IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v383y2025ics027795362500735x.html

Parental beverage choices to inform policy on sugar-sweetened beverages: a discrete choice experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Byambadorj, Nyamdavaa
  • Best, Rohan
  • Mandakh, Undram
  • Sinha, Kompal

Abstract

This study addresses growing concerns regarding childhood obesity and cardiovascular diseases by exploring the effects of possible policy measures on the intention to choose sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) in Mongolia, a low-income country. Focusing on parents’ preferences for purchasing SSBs, we employed a stated preference choice experiment to analyse how various product attributes, including price, labelling, sugar content and store placement, affect parents’ purchase decisions. Price increases were the most effective intervention, with larger increases leading to a substantial reduction in purchase probability. Labelling also played a crucial role, particularly graphic warnings, which strongly deterred selection. Reducing sugar content positively influenced preferences. Also, store placement at less prominent locations (e.g., back row and bottom shelf) was associated with lower selection probability; however, these results reflect stated preferences and should be interpreted cautiously given their hypothetical nature. Additionally, estimates of willingness to pay suggest consumers are less willing to purchase SSBs with graphic warning labels and placement in the back row and bottom level. These findings highlight the importance of integrating multiple regulatory measures to effectively curb SSB consumption and mitigate associated health risks in Mongolia.

Suggested Citation

  • Byambadorj, Nyamdavaa & Best, Rohan & Mandakh, Undram & Sinha, Kompal, 2025. "Parental beverage choices to inform policy on sugar-sweetened beverages: a discrete choice experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 383(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:383:y:2025:i:c:s027795362500735x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118404
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027795362500735X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118404?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    2. Denzil G. Fiebig & Michael P. Keane & Jordan Louviere & Nada Wasi, 2010. "The Generalized Multinomial Logit Model: Accounting for Scale and Coefficient Heterogeneity," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 393-421, 05-06.
    3. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    4. Mickael Bech & Dorte Gyrd‐Hansen, 2005. "Effects coding in discrete choice experiments," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(10), pages 1079-1083, October.
    5. Cawley, John & Frisvold, David & Hill, Anna & Jones, David, 2020. "Oakland’s sugar-sweetened beverage tax: Impacts on prices, purchases and consumption by adults and children," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    6. Zhai, Tianchang & Li, Lei & Wang, Jingjing & Si, Wei, 2022. "Will the consumption tax on sugar-sweetened beverages help promote healthy beverage consumption? Evidence from urban China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    7. Fabrice Etilé & Anurag Sharma, 2015. "Do High Consumers of Sugar‐Sweetened Beverages Respond Differently to Price Changes? A Finite Mixture IV‐Tobit Approach," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(9), pages 1147-1163, September.
    8. Jemimah Ride & Ilias Goranitis & Yan Meng & Christine LaBond & Emily Lancsar, 2024. "A Reporting Checklist for Discrete Choice Experiments in Health: The DIRECT Checklist," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 42(10), pages 1161-1175, October.
    9. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    10. Blake, Miranda R. & Lancsar, Emily & Peeters, Anna & Backholer, Kathryn, 2019. "Sugar-sweetened beverage price elasticities in a hypothetical convenience store," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 225(C), pages 98-107.
    11. Arne Risa Hole, 2007. "Fitting mixed logit models by using maximum simulated likelihood," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 7(3), pages 388-401, September.
    12. Ou Yang & Peter Sivey & Andrea M. de Silva & Anthony Scott, 2020. "Parents' Demand for Sugar Sweetened Beverages for Their Pre‐School Children: Evidence from a Stated‐Preference Experiment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(2), pages 480-504, March.
    13. Mandy Ryan & Karen Gerard & Gillian Currie, 2012. "Using Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics," Chapters, in: Andrew M. Jones (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Health Economics, Second Edition, chapter 41, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Joan L. Walker & Yanqiao Wang & Mikkel Thorhauge & Moshe Ben-Akiva, 2018. "D-efficient or deficient? A robustness analysis of stated choice experimental designs," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(2), pages 215-238, March.
    15. Esther W. de Bekker‐Grob & Mandy Ryan & Karen Gerard, 2012. "Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(2), pages 145-172, February.
    16. repec:hal:pseose:halshs-01203193 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Menegaki, Angeliki, N. & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Tsagarakis, Konstantinos P., 2016. "Towards a common standard – A reporting checklist for web-based stated preference valuation surveys and a critique for mode surveys," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 18-50.
    18. Claro, R.M. & Levy, R.B. & Popkin, B.M. & Monteiro, C.A., 2012. "Sugar-sweetened beverage Taxes in Brazil," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 102(1), pages 178-183.
    19. Anurag Sharma & Katharina Hauck & Bruce Hollingsworth & Luigi Siciliani, 2014. "The Effects Of Taxing Sugar‐Sweetened Beverages Across Different Income Groups," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(9), pages 1159-1184, September.
    20. Ilene L. Hollin & Benjamin M. Craig & Joanna Coast & Kathleen Beusterien & Caroline Vass & Rachael DiSantostefano & Holly Peay, 2020. "Reporting Formative Qualitative Research to Support the Development of Quantitative Preference Study Protocols and Corresponding Survey Instruments: Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 13(1), pages 121-136, February.
