IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/agrebk/qt1m55f21s.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Soda Wars: The Effect Of A Soda Tax Election On University Beverage Sales

Author

Listed:
  • Taylor, Rebecca LC
  • Kaplan, Scott
  • Villas‐Boas, Sofia B
  • Jung, Kevin

Abstract

We examine how soda sales changed due to the campaign attention and election outcome of a local excise tax on sugar-sweetened beverages. Using panel data of beverage sales from university retailers in Berkeley, California, we estimate that soda purchases relative to control beverages significantly dropped immediately after the election, months before the tax was implemented in the city of Berkeley or on campus. Supplemental scanner data from off-campus retailers reveal this result is not unique to the university setting. Our findings suggest soda tax media coverage and election outcomes can have larger effects on purchasing behavior than the tax itself. (JEL D12, H20, C23, I38, Q18).

Suggested Citation

  • Taylor, Rebecca LC & Kaplan, Scott & Villas‐Boas, Sofia B & Jung, Kevin, 2019. "Soda Wars: The Effect Of A Soda Tax Election On University Beverage Sales," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt1m55f21s, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdl:agrebk:qt1m55f21s
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/1m55f21s.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yen, Steven T & Jensen, Helen H & Wang, Qingbin, 1996. "Cholesterol Information and Egg Consumption in the US: A Nonnormal and Hetroscedastic Double-Hurdle Model," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 23(3), pages 343-356.
    2. Michael Kremer & Dan Levy, 2008. "Peer Effects and Alcohol Use among College Students," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(3), pages 189-206, Summer.
    3. Wolfram Schlenker & Sofia B. Villas-Boas, 2009. "Consumer and Market Responses to Mad Cow Disease," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(4), pages 1140-1152.
    4. Lusk Jayson L, 2010. "The Effect of Proposition 2 on the Demand for Eggs in California," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-20, April.
    5. Fletcher, Jason M. & Frisvold, David E. & Tefft, Nathan, 2010. "The effects of soft drink taxes on child and adolescent consumption and weight outcomes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(11-12), pages 967-974, December.
    6. Jeffrey Grogger, 2017. "Soda Taxes And The Prices of Sodas And Other Drinks: Evidence From Mexico," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(2), pages 481-498.
    7. Raj Chetty & Adam Looney & Kory Kroft, 2009. "Salience and Taxation: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1145-1177, September.
    8. Schlenker, Wolfram & Villas-Boas, Sofia, 2009. "AJAE appendix for ‘Consumer and Market Responses to Mad-Cow Disease’," American Journal of Agricultural Economics APPENDICES, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(4), pages 1-12, March.
    9. Chaloupka, Frank, 1991. "Rational Addictive Behavior and Cigarette Smoking," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(4), pages 722-742, August.
    10. Lynn D Silver & Shu Wen Ng & Suzanne Ryan-Ibarra & Lindsey Smith Taillie & Marta Induni & Donna R Miles & Jennifer M Poti & Barry M Popkin, 2017. "Changes in prices, sales, consumer spending, and beverage consumption one year after a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages in Berkeley, California, US: A before-and-after study," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-19, April.
    11. Falbe, J. & Rojas, N. & Grummon, A.H. & Madsen, K.A., 2015. "Higher retail prices of sugar-sweetened beverages 3 months after implementation of an excise tax in Berkeley, California," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 105(11), pages 2194-2201.
    12. Paarlberg, Robert & Mozaffarian, Dariush & Micha, Renata, 2017. "Viewpoint: Can U.S. local soda taxes continue to spread?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 1-7.
    13. Falbe, J. & Thompson, H.R. & Becker, C.M. & Rojas, N. & McCulloch, C.E. & Madsen, K.A., 2016. "Impact of the Berkeley excise tax on sugar-sweetened beverage consumption," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 106(10), pages 1865-1871.
    14. Jakina Debnam, 2017. "Selection Effects and Heterogeneous Demand Responses to the Berkeley Soda Tax Vote," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1172-1187.
    15. Aguilar, Arturo & Gutierrez, Emilio & Seira, Enrique, 2021. "The effectiveness of sin food taxes: Evidence from Mexico," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    16. Allcott, Hunt, 2011. "Social norms and energy conservation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(9-10), pages 1082-1095, October.
    17. Noah J. Goldstein & Robert B. Cialdini & Vladas Griskevicius, 2008. "A Room with a Viewpoint: Using Social Norms to Motivate Environmental Conservation in Hotels," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 35(3), pages 472-482, March.
    18. Olekalns, Nilss & Bardsley, Peter, 1996. "Rational Addiction to Caffeine: An Analysis of Coffee Consumption," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(5), pages 1100-1104, October.
    19. Becker, Gary S & Murphy, Kevin M, 1988. "A Theory of Rational Addiction," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(4), pages 675-700, August.
    20. Allcott, Hunt, 2011. "Social norms and energy conservation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(9), pages 1082-1095.
    21. Deborah J. Brown & Lee F. Schrader, 1990. "Cholesterol Information and Shell Egg Consumption," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 72(3), pages 548-555.
    22. John Cawley & David Frisvold, 2015. "The Incidence of Taxes on Sugar-Sweetened Beverages: The Case of Berkeley, California," NBER Working Papers 21465, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    23. Jean-Paul Chavas, 1983. "Structural Change in the Demand for Meat," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 65(1), pages 148-153.
