Purtle Jonathan, Langellier Brent, Lê-Scherban Félice
Departments of Health Management & Policy (Drs Purtle and Langellier) and Epidemiology & Biostatistics (Dr Lê-Scherban), Drexel University Dornsife School of Public Health, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
J Public Health Manag Pract. 2018 Jan/Feb;24(1):4-8. doi: 10.1097/PHH.0000000000000563.
Policymakers are increasingly proposing sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxes as an evidence-based strategy to reduce chronic disease risk; and local health departments (LHDs) are well-positioned to play a role in SSB policy development and advocacy. However, most SSB tax proposals fail to become law and limited empiric guidance exists to inform advocacy efforts. In June 2016, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, passed an SSB tax.
To identify features of the Philadelphia SSB tax policymaking process that contributed to the proposal's passage.
Qualitative case study. Semistructured interviews were conducted with key informants closely involved with the policymaking process. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Local news media about the SSB tax proposal were analyzed to triangulate interview findings. Analysis was conducted in NVivo 10 using inductive qualitative content analysis.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, during the SSB tax policymaking in process.
Nine key informants (2 city councilpersons, 4 city agency officials, 1 community-based advocate, 1 news reporter, and 1 researcher).
The Philadelphia SSB tax proposal was introduced with the explicit goal of financing universal prekindergarten and deliberately not framed as a health intervention. This framing shifted contentious debates about government involvement in individual behavior toward discussions about how to finance universal prekindergarten, a goal for which broad support existed. The LHD played an important role in communicating research evidence about potential health benefits of the SSB tax proposal at the end of the policymaking process.
During local SSB tax policy development processes, LHD officials and other advocates should encourage policymakers to design SSB tax policies so that revenue is directed toward community investments for which broad public support exists. When communicating with policymakers and the public, LHDs should consider emphasizing how SSB tax revenue will be used in addition to presenting evidence about the potential health benefits of the SSB tax at the local level.
政策制定者越来越多地提议征收含糖饮料（SSB）税，作为降低慢性病风险的循证策略；地方卫生部门（LHDs）在SSB政策制定和宣传方面具有重要作用。然而，大多数SSB税提案未能成为法律，且缺乏有限的实证指导来为宣传工作提供信息。2016年6月，宾夕法尼亚州费城通过了一项SSB税。
确定费城SSB税政策制定过程中有助于该提案通过的特征。
定性案例研究。对密切参与政策制定过程的关键信息提供者进行了半结构化访谈。访谈进行了录音和转录。分析了关于SSB税提案的当地新闻媒体，以验证访谈结果。使用归纳定性内容分析法在NVivo 10中进行分析。
宾夕法尼亚州费城，在SSB税政策制定过程中。
九名关键信息提供者（2名市议员、4名市政府机构官员、1名社区倡导者、1名新闻记者和1名研究人员）。
费城SSB税提案提出的明确目标是为普及学前教育提供资金，且刻意未被框定为一项健康干预措施。这种框架将关于政府干预个人行为的有争议辩论，转向了关于如何为普及学前教育筹集资金的讨论，而普及学前教育这一目标得到了广泛支持。LHD在政策制定过程后期传达关于SSB税提案潜在健康益处的研究证据方面发挥了重要作用。
在地方SSB税政策制定过程中，LHD官员和其他倡导者应鼓励政策制定者设计SSB税政策，以便将税收用于有广泛公众支持的社区投资。在与政策制定者和公众沟通时，LHD应考虑除了在地方层面展示关于SSB税潜在健康益处的证据外，还应强调SSB税收将如何使用。
