Search

Background Studies confirm the positive effect of sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxation on public health. However, only a few countries in Europe adopt SSB taxes. From a public policy perspective, we investigate the conditions under which countries do or do not follow this evidence. Methods Crisp-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) of 26 European Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development countries with and without an SSB tax. We test which configurations of conditions (problem pressure, governmental composition, strategic planning, health care system, public health policies, inclusion of expert advice in policymaking) emerge as relevant in determining adoption and non-adoption between the years 1981 and 2021. Pathways that lead to the presence and absence of SSB taxes are identified separately. Results At least one of the following configurations of conditions is present in countries that introduced taxation: (i) high financial problem pressure, low regulatory impact assessment activity; (ii) high public health problem pressure, a contribution-financed health care system, no holistic strategy for combatting non-communicable diseases (NCDs); (iii) a tax-financed health care system, a holistic NCD strategy, high strategic and executive planning capacity. In countries that did not adopt SSB taxes, we find (i) high regulatory impact assessment activity, high levels of sugar export; (ii) no holistic NCD strategy, high spending on preventive care; (iii and iv) a lack of strategic planning capacity and either a high share of spending on preventive care or inclusion of expert advice. Discussion Evidence inclusion requires clear policy priorities in terms of strategy and resources to promote public health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To evaluate the changes in sugar and energy labelling of carbonated sugar-sweetened soft drinks after the implementation of a tax on sugar-sweetened drinks in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Methods We visited nine main supermarkets before (May 2014) and after (April 2018) the tax came into effect and obtained data from product packaging and nutrition information panels of carbonated sugar-sweetened soft drinks. We used the paired t-test to assess differences in sugar and energy content of the same products between 2014 and 2018. Findings We obtained data from 166 products in 2014 and 464 products in 2018, of which 83 products were the same in both years. Large variations in stated sugar content were found between the different carbonated sugar-sweetened soft drinks in both 2014 and 2018 for all products and for the 83 products. The mean sugar content of the 83 products decreased by 42% between 2014 and 2018, from 9.1 g/100 mL (standard deviation, SD: 3.3) to 5.3 g/100 mL (SD: 3.5; P < 0.001). The mean energy content decreased by 40%, from 38 kcal/100 mL (SD: 13) in 2014 to 23 kcal/100 mL (SD: 15) in 2018 (P < 0.001). Conclusion The significant decreases in the labelling of sugar and energy content of carbonated sugar-sweetened soft drinks after the levy came into effect suggest this tax has been effective. The sugar content of drinks still varied considerably in 2018, suggesting further reductions in sugar content of these drinks is possible. The levy thresholds should be reduced and the tax increased to drive further reformulation of soft drinks to reduce their sugar content. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]