IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jfpoli/v131y2025ics030691922500003x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What’s the Buzz? Preferences and perceptions of policies to reduce childhood energy drink consumption

Author

Listed:
  • Staples, Aaron J.
  • Kalaitzandonakes, Maria

Abstract

As global energy drink sales and caffeine content have surged, so have public health concerns over childhood energy drink consumption. With limited regulatory oversight, potential adverse effects, and recent claims of targeted marketing toward children, there is a need to better understand society’s evolving relationship with energy drink markets. This study uses experimental and survey data from a national panel of 1,036 U.S. adults to assess consumer preferences and perceptions toward energy drink policies and marketing. First, we use a best-worst scaling experiment to assess preferences for energy drink labeling requirements, sales channel bans, marketing restrictions, and caffeine caps relative to the status quo. A randomized information treatment also considers how information from health agencies highlighting risks to childhood health affects policy preferences. Without this information, respondents have the strongest preference fora mandatory and prominently displayed caffeine content label. Providing information on the potential childhood health risks, however, increases the relative ranking of policies banning sales to children in retail outlets and high schools. The exploratory survey analysis then provides insights into marketing perceptions that open avenues for future research. For example, we show that it takes the average consumer more than twice as long to find the caffeine content of an energy drink than its calorie count, most consumers believe energy drink packaging is at least somewhat appealing to children, and the perceived target audience of social media marketing varies across brands. These results and the corresponding discussion provide important global policy-relevant insights as the energy drink market develops.

