IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaeafe/123523.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The potential impact of the Health Check™ on diet quality of food away from home purchases

Author

Listed:
  • Goddard, Ellen W.
  • Drescher, Larissa S.
  • Fernando, Jeewani

Abstract

Consumption of food away from home (FAFH) is widely believed to be a contributing factor to the current obesity crisis and other diet related problems in North America. Although FAFH expenditure represents a lower proportion of food expenditure in Canada than in the United States (24% versus 50%) it is still a significant part of Canadian diets. The Canadian Heart and Stroke Foundation has developed a third party accreditation program to identify healthy food items in grocery stores and more recently, restaurants, called the Health Check™ program. The program is not without controversy since some people feel that it is inappropriate to pay for the use of the label and it may be misleading that many processors and restaurants choose not to apply for their food products resulting, in some cases, that healthier foods without such a label may be next to other products with labels on shelves or on menus. For such a diet indicator to be helpful in enhancing public health the label must be used by people who have health problems and buy the food products labeled. The objective of this research is to examine the possible impact of the Health Check™ program for a particular group of Canadian FAFH consumers. Through the use of the NPD Group CREST® data over the period February 2007 to February 2009, actual restaurant purchases for a representative panel of Canadians were identified. In August 2009 a survey of 3319 of those same panelists was conducted. As part of the survey, respondents were asked for stated preferences for a turkey sandwich with various different nutrition labels and the Health Check™. The results suggest that there is on average a positive WTP for the provision of additional nutritional information associated with turkey sandwiches and for the Health Check™. The results highlight the importance of providing fat content information, in terms of attracting the attention of the survey respondents to the nutrient content. There is little link between survey respondents level of historical diet quality and their willingness to pay for the Health Check™ information in their sandwich purchases; unfortunately this suggests that the Health Check™ might not have its biggest impact on those that need it the most. For those with the highest historical diet quality the provision of nutrient information and/or the Health Check™ has little appeal, perhaps reflecting their higher existing nutritional engagement – do they actually need more information?

Suggested Citation

  • Goddard, Ellen W. & Drescher, Larissa S. & Fernando, Jeewani, 2012. "The potential impact of the Health Check™ on diet quality of food away from home purchases," 2012 AAEA/EAAE Food Environment Symposium 123523, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaeafe:123523
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.123523
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/123523/files/Goddard_Drescher_Fernando_ThePotentialImpactOfTheHealthCheck.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.123523?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bryan Bollinger & Phillip Leslie & Alan Sorensen, 2011. "Calorie Posting in Chain Restaurants," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 91-128, February.
    2. Loureiro, Maria L. & Hine, Susan, 2004. "Preferences and willingness to pay for GM labeling policies," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 467-483, October.
    3. Andreas C. Drichoutis & Panagiotis Lazaridis & Rodolfo M. Nayga, 2009. "Would consumers value food-away-from-home products with nutritional labels?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(4), pages 550-575.
    4. Ulrich Enneking, 2004. "Willingness-to-pay for safety improvements in the German meat sector: the case of the Q&S label," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 31(2), pages 205-223, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Allen, S. & Goddard, E., 2018. "The Effectiveness of High Sugar Warning Labels on Breakfast Cereals," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 275885, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    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. Hoefkens, Christine & Veettil, Prakashan Chellattan & Van Huylenbroeck, Guido & Van Camp, John & Verbeke, Wim, 2012. "What nutrition label to use in a catering environment? A discrete choice experiment," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 741-750.
    2. Bond, Craig A. & Thilmany, Dawn D. & Bond, Jennifer Keeling, 2008. "What to Choose? The Value of Label Claims to Fresh Produce Consumers," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(3), pages 1-26.
    3. Doherty, Edel & Campbell, Danny, 2011. "Demand for improved food safety and quality: a cross-regional comparison," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108791, Agricultural Economics Society.
    4. Courtemanche, Charles & Tchernis, Rusty & Zhou, Xilin, 2017. "Parental Work Hours and Childhood Obesity: Evidence Using Instrumental Variables Related to Sibling School Eligibility," IZA Discussion Papers 10739, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Illichmann, R. & Abdulai, A., 2014. "Analysis of Consumer Preferences and Wilingness-To-Pay for Organic Food Products in Germany," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 49, March.
    6. Wong, Woei Chyuan & Batten, Jonathan A. & Ahmad, Abd Halim & Mohamed-Arshad, Shamsul Bahrain & Nordin, Sabariah & Adzis, Azira Abdul, 2021. "Does ESG certification add firm value?," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    7. Irz, Xavier & Mazzocchi, Mario & Réquillart, Vincent & Soler, Louis-Georges, 2015. "Research in Food Economics: past trends and new challenges," Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, Editions NecPlus, vol. 96(01), pages 187-237, March.
    8. Thomas Mariotti & Nikolaus Schweizer & Nora Szech & Jonas von Wangenheim, 2023. "Information Nudges and Self-Control," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(4), pages 2182-2197, April.
    9. Huse, Cristian & Lucinda, Claudio & Cardoso, Andre Ribeiro, 2020. "Consumer response to energy label policies: Evidence from the Brazilian energy label program," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    10. Marc A. Ragin & Benjamin L. Collier & Johannes G. Jaspersen, 2021. "The effect of information disclosure on demand for high‐load insurance," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 88(1), pages 161-193, March.
    11. Huseynov, Samir & Palma, Marco A. & Ahmad, Ghufran, 2021. "Does the magnitude of relative calorie distance affect food consumption?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 530-551.
    12. Giorgio Brunello & Maria De Paola & Giovanna Labartino, 2012. "More Apples Less Chips? The Effect of School Fruit Schemes on the Consumption of Junk Food," ISER Discussion Paper 0840, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    13. Michael Luca & Georgios Zervas, 2013. "Fake It Till You Make It: Reputation, Competition, and Yelp Review Fraud," Harvard Business School Working Papers 14-006, Harvard Business School, revised May 2015.
    14. Nano Barahona & Cristóbal Otero & Sebastián Otero, 2023. "Equilibrium Effects of Food Labeling Policies," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(3), pages 839-868, May.
    15. Oluwakemi Adeola Obayelu & Janet Abiola Agbohin & Omobolaji Olubukunmi Obisesan, 2022. "Consumers’ Preference For Local Rice Brands In Ibadan Metropolis, Nigeria," Food and Agri Economics Review (FAER), Zibeline International Publishing, vol. 2(1), pages 12-17, January.
    16. repec:cie:wpaper:1408 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Woods, Mollie & Thornsbury, Suzanne & Raper, Kellie Curry & Weldon, Richard N. & Wysocki, Allen F., 2003. "Food Safety And Fresh Strawberry Markets," Staff Paper Series 11712, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    18. Dominic Lemken & Mandy Knigge & Stephan Meyerding & Achim Spiller, 2017. "The Value of Environmental and Health Claims on New Legume Products: A Non-Hypothetical Online Auction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-18, July.
    19. Pouta, Eija & Forsman-Hugg, Sari & Heikkila, Jaakko & Isoniemi, Merja & Makela, Johanna & Paananen, Jaana, 2008. "Consumers' choice of broiler meat in Finland: the effects of country of origin and production methods," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 43543, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. Houde, Sébastien & Myers, Erica, 2021. "Are consumers attentive to local energy costs? Evidence from the appliance market," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    21. Chandrayee Chatterjee & James C. Cox & Michael K. Price & Florian Rundhammer, 2020. "Robbing Peter to Pay Paul: Understanding How State Tax Credits Impact Charitable Giving," NBER Working Papers 27163, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ags:aaeafe:123523. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.