IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i5p4054-d1079138.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public Support for Nutrition-Related Actions by Food Companies in Australia: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Findings from the 2020 International Food Policy Study

Author

Listed:
  • Ebony Yin

    (Institute for Health Transformation, Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, Deakin University, Burwood 3125, Australia)

  • Adrian J. Cameron

    (Institute for Health Transformation, Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, Deakin University, Burwood 3125, Australia)

  • Sally Schultz

    (Institute for Health Transformation, Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, Deakin University, Burwood 3125, Australia)

  • Christine M. White

    (School of Public Health Sciences, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1, Canada)

  • Lana Vanderlee

    (School of Nutrition, Centre Nutrition, Santé et Société (NUTRISS), Institut sur la Nutrition et les Aliments Fonctionnels (INAF), Université Laval, Québec City, QC G1V 0A6, Canada)

  • David Hammond

    (School of Public Health Sciences, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1, Canada)

  • Gary Sacks

    (Institute for Health Transformation, Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, Deakin University, Burwood 3125, Australia)

Abstract

Unhealthy food environments contribute to unhealthy population diets. In Australia, the government currently relies on voluntary food company actions (e.g., related to front-of-pack labelling, restricting promotion of unhealthy foods, and product formulation) as part of their efforts to improve population diets, despite evidence that such voluntary approaches are less effective than mandatory policies. This study aimed to understand public perceptions of potential food industry nutrition-related actions in Australia. An online survey was completed by 4289 Australians in 2020 as part of the International Food Policy Study. The level of public support was assessed for six different nutrition-related actions related to food labelling, food promotion, and product formulation. High levels of support were observed for all six company actions, with the highest support observed for displaying the Health Star Rating on all products (80.4%) and restricting children’s exposure to online promotion of unhealthy food (76.8%). Findings suggest the Australian public is strongly supportive of food companies taking action to improve nutrition and the healthiness of food environments. However, given the limitations of the voluntary action from food companies, mandatory policy action by the Australian government is likely to be needed to ensure company practices align with public expectations.

