Centre for Sport and Social Impact, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.
Centre for Sport and Social Impact, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.
Public Health. 2020 Aug;185:212-217. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2020.04.043. Epub 2020 Jul 10.
To explore sports organisation members' attitudes to sponsorship of sport by energy-dense, nutrient-poor food and drink ('junk food') brands.
The study design is a cross-sectional study.
An online survey of adult members of three sports organisations that did not accept junk food sponsorship in Victoria, Australia in 2018: one was responsible for an elite team in a national competition (5000-10,000 members); one managed a team sport competition across Victoria (50,000-100,000 registered junior and adult participants, referees and coaches); and one administered a junior team sport competition for boys and girls in a major city (10,000-15,000 participants).
Most (71%) of the 2224 respondents reported it was important/very important that their organisation did not accept junk food sponsorship. A higher proportion was concerned/very concerned about junk food companies sponsoring children's sport (60%) compared with such companies sponsoring elite (49%, P < 0.001) or community adult (39%, P < 0.001) sport. A higher proportion of respondents were likely/very likely to support a policy that restricted junk food sponsorship of children's sport (84%), compared with a policy restricting sponsorship of elite (76%, P > 0.001) and adult community (74%, P > 0.001) sport. Two-thirds of respondents supported restricting junk food companies from sponsoring sport, even if fees for children's (66%) and community adult (65%) sport increased, or if membership and attendance costs for elite sport supporters increased (63%).
In the Australian context of this study, junk food sponsorship of sport, particularly children's sport, is a concern to members of sports organisations. Although still high, support for restricting such sponsorship declines if members perceive it will lead to increases in participation costs and decreases in participation opportunities. Initiatives restricting junk food sponsorship of sport are likely to receive strong support from the sports community, particularly when the focus is on children's sport, and participation costs and opportunities are not negatively impacted.
探讨体育组织成员对能量密集、营养贫乏的食品和饮料(“垃圾食品”)品牌赞助体育活动的态度。
本研究设计为横断面研究。
2018 年,对澳大利亚维多利亚州三个不接受垃圾食品赞助的体育组织的成年成员进行了在线调查:一个组织负责一项全国性比赛的精英团队(5000-10000 名成员);一个组织管理维多利亚州的团队运动比赛(50000-100000 名注册的青少年和成年参与者、裁判和教练);一个组织为一个主要城市的男孩和女孩管理一项青少年团队运动比赛(10000-15000 名参与者)。
在 2224 名受访者中,大多数(71%)人报告称,他们的组织不接受垃圾食品赞助非常重要/重要。与赞助精英运动(49%,P<0.001)或社区成人运动(39%,P<0.001)相比,更多的人关注/非常关注垃圾食品公司赞助儿童运动。与限制精英(76%,P>0.001)和社区成人(74%,P>0.001)运动赞助的政策相比,更多的受访者可能/非常可能支持限制儿童运动的垃圾食品赞助政策。三分之二的受访者支持限制垃圾食品公司赞助体育活动,即使儿童(66%)和社区成人(65%)体育活动的费用增加,或者精英体育支持者的会员费和出席费增加(63%)。
在本研究的澳大利亚背景下,垃圾食品赞助体育活动,特别是儿童体育活动,是体育组织成员关注的问题。尽管支持率仍然很高,但如果成员认为这将导致参与成本增加和参与机会减少,那么对这种赞助的支持就会下降。限制垃圾食品赞助体育活动的举措可能会得到体育界的大力支持,尤其是当重点是儿童体育活动,并且参与成本和机会不受负面影响时。