Retailer perspectives on sugar-sweetened beverage taxes in the California Bay Area
The sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) industry has claimed that food and beverage retailers are opposed to SSB taxes. In 2018 and 2019, we formally evaluated retailers’ perceptions of SSB taxes using semi-structured interviews (including open- and closed-ended questions) with 103 randomly selected reta...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2020-09-01
|
| Series: | Preventive Medicine Reports |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211335520300899 |
| _version_ | 1818532101534777344 |
|---|---|
| author | Julian Ponce Haoxuan Yuan Dean Schillinger Hina Mahmood Matthew Lee Jen Falbe Ryane Daniels Kristine A. Madsen |
| author_facet | Julian Ponce Haoxuan Yuan Dean Schillinger Hina Mahmood Matthew Lee Jen Falbe Ryane Daniels Kristine A. Madsen |
| author_sort | Julian Ponce |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) industry has claimed that food and beverage retailers are opposed to SSB taxes. In 2018 and 2019, we formally evaluated retailers’ perceptions of SSB taxes using semi-structured interviews (including open- and closed-ended questions) with 103 randomly selected retailers (50 corner and liquor stores; 28 chain convenience, drug, and mass-merchandise stores; 18 chain supermarkets and discount supermarkets; and 7 independent supermarkets) across 3 cities with SSB taxes (Berkeley, Oakland, and San Francisco); interviews occurred in 2018 and 2019 (approximately 3 years, 1 year and 6 months post tax-implementation, respectively). A majority of both small and large retailers reported the tax had only a minimal effect on their business (70%). About half of retailers believed that other cities should adopt SSB taxes (53%), and were supportive of a statewide SSB tax (53%), noting it would level the playing field and better support health in their communities. Retailers’ responses did not differ based on neighborhood income, and only 2 responses differed significantly between large and small retailers. Only 2 of 103 retailers reported raising the price of a non-beverage product in response to the tax, specifically raising the price of snack foods of low nutritional quality and alcoholic beverages. A majority of retailers in 3 California cities with SSB taxes have no concerns regarding the tax, endorse the health goals of SSB taxes and support statewide expansion of SSB tax policies. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-11T17:41:08Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-686b899f667c41b4a8a9f9b1fbbf29fb |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2211-3355 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-11T17:41:08Z |
| publishDate | 2020-09-01 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Preventive Medicine Reports |
| spelling | doaj.art-686b899f667c41b4a8a9f9b1fbbf29fb2022-12-22T00:56:31ZengElsevierPreventive Medicine Reports2211-33552020-09-0119101129Retailer perspectives on sugar-sweetened beverage taxes in the California Bay AreaJulian Ponce0Haoxuan Yuan1Dean Schillinger2Hina Mahmood3Matthew Lee4Jen Falbe5Ryane Daniels6Kristine A. Madsen7University of California, Berkeley, School of Public Health, United StatesUniversity of California, San Francisco, Division of General Internal Medicine and Center for Vulnerable Populations, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, United StatesUniversity of California, San Francisco, Division of General Internal Medicine and Center for Vulnerable Populations, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, United StatesUniversity of California, Berkeley, School of Public Health, United StatesUniversity of California, Berkeley, School of Public Health, United StatesUniversity of California, Davis, Human Development and Family Studies Program, Department of Human Ecology, United StatesUniversity of California, San Francisco, Division of General Internal Medicine and Center for Vulnerable Populations, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, United StatesUniversity of California, Berkeley, School of Public Health, United States; Corresponding author at: 2121 Berkeley Way West, Room 6140, Berkeley, CA 94720-7360, United States.The sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) industry has claimed that food and beverage retailers are opposed to SSB taxes. In 2018 and 2019, we formally evaluated retailers’ perceptions of SSB taxes using semi-structured interviews (including open- and closed-ended questions) with 103 randomly selected retailers (50 corner and liquor stores; 28 chain convenience, drug, and mass-merchandise stores; 18 chain supermarkets and discount supermarkets; and 7 independent supermarkets) across 3 cities with SSB taxes (Berkeley, Oakland, and San Francisco); interviews occurred in 2018 and 2019 (approximately 3 years, 1 year and 6 months post tax-implementation, respectively). A majority of both small and large retailers reported the tax had only a minimal effect on their business (70%). About half of retailers believed that other cities should adopt SSB taxes (53%), and were supportive of a statewide SSB tax (53%), noting it would level the playing field and better support health in their communities. Retailers’ responses did not differ based on neighborhood income, and only 2 responses differed significantly between large and small retailers. Only 2 of 103 retailers reported raising the price of a non-beverage product in response to the tax, specifically raising the price of snack foods of low nutritional quality and alcoholic beverages. A majority of retailers in 3 California cities with SSB taxes have no concerns regarding the tax, endorse the health goals of SSB taxes and support statewide expansion of SSB tax policies.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211335520300899PolicyPublic healthSugar-sweetened beveragesPrimary prevention |
| spellingShingle | Julian Ponce Haoxuan Yuan Dean Schillinger Hina Mahmood Matthew Lee Jen Falbe Ryane Daniels Kristine A. Madsen Retailer perspectives on sugar-sweetened beverage taxes in the California Bay Area Preventive Medicine Reports Policy Public health Sugar-sweetened beverages Primary prevention |
| title | Retailer perspectives on sugar-sweetened beverage taxes in the California Bay Area |
| title_full | Retailer perspectives on sugar-sweetened beverage taxes in the California Bay Area |
| title_fullStr | Retailer perspectives on sugar-sweetened beverage taxes in the California Bay Area |
| title_full_unstemmed | Retailer perspectives on sugar-sweetened beverage taxes in the California Bay Area |
| title_short | Retailer perspectives on sugar-sweetened beverage taxes in the California Bay Area |
| title_sort | retailer perspectives on sugar sweetened beverage taxes in the california bay area |
| topic | Policy Public health Sugar-sweetened beverages Primary prevention |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211335520300899 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT julianponce retailerperspectivesonsugarsweetenedbeveragetaxesinthecaliforniabayarea AT haoxuanyuan retailerperspectivesonsugarsweetenedbeveragetaxesinthecaliforniabayarea AT deanschillinger retailerperspectivesonsugarsweetenedbeveragetaxesinthecaliforniabayarea AT hinamahmood retailerperspectivesonsugarsweetenedbeveragetaxesinthecaliforniabayarea AT matthewlee retailerperspectivesonsugarsweetenedbeveragetaxesinthecaliforniabayarea AT jenfalbe retailerperspectivesonsugarsweetenedbeveragetaxesinthecaliforniabayarea AT ryanedaniels retailerperspectivesonsugarsweetenedbeveragetaxesinthecaliforniabayarea AT kristineamadsen retailerperspectivesonsugarsweetenedbeveragetaxesinthecaliforniabayarea |