Search

Background: The public health benefits of sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxes often rely on, among other things, changes to consumer purchases. Thus, perceived cost of SSBs and signalling effects—via awareness of the tax—may impact the effectiveness of SSB taxes on consumer purchases. Objective: The study sought to examine perceived cost of SSBs, tax awareness, and changes in beverage purchasing over time and across four countries with and without SSB taxes. Methods: The study used data from the 2017, 2018 and 2019 waves of the International Food Policy Study. Annual cross-sectional online surveys were conducted in Australia, Mexico, UK and US, which captured perceived cost of SSBs relative to non-SSBs in all countries (with Australia as a no-tax comparator), and measures of tax awareness and participants' reported changes in beverage purchasing in response to SSB taxes in Mexico (tax implemented in 2014), UK (tax implemented in 2018) and US (subnational taxes since 2015). Logistic regression models evaluated the measures across years and socio-demographic groups. Results: Perceived cost of SSBs relative to non-SSBs was higher in Mexico (all three years) and the UK (2018 and 2019 following tax implementation) than Australia and the US. Tax awareness was higher in UK than Mexico, and decreased over time among Mexican respondents. Patterns of reported beverage purchasing changes in response to the tax were similar across Mexico, UK and US, with the largest changes reported by Mexican respondents. Respondents with characteristics corresponding to lower socioeconomic status were less likely to be aware of an SSB tax, but more likely to perceive SSBs to cost more than non-SSBs and report changes in purchasing in response to the tax, where there was one. Conclusions: This study suggests that in countries where a national SSB tax was present (Mexico, UK), perceived cost of SSBs and tax awareness were higher compared to countries with no SSB tax (Australia) or subnational SSB taxes (US), respectively, and suggests that perceived cost and tax awareness represent distinct constructs. Improving the 'signalling effect' of existing SSB taxes may be warranted, particularly in tax settings where consumer behaviour change is a policy objective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Language focused on individual dietary behaviors, or alternatively, lifestyle choices or decisions, suggests that what people eat and drink is primarily a choice that comes down to free will. Referring to and intervening upon food consumption as though it were a freely chosen behavior has an inherently logical appeal due to its simplicity and easily defined targets of intervention. However, despite decades of behavioral interventions, population-level patterns of food consumption remain suboptimal. This debate paper interrogates the manner in which language frames how problems related to poor diet quality are understood and addressed within society. We argue that referring to food consumption as a behavior conveys the idea that it is primarily a freely chosen act that can be ameliorated through imploring and educating individuals to make better selections. Leveraging practice theory, we subsequently propose that using the alternative language of eating practices and patterns better conveys the socially situated nature of food consumption. This language may therefore point to novel avenues for intervention beyond educating and motivating individuals to eat more healthfully, to instead focus on creating supportive contexts that enable sustained positive dietary change. Clearly, shifting discourse will not on its own transform the science and practice of nutrition. Nevertheless, the seeds of change may lie in aligning our terminology, and thus, our framing, with desired solutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cross-country differences in dietary behaviours and obesity rates have been previously reported. Consumption of energy-dense snack foods and soft drinks are implicated as contributing to weight gain, however little is known about how the availability of these items within supermarkets varies internationally. This study assessed variations in the display of snack foods and soft drinks within a sample of supermarkets across eight countries. Methods: Within-store audits were used to evaluate and compare the availability of potato chips (crisps), chocolate, confectionery and soft drinks. Displays measured included shelf length and the proportion of checkouts and end-of-aisle displays containing these products. Audits were conducted in a convenience sample of 170 supermarkets across eight developed nations (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden, United Kingdom (UK), and United States of America (US)). Results: The mean total aisle length of snack foods (adjusted for store size) was greatest in supermarkets from the UK (56.4 m) and lowest in New Zealand (21.7 m). When assessed by individual item, the greatest aisle length devoted to chips, chocolate and confectionery was found in UK supermarkets while the greatest aisle length dedicated to soft drinks was in Australian supermarkets. Only stores from the Netherlands (41%) had less than 70% of checkouts featuring displays of snack foods or soft drinks. Conclusion: Whilst between-country variations were observed, overall results indicate high levels of snack food and soft drinks displays within supermarkets across the eight countries. Exposure to snack foods is largely unavoidable within supermarkets, increasing the likelihood of purchases and particularly those made impulsively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Sugar taxes and front-of-package (FOP) nutrition labelling systems are strategies to address diet-related non-communicable diseases. However, there is relatively little experimental data on how these strategies influence consumer behavior and how they may interact. This study examined the relative impact of different sugar taxes and FOP labelling systems on beverage and snack food purchases. Methods: A total of 3584 Canadians 13 years and older participated in an experimental marketplace study using a 5 (FOP label condition) × 8 (tax condition) between-within group experiment. Participants received $5 and were presented with images of 20 beverages and 20 snack foods available for purchase. Participants were randomized to one of five FOP label conditions (no label; 'high in' warning; multiple traffic light; health star rating; nutrition grade) and completed eight within-subject purchasing tasks with different taxation conditions (beverages: no tax, 20% tax on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), 20% tax on sugary drinks, tiered tax on SSBs, tiered tax on sugary drinks; snack foods: no tax, 20% tax on high-sugar foods, tiered tax on high-sugar foods). Upon conclusion, one of eight selections was randomly chosen for purchase, and participants received the product and any change. Results: Compared to those who saw no FOP label, participants who viewed the 'high in' symbol purchased less sugar (− 2.5 g), saturated fat (− 0.09 g), and calories (− 12.6 kcal) in the beverage purchasing tasks, and less sodium (− 13.5 mg) and calories (− 8.9 kcal) in the food tasks. All taxes resulted in substantial reductions in mean sugars (− 1.4 to − 4.7 g) and calories (− 5.3 to − 19.8 kcal) purchased, and in some cases, reductions in sodium (− 2.5 to − 6.6 mg) and saturated fat (− 0.03 to − 0.08 g). Taxes that included 100% fruit juice ('sugary drink' taxes) produced greater reductions in sugars and calories than those that did not. Conclusions: This study expands the evidence indicating the effectiveness of sugar taxation and FOP labelling strategies in promoting healthy food and beverage choices. The results emphasize the importance of applying taxes to 100% fruit juice to maximize policy impact, and suggest that nutrient-specific FOP 'high in' labels may be more effective than other common labelling systems at reducing consumption of targeted nutrients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]