Abstract
Abstract
Background
Worldwide obesity rates have nearly tripled over the past five decades. So far, policies to promote a healthier diet have been less intrusive than those to reduce tobacco and alcohol consumption. Not much is known about public support for policies that aim to promote a healthy diet. In this study, a discrete choice experiment (DCE) was used to elicit stated preferences for policies varying in intrusiveness among a representative sample of the public of The Netherlands.
Methods
The choice tasks presented respondents a hypothetical scenario of two policy packages, each comprising a mix of seven potential policies that differed in level of intrusiveness. We estimated mixed logit models (MXL) to estimate respondents’ preferences for these policies and performed latent class analyses to identify heterogeneity in preferences.
Results
The MXL model showed that positive financial incentives like subsidies for vegetables and fruit yielded most utility. A tax of 50% on sugary drinks was associated with disutility while a tax of 20% was associated with positive utility compared to no tax at all. We identified three subgroups with distinct preferences for the seven policies to promote a healthy diet, which were characterized as being “against”, “mixed” and “pro” policies to promote a healthy diet.
Conclusion
Preferences for policies promoting a healthy diet vary considerably in the Dutch population, particularly in relation to more intrusive policies. This makes selection and implementation of a policy package that has wide public support challenging.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health Policy,Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous)
Reference67 articles.
1. World Health Organization: Body Mass Index—BMI. http://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/disease-prevention/nutrition/a-healthy-lifestyle/body-mass-index-bmi
2. Pineda, E., Sanchez-Romero, L.M., Brown, M., Jaccard, A., Jewell, J., Galea, G., Webber, L., Breda, J.: Forecasting future trends in obesity across Europe: the value of improving surveillance. Obes. Facts 11, 360–371 (2018)
3. Shelley, J.J.: Addressing the policy cacophony does not require more evidence: an argument for reframing obesity as caloric overconsumption. BMC Public Health 12, 1–8 (2012)
4. Forouzanfar, M.H., Afshin, A., Alexander, L.T., Biryukov, S., Brauer, M., Al., E.: Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet (London) 388, 1659–1724 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31679-8
5. Hamer, M., Kivimäki, M., Gale, C.R., Batty, G.D.: Lifestyle risk factors, inflammatory mechanisms, and COVID-19 hospitalization: a community-based cohort study of 387,109 adults in UK. Brain Behav. Immun. 87, 184–187 (2020)
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献