School of Public Health, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Department of Gender Studies and Social Analysis, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Health Promot J Austr. 2019 Jan;30(1):47-59. doi: 10.1002/hpja.185. Epub 2018 Aug 5.
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.
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.
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.
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.
澳大利亚政策制定者已经认识到，实施肥胖预防法规可能会受到公众意见的促进或阻碍。因此，我们调查了公众对可能的法规的看法。
对 2732 名年龄在 15 岁及以上的南澳大利亚人的横断面调查，旨在代表南澳大利亚人。问题调查了对四项肥胖预防法规的看法（对包装食品进行强制性的包装前营养标签；限制在学校附近开设快餐店；对不健康的高脂肪食品征税；对含糖饮料征税）。确定了对每种干预措施的支持程度（李克特量表）以及支持/反对的原因。
对这些法规的看法不一：对强制性营养标签的支持率最高（90%），对税收的支持率最低（40%-42%）。对标签的高度支持通常基于这样一种信念，即这一规定将教育“其他人”关于营养的知识。对分区限制和税收的支持率较低，与对政府过度干预以及这些法规在改变行为方面的有效性存在疑问有关。对每项法规的支持程度以及支持或反对的原因，因性别和社会经济地位而异。
支持程度的社会人口统计学差异似乎反映了对食品供应的性别责任以及对社会经济贫困物质限制的担忧。与目标人群的接触可能会提供优化法规可接受性和最小化意外社会后果的见解。那么问题来了？：在社会经济处于不利地位的目标人群中对法规的抵制引起了公共卫生倡导者的关注。如果不考虑到所确定的问题，可能会进一步使这些群体边缘化。
