the date it was retrieved and the link kept. What your company does about it is not ours to write: no recommendation, no talking points, no ranking of people.
Instruments on one register
A global beverage company runs the programme across five topics and six markets: the Monday digest, the monthly map, instrument briefs on stage change. The sixth market was added in days.
Readings that held up
Across sixteen food and beverage companies in one quarter, 378 of the 397 outputs that received direct client feedback stood as issued. We publish the log every quarter.
One slide, drawn by hand
What the stakeholder map used to cost one advocacy team. On the platform it is a filter over accepted events, redrawn every morning.
References are described by sector and geography. Figures: 45 instruments and 95% measured on the platform; the time to build the map stated by the client. The graph and the worked event are illustrative. Not legal advice.
Questions people askIs this lobbying?
No. We never write or recommend a position. We report what moved, how long the window stays open, what the evidence and the pressure are, and who did what. The position is yours.
Why not ask a general chatbot?
Four reasons: cost, consistency, auditability and sources. A multi-market question costs money every time you ask a frontier model. We run test questions per jurisdiction every week. The regulation's text is stored with the answer, taken from the official record.
We already have a policy-intelligence platform.
Keep it for the bills. It does not read the food instruments outside the legislature, the scientific evidence or the NGO pressure, and it does not attach a category impact. We read its tracker in.
We are an industry association.
Run the register for the topics you work on. Each member reads a brief filtered to its own markets and categories, and your positions stay yours.
The source catalogue and the instrument register are the first deliverables, in weeks. Scoped and priced up front for the first topic; after that, pay for what runs. You configure it in plain language, by chat. Sending a Monday brief to one person is a setting.