Search

Restrictions on marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages to children is a globally recommended policy measure to improve diets and health. The aim of the analysis was to identify opportunities to enable policy learning and shift beliefs of relevant actors, to engender policy progress on restrictions on marketing of unhealthy foods to children. We drew on the Advocacy Coalition Framework to thematically analyse data from qualitative policy interviews conducted Australia (n  = 24), Fiji (n  = 10) and Thailand (n  = 20). In all three countries two clear and opposing advocacy coalitions were evident within the policy subsystem related to regulation of unhealthy food marketing, which we termed the 'strengthen regulation' and 'minimal/self regulation' coalitions. Contributors to policy stasis on this issue were identified as tensions between public health and economic objectives of government, and limited formal and informal spaces for productive dialogue. The analysis also identified opportunities for policy learning that could enable policy progress on restrictions on marketing of unhealthy foods to children as: taking an incremental approach to policy change, defining permitted (rather than restricted) foods, investing in new public health expertise related to emerging marketing approaches and scaling up of monitoring of impacts. The insights from this study are likely to be relevant to many countries seeking to strengthen regulation of marketing to children, in response to recent global recommendations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Food allergies are increasing globally, including numbers of allergens, the sensitization rate, and the prevalence rate. To protect food-allergic individuals in the community, food allergies need to be appropriately managed. This paper describes current Australian food allergen management practices. In Australia, the prevalence of food allergies, the anaphylaxis rate, and the fatal anaphylaxis rate are among the highest in the world. Interagency and stakeholder collaboration is facilitated and enhanced as Australia moves through past, current, and ongoing food allergen challenges. As a result, Australia has been a global leader in regulating the labeling of common allergens in packaged foods and their disclosure in foods not required to bear a label. Moreover, the food industry in Australia and New Zealand has developed a unique food allergen risk management tool, the Voluntary Incidental Trace Allergen Labelling program, which is managed by the Allergen Bureau. This paper summarizes insights and information provided by the major stakeholders involved to protect food-allergic consumers from any allergic reaction. Stakeholders include government; consumer protection, regulation, and enforcement agencies; the food industry; and food allergen testing and food allergen/allergy research bodies in Australia. The ongoing goal of all stakeholders in food allergen management in Australia is to promote best practice food allergen management procedures and provide a wide choice of foods, while enabling allergic consumers to manage their food allergies and reduce the risk of an allergic reaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a best practice model that can be utilized by food system actors to assist with (re) building trust in the food system, before, during and after a food incident defined as 'any situation within the food supply chain where there is a risk or potential risk of illness or confirmed illness or injury associated with the consumption of a food or foods' (Commonwealth of Australia. National Food Incident Response Protocol. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, 2012). Interviews were undertaken with 105 actors working within the media, food industry and food regulatory settings across Australia, New Zealand (NZ) and the United Kingdom(UK). Interview data produced strategy statements, which indicated participant views on how to (re)build consumer trust in the food system. These included: (i) be transparent, (ii) have protocols and procedures in place, (iii) be credible, (iv) be proactive, (v) put consumers first, (vi) collaborate with stakeholders, (vii) be consistent, (viii) educate stakeholders and consumers, (ix) build your reputation and (x) keep your promises. A survey was designed to enable participants to indicate their agreement/disagreement with the ideas, rate their importance and provide further comment. The five strategies considered key to (re)building consumer trust were used to develop a model demonstrating best practice strategies for (re)building consumer trust in the food system before, during and after a food incident. In a world where the food system is increasingly complex, strategies for (re)building and fostering consumer trust are important. This study offers a model to do so which is derived from the views and experiences of actors working across the food industry, food regulation and the media. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background In response to rising childhood obesity rates, the Australian food industry implemented two initiatives in 2009 to reduce the marketing of unhealthy food to children. This study evaluated the efficacy of these initiatives on the rate of unhealthy food advertising to children on Australian television. Methods The rates of food advertisements on three free-to-air commercial television channels and a youth-oriented digital channel in Sydney, Australia were analysed over 2 weekdays (16 h) and two weekend days (22 h). Advertisements were categorized according to the healthiness of foods advertised (non-core, core, miscellaneous) and signatory status to the food industry advertising initiatives. Results Total food advertising rates for the three channels increased from 5.5/h in 2011 to 7.3/h in 2015, due to an increase of 0.8/h for both core and miscellaneous foods. The rate of non-core food advertisements in 2015 (3.1/h) was similar to 2011 (3.0/h). The youth-oriented channel had fewer total food advertisements (3.7/h versus 7.3/h) but similar fast-food advertisement rates (1.3/h versus 1.3/h). Conclusions There was no change in the rate of unhealthy food advertising since 2011, suggesting minimal impact of the current food industry initiatives on reducing children's exposure to unhealthy food advertising. