Cargando…

What are the benefits and risks of nutrition policy actions to reduce added sugar consumption? An Australian case study

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to critically analyse Australia’s current and proposed policy actions to reduce added sugar consumption. Over-consumption of added sugar is a significant public health nutrition issue. The competing interests, values and beliefs among stakeholders mean they have disparate...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Russell, Cherie, Baker, Phillip, Grimes, Carley, Lawrence, Mark Andrew
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9991626/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35067254
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1368980022000234
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to critically analyse Australia’s current and proposed policy actions to reduce added sugar consumption. Over-consumption of added sugar is a significant public health nutrition issue. The competing interests, values and beliefs among stakeholders mean they have disparate views regarding which policy actions are preferable to reduce added sugar consumption. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews using purposive, snowball sampling and policy mapping. Policy actions were classified by two frameworks: NOURISHING (e.g. behaviour change communication, food environment and food system) and the Orders of Change (e.g. first order: technical adjustments, second order: reforming the system, third order: transforming the system). SETTING: Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-two stakeholders from the food industry, food regulation, government, public health groups and academia. RESULTS: All proposed and existing policy actions targeted the food environment/behaviour change; most were assessed as first-order changes, and reductionist (nutrient specific) in nature. Influences on policy actions included industry power, stakeholder fragmentation, government ideology/political will and public pressure. Few stakeholders considered potential risks of policy actions, particularly of non-nutritive sweetener substitution or opportunity costs for other policies. CONCLUSIONS: Most of Australia’s policy actions to reduce added sugar consumption are reductionist. Preferencing nutrient specific, first-order policy actions could reflect the influence of vested interests, a historically dominant reductionist orientation to nutrition science and policy, and the perceived difficulty of pursuing second- or third-order changes. Pursuing only first-order policy actions could lead to ‘regrettable’ substitutions and creates an opportunity cost for more comprehensive policy aimed at adjusting the broader food system.