    24. Gur Huberman & Tomer Regev, 2001. "Contagious Speculation and a Cure for Cancer: A Nonevent that Made Stock Prices Soar," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(1), pages 387-396, February.
    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. Wenying Li & Eric Andrew Finkelstein & Chen Zhen, 2022. "Intended and unintended consequences of salient nutrition labels," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(2), pages 853-872, March.
    2. Leider, Julien & Powell, Lisa M., 2022. "Longer-term impacts of the Oakland, California, sugar-sweetened beverage tax on prices and volume sold at two-years post-tax," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    3. Alex Rees-Jones & Kyle Rozema, 2023. "Price Isn’t Everything: Behavioral Response Around Changes In Sin Taxes," National Tax Journal, University of Chicago Press, vol. 76(1), pages 5-35.
    4. Zhen, Chen & Chen, Yu & Lin, Biing-Hwan & Karns, Shawn & Mancino, Lisa & Ver Ploeg, Michele, 2021. "Do Obese and Nonobese Consumers Respond Differently to Price Changes? Implications of Preference Heterogeneity for Using Food Taxes and Subsidies to Reduce Obesity," MPRA Paper 112697, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Sunjin Ahn & Jayson L. Lusk, 2021. "Non‐Pecuniary Effects of Sugar‐Sweetened Beverage Policies," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(1), pages 53-69, January.
    6. Dickson, Alex & Gehrsitz, Markus & Kemp, Jonathan, 2021. "Does a Spoonful of Sugar Levy Help the Calories Go Down? An Analysis of the UK Soft Drinks Industry Levy," IZA Discussion Papers 14528, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Hoy, Kyle A. & Wrenn, Douglas H., 2020. "The effectiveness of taxes in decreasing candy purchases," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    8. Dickson, Alex & Gehrsitz, Markus & Kemp, Jonathan, 2022. "Does a Spoonful of Sugar Levy Help the Calories Go Down? An Analysis of the UK Soft Drinks Industry Levy," VfS Annual Conference 2022 (Basel): Big Data in Economics 264048, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    9. Goncalves, Judite & Merenda, Roxanne & Pereira dos Santos, João, 2023. "Not So Sweet: Impacts of a Soda Tax on Producers," IZA Discussion Papers 15968, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    10. Bartels, Lara & Werthschulte, Madeline, 2023. ""More bang for the buck"? Evidence on the effectiveness of an energy efficiency subsidy," ZEW Discussion Papers 23-022, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    11. Goncalves, Judite & Merenda, Roxanne & dos Santos, João Pereira, 2022. "Not so sweet: The impact of the Portuguese soda tax on producers," Ruhr Economic Papers 938, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    12. Aguilar, Arturo & Gutierrez, Emilio & Seira, Enrique, 2021. "The effectiveness of sin food taxes: Evidence from Mexico," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    13. Julio C. Arteaga & Daniel Flores & Edgar Luna, 2021. "The effect of a soft drink tax in Mexico: evidence from time series industry data," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 65(2), pages 349-366, April.
    14. Gonçalves, Judite & Pereira dos Santos, João, 2020. "Brown sugar, how come you taste so good? The impact of a soda tax on prices and consumption," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 264(C).
    15. Alyssa J. Moran & Yuxuan Gu & Sasha Clynes & Attia Goheer & Christina A. Roberto & Anne Palmer, 2020. "Associations between Governmental Policies to Improve the Nutritional Quality of Supermarket Purchases and Individual, Retailer, and Community Health Outcomes: An Integrative Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-23, October.
    16. Bartels, Lara & Werthschulte, Madeline, 2022. "More than just a Price Decrease: Field Experimental Evidence on the Mechanisms of an Energy Efficiency Subsidy," VfS Annual Conference 2022 (Basel): Big Data in Economics 264091, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    17. Aaron Adalja & Jūra Liaukonytė & Emily Wang & Xinrong Zhu, 2023. "GMO and Non-GMO Labeling Effects: Evidence from a Quasi-Natural Experiment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(2), pages 233-250, March.
    18. Nano Barahona & Cristóbal Otero & Sebastián Otero, 2023. "Equilibrium Effects of Food Labeling Policies," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(3), pages 839-868, May.
    19. Emily A. Altman & Kristine A. Madsen & Laura A. Schmidt, 2021. "Missed Opportunities: The Need to Promote Public Knowledge and Awareness of Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-9, April.
    20. Christian Rojas & Emily Wang, 2021. "Do Taxes On Soda And Sugary Drinks Work? Scanner Data Evidence From Berkeley And Washington State," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(1), pages 95-118, January.
    21. John Gibson & Steven Tucker & Geua Boe-Gibson, 2019. "Testing an Information Intervention: Experimental Evidence on the Effect of Jamie Oliver on Fizzy Drinks Demand," Working Papers in Economics 19/08, University of Waikato.
    22. Felipe Lozano‐Rojas & Patrick Carlin, 2022. "The effect of soda taxes beyond beverages in Philadelphia," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(11), pages 2381-2410, November.
    23. Andrew Fearne & Natalia Borzino & Beatrix De La Iglesia & Peter Moffatt & Margaret Robbins, 2022. "Using supermarket loyalty card data to measure the differential impact of the UK soft drink sugar tax on buyer behaviour," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(2), pages 321-337, June.
    24. Cawley, John & Frisvold, David, 2023. "Review: Taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages: Political economy, and effects on prices, purchases, and consumption," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).

