Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2440/117953
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorFarrell, L.en
dc.contributor.authorMoore, V.en
dc.contributor.authorWarin, M.en
dc.contributor.authorStreet, J.en
dc.date.issued2019en
dc.identifier.citationHealth Promotion Journal of Australia, 2019; 30(1):47-59en
dc.identifier.issn1036-1073en
dc.identifier.issn2201-1617en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/117953-
dc.description.abstractIssue addressed: Australian policymakers have acknowledged that implementing obesity prevention regulations is likely to be facilitated or hindered by public opinion. Accordingly, we investigated public views about possible regulations. Methods: Cross‐sectional survey of 2732 persons, designed to be representative of South Australians aged 15 years and over. Questions examined views about four obesity prevention regulations (mandatory front‐of‐pack nutrition labelling for packaged foods; zoning restrictions to prohibit fast food outlets near schools; taxes on unhealthy high fat foods; and taxes on sugar‐sweetened beverages). Levels of support (Likert scale) for each intervention and reasons for support/opposition were ascertained. Results: Views about the regulations were mixed: support was highest for mandatory nutrition labelling (90%) and lowest for taxes (40%‐42%). High levels of support for labelling were generally underpinned by a belief that this regulation would educate “Other” people about nutrition. Lower levels of support for zoning restrictions and taxes were associated with concerns about government overreach and the questionable effectiveness of these regulations in changing behaviours. Levels of support for each regulation, and reasons for support or opposition, differed by gender and socio‐economic status. Conclusion: Socio‐demographic differences in support appeared to reflect gendered responsibilities for food provision and concerns about the material constraints of socio‐economic deprivation. Engagement with target populations may offer insights to optimise the acceptability of regulations and minimise unintended social consequences. So what?: Resistance to regulations amongst socio‐economically disadvantaged target populations warrants attention from public health advocates. Failure to accommodate concerns identified may further marginalise these groups.en
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityLucy C. Farrell, Vivienne M. Moore, Megan J. Warin, Jackie M. Streeten
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherWileyen
dc.rights© 2018 Australian Health Promotion Associationen
dc.subjectHealth equity; health policy; obesity; quantitative methodsen
dc.titleWhy do the public support or oppose obesity prevention regulations? Results from a South Australian population surveyen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.identifier.rmid0030098050en
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/hpja.185en
dc.relation.granthttp://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/565501en
dc.identifier.pubid431486-
pubs.library.collectionPublic Health publicationsen
pubs.library.teamDS05en
pubs.verification-statusVerifieden
pubs.publication-statusPublisheden
dc.identifier.orcidFarrell, L. [0000-0003-3457-622X]en
dc.identifier.orcidMoore, V. [0000-0001-9505-6450]en
dc.identifier.orcidWarin, M. [0000-0001-8766-1087]en
dc.identifier.orcidStreet, J. [0000-0002-1033-4341]en
Appears in Collections:Public Health publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
hdl_117953.pdfAccepted version1.06 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.