    21. Vinh Vo & K.-H. Nguyen & J. A. Whitty & Tracy A. Comans, 2022. "The Effect of Price Changes and Teaspoon Labelling on Intention to Purchase Sugar-Sweetened Beverages: A Discrete Choice Experiment," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 199-212, March.
    22. Hensher,David A. & Rose,John M. & Greene,William H., 2015. "Applied Choice Analysis," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107465923.
    23. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    24. Violeta Chacon & Guillermo Paraje & Joaquin Barnoya & Frank J Chaloupka, 2018. "Own-price, cross-price, and expenditure elasticities on sugar-sweetened beverages in Guatemala," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-12, October.
    25. Harrison, Glenn W. & Rutström, E. Elisabet, 2008. "Experimental Evidence on the Existence of Hypothetical Bias in Value Elicitation Methods," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, in: Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 81, pages 752-767, Elsevier.
    26. Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M., 2011. "Experimental design influences on stated choice outputs: An empirical study in air travel choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 63-79, January.
    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. 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).
    2. Arne Risa Hole & Hong Il Yoo, 2017. "The use of heuristic optimization algorithms to facilitate maximum simulated likelihood estimation of random parameter logit models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 66(5), pages 997-1013, November.
    3. Pierre-Alexandre Mahieu & Henrik Andersson & Olivier Beaumais & Romain Crastes dit Sourd & Stephane Hess & François-Charles Wolf, 2017. "Stated preferences: a unique database composed of 1657recent published articles in journals relatedto agriculture, environment, or health," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 98(3), pages 201-220.
    4. Chandoevwit, Worawan & Wasi, Nada, 2020. "Incorporating discrete choice experiments into policy decisions: Case of designing public long-term care insurance," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).
    5. Krah, Kwabena & Michelson, Hope & Perge, Emilie & Jindal, Rohit, 2019. "Constraints to adopting soil fertility management practices in Malawi: A choice experiment approach," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-1.
    6. de Bekker-Grob, E.W. & Donkers, B. & Bliemer, M.C.J. & Veldwijk, J. & Swait, J.D., 2020. "Can healthcare choice be predicted using stated preference data?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    7. Damian Clarke & Sonia Oreffice & Climent Quintana‐Domeque, 2021. "On the Value of Birth Weight," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 83(5), pages 1130-1159, October.
    8. Sever, Ivan & Verbič, Miroslav & Klarić Sever, Eva, 2019. "Cost attribute in health care DCEs: Just adding another attribute or a trigger of change in the stated preferences?," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 1-1.
    9. Chen, Gang & Ratcliffe, Julie & Milte, Rachel & Khadka, Jyoti & Kaambwa, Billingsley, 2021. "Quality of care experience in aged care: An Australia-Wide discrete choice experiment to elicit preference weights," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 289(C).
    10. Arne Hole & Julie Kolstad, 2012. "Mixed logit estimation of willingness to pay distributions: a comparison of models in preference and WTP space using data from a health-related choice experiment," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 445-469, April.
    11. John Buckell & Vrinda Vasavada & Sarah Wordsworth & Dean A. Regier & Matthew Quaife, 2022. "Utility maximization versus regret minimization in health choice behavior: Evidence from four datasets," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(2), pages 363-381, February.
    12. Huls, Samare P.I. & de Bekker-Grob, Esther W., 2022. "Can healthcare choice be predicted using stated preference data? The role of model complexity in a discrete choice experiment about colorectal cancer screening," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 315(C).
    13. Holte, Jon Helgheim & Kjaer, Trine & Abelsen, Birgit & Olsen, Jan Abel, 2015. "The impact of pecuniary and non-pecuniary incentives for attracting young doctors to rural general practice," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 1-9.
    14. Jiang, Shan & Gu, Yuanyuan & Yang, Fan & Wu, Tao & Wang, Hui & Cutler, Henry & Zhang, Lufa, 2020. "Tertiary hospitals or community clinics? An enquiry into the factors affecting patients' choice for healthcare facilities in urban China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    15. Héctor M. Núñez & Adán L. Martínez-Cruz & Jaime Sainz-Santamaría, 2025. "Preferences for Renewable Energies and Green Jobs in Mexico City," Working Papers 2025-05, Banco de México.
    16. Pestana, Joana & Frutuoso, João & Costa, Eduardo & Fonseca, Filipa, 2024. "Heterogeneity in physician's job preferences in a dual practice context – Evidence from a DCE," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 343(C).
    17. Haile, Kaleab K. & Tirivayi, Nyasha & Tesfaye, Wondimagegn, 2019. "Farmers’ willingness to accept payments for ecosystem services on agricultural land: The case of climate-smart agroforestry in Ethiopia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    18. Krucien, Nicolas & Ryan, Mandy & Hermens, Frouke, 2017. "Visual attention in multi-attributes choices: What can eye-tracking tell us?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 251-267.
    19. Julia Ihli, Hanna & Chiputwa, Brian & Winter, Etti & Gassner, Anja, 2022. "Risk and time preferences for participating in forest landscape restoration: The case of coffee farmers in Uganda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    20. Hanna Ihli & Ronja Seegers & Etti Winter & Brian Chiputwa & Anja Gassner, 2022. "Preferences for tree fruit market attributes among smallholder farmers in Eastern Rwanda," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 53(1), pages 5-21, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies
    • 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:socmed:v:383:y:2025:i:c:s027795362500735x. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.