Drawing on Strategic Management Approaches to Inform Nutrition Policy Design: An Applied Policy Analysis for Salt Reduction in Packaged Foods.
Australia
Food System Drivers
Nutrition Policy
Salt Reduction
Journal
International journal of health policy and management
ISSN: 2322-5939
Titre abrégé: Int J Health Policy Manag
Pays: Iran
ID NLM: 101619905
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Dec 2021
01 Dec 2021
Historique:
received:
28
05
2020
accepted:
07
10
2020
pubmed:
9
11
2020
medline:
26
3
2022
entrez:
8
11
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Nutrition policies to improve the food environment frequently rely on voluntary business action for implementation, many have had mixed success. The aims of this study were to identify key food system drivers influencing the Australian packaged food sector and analyse how these might impact the willingness of food companies to voluntarily reduce salt in packaged foods. Business methods formed the basis of this retrospective applied policy analysis of voluntary salt reduction for the period 2013-2016 where the focal policy was the Australian Food and Health Dialogue (2009-2015). The analytical framework included political-legal, economic, social, technological (PEST) external drivers of the food system, and Porter's Five Forces for the competitive drivers of the food system. Documentary data identifying food system drivers affecting the Australian packaged food sector (comprised of the food processing and supermarket industries) were identified through a comprehensive search of the grey and academic literatures. The interplay between external and competitive food system drivers created an environment in which voluntary salt reduction was found to be an uneasy fit. A high cost of doing business, soft growth, intense competition, asymmetry of power in favour of supermarkets, and marginal consumer interest in less salty food were found likely to create commercial disincentives to invest in voluntary salt reduction above more pressing commercial imperatives. Analysis of food manufacturing industries highlighted the highly contextual nature of food system drivers. Opportunities for nutrition policy included: support for 'shared value' in economic discourse; and, leveraging investor, supermarket, and the largely unrealised bargaining power of consumers. Business frameworks can provide meaningful insights for nutrition policy on how food system drivers can thwart policy goals. Our analysis highlighted areas to incentivise voluntary action and illustrated the importance of political-legal, economic and consumer strategies for salt reduction.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Nutrition policies to improve the food environment frequently rely on voluntary business action for implementation, many have had mixed success. The aims of this study were to identify key food system drivers influencing the Australian packaged food sector and analyse how these might impact the willingness of food companies to voluntarily reduce salt in packaged foods.
METHODS
METHODS
Business methods formed the basis of this retrospective applied policy analysis of voluntary salt reduction for the period 2013-2016 where the focal policy was the Australian Food and Health Dialogue (2009-2015). The analytical framework included political-legal, economic, social, technological (PEST) external drivers of the food system, and Porter's Five Forces for the competitive drivers of the food system. Documentary data identifying food system drivers affecting the Australian packaged food sector (comprised of the food processing and supermarket industries) were identified through a comprehensive search of the grey and academic literatures.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The interplay between external and competitive food system drivers created an environment in which voluntary salt reduction was found to be an uneasy fit. A high cost of doing business, soft growth, intense competition, asymmetry of power in favour of supermarkets, and marginal consumer interest in less salty food were found likely to create commercial disincentives to invest in voluntary salt reduction above more pressing commercial imperatives. Analysis of food manufacturing industries highlighted the highly contextual nature of food system drivers. Opportunities for nutrition policy included: support for 'shared value' in economic discourse; and, leveraging investor, supermarket, and the largely unrealised bargaining power of consumers.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Business frameworks can provide meaningful insights for nutrition policy on how food system drivers can thwart policy goals. Our analysis highlighted areas to incentivise voluntary action and illustrated the importance of political-legal, economic and consumer strategies for salt reduction.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33160294
doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2020.204
pmc: PMC9309969
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
896-908Informations de copyright
© 2021 The Author(s); Published by Kerman University of Medical Sciences. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Références
Public Health Nutr. 2014 Nov;17(11):2467-83
pubmed: 24564894
Am J Clin Nutr. 2014 Jun;99(6):1525-42
pubmed: 24760975
Nutrients. 2020 May 08;12(5):
pubmed: 32397296
Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2017 Nov 2;57(16):3357-3372
pubmed: 26745848
Lancet. 2015 Dec 5;386(10010):2287-323
pubmed: 26364544
Nature. 2018 Apr 5;556(7699):19-22
pubmed: 29620753
Public Health. 2015 Apr;129(4):351-63
pubmed: 25753279
Public Health Nutr. 2013 Oct;16(10):1837-42
pubmed: 22935554
Harv Bus Rev. 2008 Jan;86(1):78-93, 137
pubmed: 18271320
BMJ. 2005 Nov 5;331(7524):1064-5
pubmed: 16230312
PLoS Med. 2012;9(7):e1001254
pubmed: 22802734
Appetite. 2019 May 1;136:193-207
pubmed: 30819576
Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. 2015 Jun;5(3):207-18
pubmed: 26090332
Med J Aust. 2014 Feb 3;200(2):92-5
pubmed: 24484111
Public Health Nutr. 2016 Feb;19(3):477-85
pubmed: 25989940
Health Promot J Austr. 2012 Aug;23(2):86-91
pubmed: 23088483
Nutrients. 2011 Jun;3(6):694-711
pubmed: 22254117
J Food Sci. 2011 Jan-Feb;76(1):S72-6
pubmed: 21535718
PLoS Med. 2012;9(6):e1001242
pubmed: 22723746
Lancet Glob Health. 2014 Dec;2(12):e681-2
pubmed: 25433616
PLoS One. 2017 May 18;12(5):e0177535
pubmed: 28542317
Int J Epidemiol. 2009 Jun;38(3):791-813
pubmed: 19351697
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2019 Oct;21(10):1596-1601
pubmed: 31448517
BMC Public Health. 2016 Jul 27;16:651
pubmed: 27465746
Nutrients. 2017 Aug 18;9(8):
pubmed: 28820449
Harv Bus Rev. 2002 Dec;80(12):49-55, 132
pubmed: 12510537
Bull World Health Organ. 2019 Aug 1;97(8):514
pubmed: 31384066
Global Health. 2007 May 22;3:2
pubmed: 17519005
J Hum Hypertens. 2009 Jun;23(6):363-84
pubmed: 19110538
Ecol Food Nutr. 2015;54(6):603-24
pubmed: 25879914
Am J Public Health. 2010 Feb;100(2):240-6
pubmed: 20019306
Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2009 Nov;49(10):841-51
pubmed: 19960392
Health Policy. 2013 May;110(2-3):186-97
pubmed: 23506799
Lancet. 2018 May 19;391(10134):2071-2078
pubmed: 29627159
Lancet. 2013 Feb 23;381(9867):670-9
pubmed: 23410611
PLoS One. 2015 Jul 22;10(7):e0130247
pubmed: 26201031
JAMA. 2008 Oct 15;300(15):1808-11
pubmed: 18854543
Curr Obes Rep. 2018 Sep;7(3):211-219
pubmed: 30022469