    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. Taylor, Rebecca & Kaplan, Scott & Villas-Boas, Sofia B & Jung, Kevin, 2016. "Soda Wars: Effect of a Soda Tax Election on Soda Purchases," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt0q18s7b7, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    2. Gonçalves, Judite & Pereira dos Santos, João, 2020. "Brown sugar, how come you taste so good? The impact of a soda tax on prices and consumption," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 264(C).
    3. Zhang, Yinjunjie & Palma, Marco A., 2018. "Revisiting the Effects of Sugar Tax on Demand Elasticities - Evidence from the BLP Demand Model," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 273978, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. John Cawley & David Frisvold & David Jones & Chelsea Lensing, 2021. "The Pass‐Through of a Tax on Sugar‐Sweetened Beverages in Boulder, Colorado," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(3), pages 987-1005, May.
    5. Cornelsen, Laura & Smith, Richard D., 2018. "Viewpoint: Soda taxes – Four questions economists need to address," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 138-142.
    6. Hoy, Kyle A. & Wrenn, Douglas H., 2020. "The effectiveness of taxes in decreasing candy purchases," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    7. Todd D. Gerarden & Richard G. Newell & Robert N. Stavins, 2017. "Assessing the Energy-Efficiency Gap," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1486-1525, December.
    8. Pierre Dubois & Rachel Griffith & Martin O'Connell, 2020. "How Well Targeted Are Soda Taxes?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(11), pages 3661-3704, November.
    9. John Cawley & Chelsea Crain & David Frisvold & David Jones, 2018. "The Pass-Through of the Largest Tax on Sugar-Sweetened Beverages: The Case of Boulder, Colorado," NBER Working Papers 25050, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Nano Barahona & Cristóbal Otero & Sebastián Otero, 2023. "Equilibrium Effects of Food Labeling Policies," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(3), pages 839-868, May.
    11. Bonan, Jacopo & Battiston, Pietro & Bleck, Jaimie & LeMay-Boucher, Philippe & Pareglio, Stefano & Sarr, Bassirou & Tavoni, Massimo, 2021. "Social interaction and technology adoption: Experimental evidence from improved cookstoves in Mali," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    12. Gračner, Tadeja & Kapinos, Kandice A. & Gertler, Paul J., 2022. "Associations of a national tax on non-essential high calorie foods with changes in consumer prices," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    13. Xiang, Di & Zhan, Lue & Bordignon, Massimo, 2020. "A reconsideration of the sugar sweetened beverage tax in a household production model," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    14. Massimo Bordignon & Di Xiang & Lue Zhan, 2018. "Predicting the Effects of a Sugar Sweetened Beverage Tax in a Household Production Model," DISCE - Working Papers del Dipartimento di Economia e Finanza def075, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimenti e Istituti di Scienze Economiche (DISCE).
    15. Matilde Giaccherini & David Herberich & David Jimenez-Gomez & John List & Giovanni Ponti & Michael Price, 2020. "Are Economics and Psychology Complements in Household Technology Diffusion? Evidence from a Natural Field Experiment," Natural Field Experiments 00713, The Field Experiments Website.
    16. Gilbert, Ben & Graff Zivin, Joshua, 2014. "Dynamic salience with intermittent billing: Evidence from smart electricity meters," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PA), pages 176-190.
    17. Sunjin Ahn & Jayson L. Lusk, 2021. "Non‐Pecuniary Effects of Sugar‐Sweetened Beverage Policies," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(1), pages 53-69, January.
    18. Julio C. Arteaga & Daniel Flores & Edgar Luna, 2021. "The effect of a soft drink tax in Mexico: evidence from time series industry data," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 65(2), pages 349-366, April.
    19. Bryan Bollinger & Steven E. Sexton, 2023. "Local excise taxes, sticky prices, and spillovers: evidence from Berkeley’s soda tax," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 281-331, June.
    20. Daniel John Zizzo & Melanie Parravano & Ryota Nakamura & Suzanna Forwood & Marc Suhrcke, 2021. "The impact of taxation and signposting on diet: an online field study with breakfast cereals and soft drinks," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(4), pages 1294-1324, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Tax; Berkeley; Election; Difference-In-Differences; Event Study; Economics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • H20 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - General
    • C23 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models
    • I38 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Government Programs; Provision and Effects of Welfare Programs
    • 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:cdl:agrebk:qt1m55f21s. 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: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dabrkus.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.