Can Soft Drink Taxes Reduce Population Weight?

Fletcher, Jason M.; Frisvold, David; Tefft, Nathan

doi:10.1111/j.1465-7287.2009.00182.x

Cited by 180 publications

(127 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

118

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Fletcher et al 41 analysed the relationship between soft drink taxes in states in the USA, which averaged 3%, and population BMI between 1990 and 2006 and found that even relatively large tax increases had little effect. Similarly, Oaks 43 found no relationship between obesity prevalence and a snack and soft drink tax of 5.5% in Maine, USA, on comparing the obesity rate over 15 years with that in New Hampshire, a state with no tax.…”

Section: Grey Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of fiscal policy on diet, obesity and chronic disease: a systematic review

Thow

Jan

Leeder

et al. 2010

Bull. World Health Organ.

237

191

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research 2 from Business Source Premier. In addition, 55 papers from Google Scholar were judged relevant. Once duplicate references were removed, 62 remained. Thereafter, 41 papers were excluded following a full text review, leaving 21. The reference lists from three recent reviews [17][18][19] were also examined, yielding two further publications, and the details of one recently published study were obtained directly from a coauthor. 20 Finally, 24 studies were included in the current review (Fig. 1). AnalysisFor the purposes of the analysis, studies were classified according to: (i) the outcome assessed, such as the effect on food consumption or expenditure, body weight or health, (ii) whether they were modelling or empirical studies, and (iii) whether or not they were peer-reviewed. ResultsOf the 24 studies reviewed, 13 were from the peer-reviewed literature, including one published in an edited book, and 11 were published online, as summarized in Table 1 (available at: http://www.who. int/bulletin/volumes/88/8/09-070987). All were published between 2000 and 2009, and mostly since 2006. All studies but one were set in high-income countries, and more than half were in the USA.The majority of studies used predictive models to assess the effect of a proposed tax on consumption. Only 6 studies used observational data and 4 of these used data at the population rather than the individual level to look for associations between taxes and body weight.Nine studies assessed the effect of taxes on food consumption or expenditure alone, five on consumption and body weight, four on consumption and disease, and six on body weight only. Studies on soft drink taxes were the most common: there were 10 such studies, 2 of which also included "snack" taxes. Thereafter, 7 studies examined food taxation based on nutrient content, most commonly fat. Three studies assessed fruit and vegetable subsidies, and another assessed three taxes on a variety of "unhealthy" foods. Effect on consumptionPeer-reviewed studies The four peer-reviewed studies on food consumption all found that a subsidy, tax or change to a tax altered consumption in the expected direction. In an empirical study in Ireland, Bahl et al. 21 found that a 20% reduction in a soft drink tax resulted in a 6.8% increase in average soft drink consumption. However, had all of the tax reduction been passed on, consumption would actually have risen by 15%.Three studies modelled the effect of proposed taxation strategies on the whole diet. Smed et al. 24 examined seven scenarios for taxing unhealthy and subsidizing healthy foods and nutrients in Denmark. Each involved the equivalent of halving value added tax (VAT) on fruit and vegetables. They concluded that subsidizing specific nutrients was more effective than subsidizing food groups. Their best revenue-neutral scenario decreased average consumption of sugar by 6.5%, fat by 2.5% and saturated fat by 3.6%, and increased consumption of fibre by 6.5%.In a similar study, Jensen & Smed 22 found that younger consumers and loweri...

show abstract

Section: Grey Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of fiscal policy on diet, obesity and chronic disease: a systematic review

Thow

Jan

Leeder

et al. 2010

Bull. World Health Organ.

237

191

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The pool own-price elasticity was -1.299 (95% CI: -1.089 to -1.509), denoting that a 10% increase in a tax would reduce SSB consumption by 12.99%. With respect to the impact of taxes on obesity, studies conducted in the United States found that a 1% increase in SSB prices can reduce obesity prevalence in adults and children by 0.0001 (Fleetcher et al 2010) and 0.0090 (Fletcher et al 2010), respectively. Another study in the United States indicated that a 10% increase in SSB prices can reduce obesity prevalence in men and women by 0.05 and 0.34, respectively (Han and Powell 2011), while a third study indicated that a 20% increase in SSB prices can reduce obesity prevalence by 0.0300 (Smith et al 2010).…”

Section: Effectiveness Of Sugar-sweetened Beverage Taxesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of Obesity Prevention and Control

Thavorncharoensap

2017

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in Asian Development Bank InstituteThe Working Paper series is a continuation of the formerly named Discussion Paper series; the numbering of the papers continued without interruption or change. ADBI's working papers reflect initial ideas on a topic and are posted online for discussion. ADBI encourages readers to post their comments on the main page for each working paper (given in the citation below). Some working papers may develop into other forms of publication.ADB recognizes "China" as the People's Republic of China; "Hong Kong" as Hong Kong, China; and "Korea" as the Republic of Korea. The views expressed in this paper are the views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of ADBI, ADB, its Board of Directors, or the governments they represent. ADBI does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this paper and accepts no responsibility for any consequences of their use. Terminology used may not necessarily be consistent with ADB official terms.Working papers are subject to formal revision and correction before they are finalized and considered published.Asian Development Bank Institute Kasumigaseki Building, 8th Floor 3-2-5 Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku Tokyo 100-6008, JapanTel:+81-3-3593-5500 Fax:+81-3-3593-5571 URL:www.adbi.org E-mail: info@adbi.org AbstractImplementation of evidence-based interventions to control obesity is regarded as a public health priority. In this working paper, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness evidence of sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxes, nutrition labeling, advertising bans on unhealthy food, and school-based interventions are reviewed.The review indicates that SSB taxes may be an effective and cost-effective intervention for obesity prevention and control. Regarding nutrition labeling, current evidence indicates that this has a significant impact on food selection. Although there is limited evidence on its impact on body mass index (BMI) and obesity prevalence, nutrition labeling is considered a cost-effective intervention in many settings. Further, while current evidence indicates that unhealthy food and beverage advertisements may increase dietary intake and the preference for unhealthy foods, especially in children, limited evidence demonstrates the impact of restricted unhealthy food advertising on BMI and obesity prevalence. However, such an intervention is considered to be cost-effective in many settings. Concerning school-based interventions, due to th...

show abstract

“…Two such studies (22,23) , conducted in the USA, demonstrated the cost-effectiveness of this intervention. However, other estimates for the USA, where already two-thirds of the States apply some kind of specific taxation to SSB, are more pessimistic, reporting that although these taxes do reduce the BMI of the population, the change is minimal (24) .…”

Section: Taxation Possibly the Most Effective Levermentioning

confidence: 99%