Suggested Citation

  • Ebony Yin & Adrian J. Cameron & Sally Schultz & Christine M. White & Lana Vanderlee & David Hammond & Gary Sacks, 2023. "Public Support for Nutrition-Related Actions by Food Companies in Australia: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Findings from the 2020 International Food Policy Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-12, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:5:p:4054-:d:1079138
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/5/4054/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/5/4054/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baker, Phillip & Gill, Timothy & Friel, Sharon & Carey, Gemma & Kay, Adrian, 2017. "Generating political priority for regulatory interventions targeting obesity prevention: an Australian case study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 141-149.
    2. Marcela Reyes & Lindsey Smith Taillie & Barry Popkin & Rebecca Kanter & Stefanie Vandevijvere & Camila Corvalán, 2020. "Changes in the amount of nutrient of packaged foods and beverages after the initial implementation of the Chilean Law of Food Labelling and Advertising: A nonexperimental prospective study," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(7), pages 1-37, July.
    3. Jelke Bethlehem, 2010. "Selection Bias in Web Surveys," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 78(2), pages 161-188, August.
    4. Kasaundra M. Tomlin, 2019. "Assessing the Efficacy of Consumer Boycotts of U.S. Target Firms: A Shareholder Wealth Analysis," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(2), pages 503-529, October.
    5. Kelly, Bridget & Baur, Louise A. & Bauman, Adrian E. & King, Lesley & Chapman, Kathy & Smith, Ben J., 2012. "Restricting unhealthy food sponsorship: Attitudes of the sporting community," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(3), pages 288-295.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ramón Ferri-García & María del Mar Rueda, 2022. "Variable selection in Propensity Score Adjustment to mitigate selection bias in online surveys," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 63(6), pages 1829-1881, December.
    2. Lehmann, Nico & Sloot, Daniel & Schüle, Christopher & Ardone, Armin & Fichtner, Wolf, 2023. "The motivational drivers behind consumer preferences for regional electricity – Results of a choice experiment in Southern Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    3. Giulia Casu & Marco Giovanni Mariani & Rita Chiesa & Dina Guglielmi & Paola Gremigni, 2021. "The Role of Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Gender between Job Satisfaction and Task Performance," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-15, September.
    4. Bertram, Christine & Rehdanz, Katrin, 2015. "The role of urban green space for human well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 139-152.
    5. Galperin, Hernan & Arcidiacono, Malena, 2021. "Employment and the gender digital divide in Latin America: A decomposition analysis," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7).
    6. Luis Castro-Martín & María del Mar Rueda & Ramón Ferri-García, 2020. "Estimating General Parameters from Non-Probability Surveys Using Propensity Score Adjustment," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-14, November.
    7. Grilli, Gianluca & Curtis, John, 2021. "An evaluation of public initiatives to change behaviours that affect water quality," Papers WP696, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    8. Díaz, Juan-José & Sánchez, Alan & Diez-Canseco, Francisco & Jaime Miranda, J. & Popkin, Barry M., 2023. "Employment and wage effects of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes and front-of-package warning label regulations on the food and beverage industry: Evidence from Peru," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    9. Brian Fabo & Sharon Sarah Belli, 2017. "(Un)beliveable wages? An analysis of minimum wage policies in Europe from a living wage perspective," IZA Journal of Labor Policy, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 6(1), pages 1-11, December.
    10. Kawamura, Tetsuya & Mori, Tomoharu & Motonishi, Taizo & Ogawa, Kazuhito, 2021. "Is Financial Literacy Dangerous? Financial Literacy, Behavioral Factors, and Financial Choices of Households," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    11. Boswell, John & Cairney, Paul & St Denny, Emily, 2019. "The politics of institutionalizing preventive health," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 202-210.
    12. Paige Coyne & Zach Staffell & Sarah J. Woodruff, 2021. "Recreational Screen Time Use among a Small Sample of Canadians during the First Six Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-9, December.
    13. Barlow, P. & Thow, A.M., 2021. "Neoliberal discourse, actor power, and the politics of nutrition policy: A qualitative analysis of informal challenges to nutrition labelling regulations at the World Trade Organization, 2007–2019," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 273(C).
    14. Teresa Correa & Camila Fierro & Marcela Reyes & Lindsey Smith Taillie & Francesca Renee Dillman Carpentier & Camila Corvalán, 2022. "Why Don’t You [Government] Help Us Make Healthier Foods More Affordable Instead of Bombarding Us with Labels? Maternal Knowledge, Perceptions, and Practices after Full Implementation of the Chilean Fo," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-11, April.
    15. Berton, Fabio & Migheli Matteo, 2015. "Estimating the marginal rate of substitution between wage and employment protection," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201529, University of Turin.
    16. Felderer Barbara & Kirchner Antje & Kreuter Frauke, 2019. "The Effect of Survey Mode on Data Quality: Disentangling Nonresponse and Measurement Error Bias," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 35(1), pages 93-115, March.
    17. Lang, Megan & Ligon, Ethan, 2022. "SMS Surveys of Selected Expenditures," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt7p7336h5, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    18. Bercholz, Maxime & Ng, Shu Wen & Stacey, Nicholas & Swart, Elizabeth C., 2022. "Decomposing consumer and producer effects on sugar from beverage purchases after a sugar-based tax on beverages in South Africa," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    19. Curtis, John & Breen, Benjamin & O'Reilly, Paul, 2016. "Recreational Angling Tournaments: Participants’ Expenditures," Papers WP546, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    20. Elise Pauzé & Odera Ekeh & Monique Potvin Kent, 2020. "The Extent and Nature of Food and Beverage Company Sponsorship of Children’s Sports Clubs in Canada: A Pilot Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-11, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:5:p:4054-:d:1079138. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.