Food and beverage marketing in primary and secondary schools in Canada.
Adolescents
Canada
Children
Food environment
Food marketing
Obesity
Policy
Schools
Self-regulation
Journal
BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 Jan 2019
28 Jan 2019
Historique:
received:
03
08
2018
accepted:
14
01
2019
entrez:
30
1
2019
pubmed:
30
1
2019
medline:
16
4
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Unhealthy food marketing is considered a contributor to childhood obesity. In Canada, food marketing in schools is mostly self-regulated by industry though it is sometimes restricted through provincial school policies. The purpose of this study was to document the type of food marketing activities occurring in Canadian schools and examine differences by school characteristics. An online survey was sent to public primary and secondary schools from 27 school boards in Ontario, British Columbia, and Nova Scotia and was completed by 154 Principals in spring 2016. This survey queried the type of food marketing occurring in schools including advertisements, food product displays, fundraising, exclusive marketing agreements, and incentive programs, among others. The occurrence of food marketing was described using frequencies, medians, and ranges. Chi-square and Fisher Exact tests were conducted to assess school-level differences in the frequency of marketing activities by school type (primary versus secondary), province (Ontario versus British Columbia), and the socio-economic status of most students (low versus middle/high income). The significance level was set at α < 0.05 for all tests. Overall, 84% of schools reported at least one type of food marketing and the median number of distinct types of marketing per school was 1 (range 0-6). The most frequently reported forms of marketing were the sale of branded food, particularly chocolate, pizza, and other fast food, for fundraising (64% of schools); food advertisements on school property (26%), and participation in incentive programs (18%). Primary schools (n = 108) were more likely to report participating in incentive programs (25%) and selling branded food items (72%) compared to secondary schools (n = 46; 2 and 43% respectively; p < 0.01). Conversely, secondary schools were more likely to report food advertising on school property (56%), exclusive marketing arrangements with food companies (43%), and food product displays (19%) than primary schools (13, 5 and 2%, respectively; p < 0.01). The presence of food marketing in most participating schools suggests that the current patchwork of policies that restrict food marketing in Canadian schools is inadequate. Comprehensive restrictions should be mandated by government in both primary and secondary schools to protect children and youth from this marketing.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Unhealthy food marketing is considered a contributor to childhood obesity. In Canada, food marketing in schools is mostly self-regulated by industry though it is sometimes restricted through provincial school policies. The purpose of this study was to document the type of food marketing activities occurring in Canadian schools and examine differences by school characteristics.
METHODS
METHODS
An online survey was sent to public primary and secondary schools from 27 school boards in Ontario, British Columbia, and Nova Scotia and was completed by 154 Principals in spring 2016. This survey queried the type of food marketing occurring in schools including advertisements, food product displays, fundraising, exclusive marketing agreements, and incentive programs, among others. The occurrence of food marketing was described using frequencies, medians, and ranges. Chi-square and Fisher Exact tests were conducted to assess school-level differences in the frequency of marketing activities by school type (primary versus secondary), province (Ontario versus British Columbia), and the socio-economic status of most students (low versus middle/high income). The significance level was set at α < 0.05 for all tests.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Overall, 84% of schools reported at least one type of food marketing and the median number of distinct types of marketing per school was 1 (range 0-6). The most frequently reported forms of marketing were the sale of branded food, particularly chocolate, pizza, and other fast food, for fundraising (64% of schools); food advertisements on school property (26%), and participation in incentive programs (18%). Primary schools (n = 108) were more likely to report participating in incentive programs (25%) and selling branded food items (72%) compared to secondary schools (n = 46; 2 and 43% respectively; p < 0.01). Conversely, secondary schools were more likely to report food advertising on school property (56%), exclusive marketing arrangements with food companies (43%), and food product displays (19%) than primary schools (13, 5 and 2%, respectively; p < 0.01).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The presence of food marketing in most participating schools suggests that the current patchwork of policies that restrict food marketing in Canadian schools is inadequate. Comprehensive restrictions should be mandated by government in both primary and secondary schools to protect children and youth from this marketing.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30691422
doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-6441-x
pii: 10.1186/s12889-019-6441-x
pmc: PMC6348619
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
114Références
Appetite. 2013 Mar;62:209-15
pubmed: 22561190
Prev Med. 2008 Nov;47(5):504-7
pubmed: 18755214
Annu Rev Public Health. 2010;31:349-69
pubmed: 20070196
JAMA Intern Med. 2013 Jul 22;173(14):1373-4
pubmed: 23699985
J Am Diet Assoc. 2009 Jul;109(7):1215-9
pubmed: 19559138
Pediatr Ann. 2007 Feb;36(2):96-101
pubmed: 17330572
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2004 Feb 10;1(1):3
pubmed: 15171786
JAMA Pediatr. 2014 Mar;168(3):234-42
pubmed: 24424573
Lancet. 2017 Dec 16;390(10113):2627-2642
pubmed: 29029897
Health Rep. 2012 Sep;23(3):37-41
pubmed: 23061263
Am J Prev Med. 2007 Oct;33(4 Suppl):S209-25
pubmed: 17884569
Can J Diet Pract Res. 2014 Sep;75(3):118-24
pubmed: 26066815
Health Rep. 2011 Sep;22(3):23-7
pubmed: 22106786
Public Health Nutr. 2017 Nov;20(16):2980-2987
pubmed: 28803573
Aust N Z J Public Health. 2005 Aug;29(4):331-6
pubmed: 16222930
Prev Med Rep. 2015 Sep 04;2:757-64
pubmed: 26844147
Can J Public Health. 2017 Apr 20;108(1):e43-e48
pubmed: 28425898
Can J Diet Pract Res. 2011 Winter;72(4):176
pubmed: 22146114
Public Health Nutr. 2014 Jun;17(6):1290-8
pubmed: 24050825
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017 Sep 12;14(9):
pubmed: 28895921
Perspect Public Health. 2013 Nov;133(6):308-13
pubmed: 23135869
Aust N Z J Public Health. 2012 Dec;36(6):543-9
pubmed: 23216495
Can J Diabetes. 2013 Apr;37(2):90-6
pubmed: 24070798
Public Health Rep. 2012 Mar-Apr;127(2):216-23
pubmed: 22379223
Health Promot Int. 2017 Apr 1;32(2):207-217
pubmed: 23945087
JAMA Pediatr. 2014 Mar;168(3):206-8
pubmed: 24424446
Health Rep. 2007 May;18(2):17-32
pubmed: 17578013
Can J Diet Pract Res. 2009 Winter;70(4):166-71
pubmed: 19958571
Obes Rev. 2016 Oct;17(10):945-59
pubmed: 27427474
Health Rep. 2007 May;18(2):47-52
pubmed: 17578015
Public Health Nutr. 2018 Jun;21(9):1608-1617
pubmed: 29433594