IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i19p12536-d931183.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sugar Tax or What? The Perspective and Preferences of Consumers

Author

Listed:
  • Agnieszka Piekara

    (Department of Bioprocess Engineering, Wroclaw University of Economics and Business, Komandorska 118-120, 53-345 Wrocław, Poland)

Abstract

Reducing high-calorie food and beverages consumption is a multi-dimensional challenge spanning agriculture to food marketing. Adverse health effects resulting from sugar-sweetened beverages such as obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease or dental carries have been described on numerous occasions. Poland is one of the countries that have introduced the sugar tax. The study aims to understand the degree of consumers’ awareness of the upcoming changes and their opinions and assessments of the efficiency of various activities. The study was based on Computer-Assisted Web Interview (CAWI). The sample comprised 500 adult consumers. Most of the respondents (69.6%) are aware that a new charge for sweetened beverages is going to be introduced, and for 78.9% of the respondents, it is important to take action aimed at reducing the consumption of sweetened beverages by consumers. Well-educated respondents as well as women perceive a greater degree of need to take specific action within the area of health policy ( p -value 0.010 and 0.000 respectively). The sugar tax is considered an effective tool for limiting the purchase of sweetened products. Other types of activities within the framework of preventative healthcare that aim to reduce the consumption of sugar by society should also be developed.

Suggested Citation

  • Agnieszka Piekara, 2022. "Sugar Tax or What? The Perspective and Preferences of Consumers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-12, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:19:p:12536-:d:931183
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/19/12536/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/19/12536/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dragos C Petrescu & Gareth J Hollands & Dominique-Laurent Couturier & Yin-Lam Ng & Theresa M Marteau, 2016. "Public Acceptability in the UK and USA of Nudging to Reduce Obesity: The Example of Reducing Sugar-Sweetened Beverages Consumption," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-18, June.
    2. Christoph F. Kurz & Adriana N. König, 2021. "The causal impact of sugar taxes on soft drink sales: evidence from France and Hungary," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(6), pages 905-915, August.
    3. Hagmann, Désirée & Siegrist, Michael & Hartmann, Christina, 2018. "Taxes, labels, or nudges? Public acceptance of various interventions designed to reduce sugar intake," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 156-165.
    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. Lan Nguyen & Hans De Steur, 2021. "Public Acceptability of Policy Interventions to Reduce Sugary Drink Consumption in Urban Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-18, December.
    2. Reynolds, J.P. & Archer, S. & Pilling, M. & Kenny, M. & Hollands, G.J. & Marteau, T.M., 2019. "Public acceptability of nudging and taxing to reduce consumption of alcohol, tobacco, and food: A population-based survey experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 236(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Reynolds, J.P. & Pilling, M. & Marteau, T.M., 2018. "Communicating quantitative evidence of policy effectiveness and support for the policy: Three experimental studies," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 1-12.
    4. Le Bodo, Yann & Etilé, Fabrice & Julia, Chantal & Friant-Perrot, Marine & Breton, Eric & Lecocq, Sébastien & Boizot-Szantai, Christine & Bergeran, Céline & Jabot, Françoise, 2022. "Public health lessons from the French 2012 soda tax and insights on the modifications enacted in 2018," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(7), pages 585-591.
    5. Braut, Beatrice & Zaccagni, Sarah, 2023. "Emotional reactions to food interventions: Evidence from an online survey," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(3), pages 419-426.
    6. Cadario, Romain & Chandon, Pierre, 2019. "Viewpoint: Effectiveness or consumer acceptance? Tradeoffs in selecting healthy eating nudges," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 1-6.
    7. Ori Katz & Eyal Zamir, 2021. "Do People Like Mandatory Rules? The Choice Between Disclosures, Defaults, and Mandatory Rules in Supplier‐Customer Relationships," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(2), pages 421-460, June.
    8. Mantzari, Eleni & Reynolds, James P. & Jebb, Susan A. & Hollands, Gareth J. & Pilling, Mark A. & Marteau, Theresa M., 2022. "Public support for policies to improve population and planetary health: A population-based online experiment assessing impact of communicating evidence of multiple versus single benefits," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 296(C).
    9. Marè, M.; & Porcelli, F.; & Vidoli, F.;, 2024. "Does private supply drive personal health choices? A spatial approach of health tax detractions at municipal level," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 24/03, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    10. Julie Metta, 2020. "Promoting discount schemes as a nudge strategy to enhance environmental behaviour," Working Papers 2020.11, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    11. Hagmann, Désirée & Siegrist, Michael & Hartmann, Christina, 2018. "Taxes, labels, or nudges? Public acceptance of various interventions designed to reduce sugar intake," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 156-165.
    12. Romain Cadario & Pierre Chandon, 2019. "Viewpoint: Effectiveness or consumer acceptance? Tradeoffs in selecting healthy eating nudges," Post-Print hal-02508983, HAL.
    13. Dobromir Stoyanov, 2021. "The role of vending channels in marketing: A systematic review and taxonomy of studies," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(2), pages 654-679, June.
    14. Ismaël Rafaï & Arthur Ribaillier & Dorian Jullien, 2021. "The impact on nudge acceptability judgments of framing and consultation of the targeted population," Working Papers hal-03228638, HAL.
    15. Saulais, Laure & Massey, Camille & Perez-Cueto, Federico J.A. & Appleton, Katherine M. & Dinnella, Caterina & Monteleone, Erminio & Depezay, Laurence & Hartwell, Heather & Giboreau, Agnès, 2019. "When are “Dish of the Day” nudges most effective to increase vegetable selection?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 15-27.
    16. Vivica Kraak & Tessa Englund & Sarah Misyak & Elena Serrano, 2017. "Progress Evaluation for the Restaurant Industry Assessed by a Voluntary Marketing-Mix and Choice-Architecture Framework That Offers Strategies to Nudge American Customers toward Healthy Food Environme," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-31, July.
    17. Romain Espinosa & Anis Nassar, 2021. "The Acceptability of Food Policies," Post-Print halshs-03210654, HAL.
    18. James P. Reynolds & Milica Vasiljevic & Mark Pilling & Marissa G. Hall & Kurt M. Ribisl & Theresa M. Marteau, 2020. "Communicating Evidence about the Causes of Obesity and Support for Obesity Policies: Two Population-Based Survey Experiments," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-19, September.
    19. Mariusz Duplaga, 2020. "The Acceptance of Key Public Health Interventions by the Polish Population Is Related to Health Literacy, But Not eHealth Literacy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-19, July.
    20. Shoshanna Griver & Itay Fischhendler, 2021. "The Social Construction of Food Security: The Israeli Case," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 13(5), pages 1303-1321, October.

    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:19:y:2022:i:19:p:12536-:d:931183. 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.