acceptable behaviour? government intervention on unhealthy foods

@BXconference #BX2015

Acceptable behaviour? Government intervention on unhealthy foodsBobby Duffy, Ipsos MORI

• Asked people about the acceptability of different types and levels of government intervention on unhealthy foods

• Updates study run in 2010• Based on an on an online survey of 16,259 across 22 countries• Approximately c500 -1,000 individuals participated on a country

by country basis, aged up to 64 • Conducted 24 July to 7 August 2015• Data are weighted to the population profile of each country

The study…

We looked at four degrees of Government intervention – and also asked about interventions in business practice

FOR

CE O

F IN

TERVENTIO

NInformationi

Provide information about changing behaviour

IncentivesProvide incentives to change behaviour

! Restrictions

Ban outright

Make behaviour more expensive or difficult

Ban behaviour

Make companies act to change behaviourCompanies

Thinking about what people choose to eat. What, if anything, do you think government should do?

Slight shift in opinion from 2010 – but mostly just all types of intervention being less appealing

2010

53%

60%

88%

82%

90%85%

77%

53%

55%

82%

Provide information about healthy eating

Provide incentives, such as health food vouchers

Make companies promote healthy choices

Make unhealthy foods more expensive

Ban unhealthy foods

Base: c.500 - 1,000 residents aged 16-64 (18-64 in the US and Canada) in each country, August 2015 and November 2010 | Source: Ipsos Global @dvisor

Government should provide information to people on how to eat more healthily

Providing information is widely supported – although still a 20 percentage point range…

TurkeySouth Africa

AustraliaMexico

IndiaSouth Korea

CanadaGreat Britain

BrazilSpain

GermanyHungary

ArgentinaItaly

RussiaPoland

BelgiumJapan

Saudi ArabiaSweden

USAFrance

95%91%91%

90%89%

88%87%87%

86%86%86%

85%85%85%

84%84%

83%81%

79%79%

78%75%

I N F O R M AT I O N

Tend to support / strongly support

Base: c.500 - 1,000 residents aged 16-64 (18-64 in the US and Canada) in each country, August 2015 | Source: Ipsos Global @dvisor

Government should provide incentives, such as money off vouchers for healthy foods to encourage people to eat more healthily

Broad support for incentives, but Sweden a very notable exception…

MexicoHungary

South AfricaBrazilIndia

ArgentinaItaly

Saudi ArabiaRussiaSpain

AustraliaCanadaBelgiumPoland

South KoreaGreat Britain

GermanyFranceJapan

USASweden

89%87%

85%85%

84%84%84%

83%81%

79%76%76%76%76%

72%72%72%

66%66%66%

44%I N C E N T I V E S



Government should introduce laws to make it more expensive to eat unhealthy foods

Support decreases for more interventionist policy using price mechanisms, with much wider range between countries (48 ppts)

IndiaTurkeyRussia

Saudi ArabiaMexico

SpainItaly

JapanBrazil

South AfricaArgentina

PolandHungary

Great BritainSouth Korea

AustraliaBelgiumSwedenCanada

GermanyFrance

USA

79%72%

70%63%63%

60%56%

55%53%53%

52%51%

49%49%

48%47%47%

44%43%

42%39%

31%R E S T R I C T I O N S



Government should introduce laws to ban unhealthy foods

And there is a massive cultural divide on outright bans: 60ppt range

TurkeyIndia

RussiaSouth KoreaSaudi Arabia

MexicoJapanSpain

ItalyArgentina

PolandSouth Africa

BrazilHungaryGermany

FranceAustralia

Great BritainCanadaBelgium

USASweden

87%83%

80%79%

72%70%

68%67%

64%63%

58%51%

50%48%

44%38%

37%37%

36%34%

28%27%

B A N O U T R I G H T



Government should not get involved in what people choose to eat

People are not consistent in their views: significant proportions also say that government should not get involved in what people choose to eat…

USAPolandJapan

ArgentinaBelgium

IndiaMexico

HungaryFranceRussia

BrazilSouth Africa

SpainTurkey

CanadaAustralia

Great BritainItaly

SwedenSaudi ArabiaSouth Korea

Germany

71%65%

63%61%61%

60%59%59%59%

58%56%

55%55%

53%53%53%53%

51%50%

44%44%

43%

N O G O V E R N M E N T I N V O LV E M E N T




68% agreed that “government should introduce laws to ban unhealthy foods OR should introduce laws to make it more expensive to make unhealthy foods”