Suggested Citation

  • Staples, Aaron J. & Kalaitzandonakes, Maria, 2025. "What’s the Buzz? Preferences and perceptions of policies to reduce childhood energy drink consumption," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:131:y:2025:i:c:s030691922500003x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2025.102799
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030691922500003X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.foodpol.2025.102799?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Potvin Kent, Monique & Mulligan, Christine & Pauzé, Elise & Pinto, Adena & Remedios, Lauren, 2024. "The food and beverage marketing monitoring framework for Canada: Development, implementation, and gaps," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    2. Marco Costanigro & Oana Deselnicu & Stephan Kroll, 2015. "Food Beliefs: Elicitation, Estimation and Implications for Labeling Policy," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(1), pages 108-128, February.
    3. Bhat, Chandra R., 2001. "Quasi-random maximum simulated likelihood estimation of the mixed multinomial logit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 677-693, August.
    4. Vincenzina Caputo & Jayson L. Lusk, 2020. "What agricultural and food policies do U.S. consumers prefer? A best–worst scaling approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 75-93, January.
    5. Carters-White, Lauren & Chambers, Stephanie & Skivington, Kathryn & Hilton, Shona, 2021. "Whose rights deserve protection? Framing analysis of responses to the 2016 Committee of Advertising Practice consultation on the non-broadcast advertising of foods and soft drinks to children," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    6. Levasseur, Pierre, 2021. "Do junk food bans in school really reduce childhood overweight? Evidence from Brazil," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    7. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, June.
    8. Wolf, Christopher A. & Tonsor, Glynn T., 2013. "Dairy Farmer Policy Preferences," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(2), pages 1-15, August.
    9. Landwehr, Stefanie C. & Hartmann, Monika, 2020. "Industry self-regulation of food advertisement to children: Compliance versus effectiveness of the EU Pledge," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    10. Papke, Leslie E & Wooldridge, Jeffrey M, 1996. "Econometric Methods for Fractional Response Variables with an Application to 401(K) Plan Participation Rates," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(6), pages 619-632, Nov.-Dec..
    11. Staples, Aaron J. & Howard, Philip H. & Conner, David S. & Sirrine, J. Robert & Ostrom, Marcia R. & Miller, Michelle, 2023. "Apples to advocacy: Evaluating consumer preferences for hard cider policies," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(4), pages 286-301, November.
    12. Danny Campbell & Seda Erdem, 2015. "Position Bias in Best-worst Scaling Surveys: A Case Study on Trust in Institutions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 97(2), pages 526-545.
    13. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1986. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 715-719, November.
    14. Loureiro, Maria L. & Rahmani, Djamel, 2016. "The incidence of calorie labeling on fast food choices: A comparison between stated preferences and actual choices," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 82-93.
    15. Kristin Kiesel & Jill J. McCluskey & Sofia B. Villas-Boas, 2011. "Nutritional Labeling and Consumer Choices," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 3(1), pages 141-158, October.
    16. Chen, Xuan & Liu, Yizao & Jaenicke, Edward C. & Rabinowitz, Adam N., 2019. "New concerns on caffeine consumption and the impact of potential regulations: The case of energy drinks," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 1-1.
    17. Erdem, Seda & Rigby, Dan & Wossink, Ada, 2012. "Using best–worst scaling to explore perceptions of relative responsibility for ensuring food safety," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 661-670.
    18. Christina Biedny & Trey Malone & Jayson L. Lusk, 2020. "Exploring Polarization in US Food Policy Opinions," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(3), pages 434-454, September.
    19. repec:plo:pone00:0188668 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Kent D. Messer & Marco Costanigro & Harry M. Kaiser, 2017. "Labeling Food Processes: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 39(3), pages 407-427.
    21. Caro, Juan Carlos & Ng, Shu Wen & Taillie, Lindsey Smith & Popkin, Barry M., 2017. "Designing a tax to discourage unhealthy food and beverage purchases: The case of Chile," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 86-100.
    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. Muunda, Emmanuel & Mtimet, Nadhem & Schneider, Franziska & Wanyoike, Francis & Dominguez-Salas, Paula & Alonso, Silvia, 2021. "Could the new dairy policy affect milk allocation to infants in Kenya? A best-worst scaling approach," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    2. Kwon, Daye & Liverpool-Tasie, Saweda & Reardon, Thomas A. & Mason-Wardell, Nicole M. & Tasie, Oyinkansola, 2024. "Addressing Conflict and Weather Shocks in Agrifood Value Chains: Policy Preferences of Nigerian Maize Traders," 2024 Annual Meeting, July 28-30, New Orleans, LA 343947, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Vincenzina Caputo & Jayson L. Lusk, 2020. "What agricultural and food policies do U.S. consumers prefer? A best–worst scaling approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 75-93, January.
    4. Solomon Tarfasa & Roy Brouwer, 2013. "Estimation of the public benefits of urban water supply improvements in Ethiopia: a choice experiment," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(9), pages 1099-1108, March.
    5. van der Kroon, Bianca & Brouwer, Roy & van Beukering, Pieter J.H., 2014. "The impact of the household decision environment on fuel choice behavior," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 236-247.
    6. Santos, Rui & Clemente, Pedro & Brouwer, Roy & Antunes, Paula & Pinto, Rute, 2015. "Landowner preferences for agri-environmental agreements to conserve the montado ecosystem in Portugal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 159-167.
    7. West, Grant H. & Snell, Heather & Kovacs, Kent & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2020. "Estimation of the preferences for the intertemporal services from groundwater," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304220, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Brouwer, Roy & Lienhoop, Nele & Oosterhuis, Frans, 2015. "Incentivizing afforestation agreements: Institutional-economic conditions and motivational drivers," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 205-222.
    9. Rodrigo J. Tapia & Gerard Jong & Ana M. Larranaga & Helena B. Bettella Cybis, 2021. "Exploring Multiple‐discreteness in Freight Transport. A Multiple Discrete Extreme Value Model Application for Grain Consolidators in Argentina," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 581-608, September.
    10. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    11. Matthews, Yvonne & Scarpa, Riccardo & Marsh, Dan, 2017. "Using virtual environments to improve the realism of choice experiments: A case study about coastal erosion management," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 193-208.
    12. Helen Scarborough & Jeff Bennett, 2012. "Cost–Benefit Analysis and Distributional Preferences," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14376, December.
    13. Glenk, Klaus & Eory, Vera & Colombo, Sergio & Barnes, Andrew, 2014. "Adoption of greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture: An analysis of dairy farmers' perceptions and adoption behaviour," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 49-58.
    14. John Robinson, Peter & van Beukering, Pieter & Brander, Luke & Brouwer, Roy & Haider, W. & Taylor, Michael & Mau, Paulus, 2022. "Understanding the determinants of biodiversity non-use values in the context of climate change: Stated preferences for the Hawaiian coral reefs," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    15. Kuriyama, Koichi & Michael Hanemann, W. & Hilger, James R., 2010. "A latent segmentation approach to a Kuhn-Tucker model: An application to recreation demand," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 209-220, November.
    16. Elizabeth S. Byrd & Nicole J. Olynk Widmar & Benjamin M. Gramig, 2018. "Presentation matters: Number of attributes presented impacts estimated preferences," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 377-389, March.
    17. Becker, Gideon, 2014. "The portfolio structure of German households: A multinomial fractional response approach with unobserved heterogeneity," University of Tübingen Working Papers in Business and Economics 74, University of Tuebingen, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, School of Business and Economics.
    18. Zhifeng Gao & Ted C. Schroeder, 2009. "Consumer responses to new food quality information: are some consumers more sensitive than others?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(3), pages 339-346, May.
    19. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Hong, Soo Jeong, 2015. "Retail channel and consumer demand for food quality in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 359-366.
    20. Choi, Andy S., 2013. "Nonmarket values of major resources in the Korean DMZ areas: A test of distance decay," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 97-107.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Best-worst scaling; Caffeine; Child health; Energy drinks; Food policy; Marketing;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth
    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy

    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:eee:jfpoli:v:131:y:2025:i:c:s030691922500003x. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/foodpol .

    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.