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The emergence of new media --including branded websites, social media and mobile applications-has created additional touch points for unhealthy food and beverage companies to target children and adolescents. The aim of this study was to perform an audit of new media for three top selling food and beverage brands in Australia. The top selling brand in three of the most advertised food and beverage categories was identified. Facebook, websites and mobile phone applications from these three brands were assessed using a combination of descriptive analyses and structured data collection during June and July 2013. Information on target audience, main focus of the activity, marketing strategies employed and connectivity were collected. Promotional activities were assessed against industry self-regulatory codes. McDonald's, Coca-Cola and Cadbury Dairy Milk were audited, with 21 promotional activities identified. These promotional activities appeared to use a number of marketing strategies, with frequent use of indirect product association, engagement techniques and branding. We identified strategic targeting of both children and adolescents. We found that while all promotional activities technically met self-regulatory codes (usually due to media-specific age restrictions) a number appeared to employ unhealthy food or beverage marketing directed to children. Brands are using engaging content via new media aimed at children and adolescents to promote unhealthy food and beverages. Given the limitations of self-regulatory codes in the context of new media, strategies need to be developed to reduce exposure of children and adolescents to marketing of unhealthy food and beverage products via these avenues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The placement of nutrition information on the front of food packages has been proposed as a method of providing simplified and visible nutrition information. This study aimed to determine the most acceptable and effective front-of-pack food labelling system for Australian consumers. Consumers' preferences and ability to compare the healthiness of mock food products were assessed for different front-of-pack labelling systems. Four systems were tested, including two variations of the Percentage Daily Intake system (Monochrome %DI and Colour-Coded %DI), which displays the proportion of daily nutrient contribution that a serve of food provides; and two variations of the Traffic Light (TL) system (Traffic Light and Traffic Light + Overall Rating), which uses colour-coding to indicate nutrient levels. Intercept surveys with 790 consumers were conducted, where each participant was exposed to a single labelling system for performance testing. Participants indicated strong support for the inclusion of nutrient information on total fat, saturated fat, sugar and sodium on the front of packages, and a consistent labelling format across all products. Using the TL system, participants were five times more likely to identify healthier foods compared with the Monochrome %DI system [odds ratio (OR) 5.18; p <0.001], and three times more likely compared with the Colour-Coded %DI system (OR = 3.01; p 0.05). Consumers supported the introduction of consistent front-of-pack food labelling. The TL system was the most effective in assisting consumers to identify healthier foods. Mandatory TL labelling regulations are recommended to assist consumers in making healthy food choices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 1986, the Ottawa Charter alerted a new generation of health promotion practitioners to the benefits of working with the non-health sectors, including the commercial sector. Since then, the establishment of partnerships with government and non-government bodies has been advanced as a positive way of fostering policies that enhance health and well-being. The food and nutrition field has enthusiastically adopted partnerships between government, non-government and industry. In this article, we focus on the tactics employed by industry bodies to further their cause in a range of fields that are characterized by risk and contestation. We describe the nature of the alliances and interactions between commercial, scientific and government groups whose stated aim is to improve Australia's diet. Our analysis shows that these partnerships have been guided less by the ethos of the Ottawa Charter and more by the interests of the various parties: namely the food industry's need for credibility in making health claims, the financial imperatives of professional bodies and scientists whose public funding is inadequate, and government endorsement of public—private partnerships as the preferred mechanism for service delivery. The symbiotic relationship that is emerging between segments of the food industry and the nutrition professions raises questions about the independence of the dietary advice being given to consumers. We conclude by arguing for a research programme to investigate the consequences of intersectoral partnerships on the nutritional status of the population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]