56% agreed that “government should not get involved in what people choose to eat”

35%

…one third of people agree that both government should not get involved and that they should ban unhealthy food/increase their price

Government should make food producers and shops promote healthy choices (e.g. through special offers on healthy foods or labelling which makes it clear which food is healthy)

Government intervention in business generally popular, less so in the US

TurkeyIndia

RussiaSouth Africa

BrazilItaly

Great BritainMexicoFrance

AustraliaPoland

GermanyHungary

ArgentinaBelgium

SpainCanada

Saudi ArabiaJapan

SwedenSouth Korea

USA

95%88%88%

87%86%86%86%

85%85%

84%84%84%

83%82%82%

81%80%

79%77%

74%70%

62%

C O M PA N I E S



What, if anything, do you think government should do?

Countries that support price mechanisms also tend to support outright bans – although some exceptions, eg Sweden and South Korea

25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80%25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

85%

ARGENTINA

AUSTRALIA

BELGIUM

BRAZIL

CANADA

FRANCE

GERMANY

UK

HUNGARY

INDIA

ITALY

JAPAN

MEXICO

POLAND

RUSSIASAUDI ARABIA

SOUTH AFRICA

SOUTH KOREA

SPAIN

SWEDEN

TURKEY

UNITED STATES

R2 =0.722

PRICE INCREASES

BA

N O

UTR

IGH

T

LIBERALISM

PATERNALISM

Strongly support/tend to support policy


What, if anything, do you think government should do?

Authoritarians and incentivisers – some correlation although some clear preferences between cultures

40% 45% 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100%20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

ARGENTINA

AUSTRALIA

BELGIUMBRAZIL

CANADAFRANCE

GERMANY

UKHUNGARY

INDIA

ITALYJAPAN MEXICO

POLAND

RUSSIA

SAUDI ARABIA

SOUTH AFRICA

SOUTH KOREA

SPAIN

SWEDEN

TURKEY

UNITED STATESR2 =0.341

BANNING OVER INCENTIVES

INCENTIVES OVER BANNING

Tend to support/strongly support


PRICE INCREASES

BA

N O

UTR

IGH

T


Prevalence of obesity does not appear at all related to support for banning unhealthy foods

R2 = 0.60

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 3620%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

ARGENTINA

AUSTRALIABELGIUM

BRAZIL

CANADAFRANCE

GERMANYUK

HUNGARY

INDIA

ITALYJAPAN MEXICO

POLAND

RUSSIA

SAUDI ARABIA

SOUTH AFRICA

SOUTH KOREA

SPAIN

SWEDEN

TURKEY

UNITED STATES


PRICE INCREASES

BA

N O

UTR

IGH

T


Countries with a higher inequality of power more supportive of prohibitive legislation

Base: c.500 - 1,000 residents aged 16-64 (18-64 in the US and Canada) in each country, August 2015 | Source: Ipsos Global @dvisor; Hofstede Cultural Dimensions

30 40 50 60 70 80 90 10020%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

INDIA

RUSSIA

TURKEY

MEXICOITALY

SOUTH KOREA

POLANDARGENTINA

BRAZIL

JAPAN

SOUTH AFRICA

HUNGARY

CANADA

SPAIN

AUSTRALIA

FRANCE

BELGIUMUK

GERMANY

SWEDEN

UNITED STATES

R2 = 0.5369

POWER DISTANCE INDEX

STR

ON

GLY

SU

PPO

RT/

TEN

D T

O S

UPP

OR

T

• Public acceptability and permission are key challenges for the application of behavioural science in public policy

• Survey provides encouragement – and cause for caution/need for nuance

• Relatively widespread support for government intervention – maybe more than would expect?

• …but this varies significantly between countries: cultural context important

• …and it doesn’t mean people are consistent: we can hold contradictory views as individuals as much as in aggregate - doesn’t devalue opinion, need sensitive, tailored response

Conclusions

Base: c.1,000 residents aged 16-64 (18-64 in the US and Canada) in each country, August 2015 | Source: Ipsos Global @dvisor and DWP

@BXconference #BX2015

Thank [email protected]

acceptable behaviour? government intervention on unhealthy foods

Food