Department of Behavioral, Social, and Health Education Sciences, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Rd, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA.
Division of Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, 1300 S. 2nd Street, Minneapolis, MN, 55454, USA.
Global Health. 2024 Nov 14;20(1):79. doi: 10.1186/s12992-024-01073-5.
The beverage industry's role in undermining nutrition-related population health is a growing global concern. Industry strategies that affect policy, science, and public opinion are increasingly exposed. However, those used in the retail space-known as market strategies-remain largely unspecified. The purpose of this study was to uncover the market strategies beverage companies use with US retailers to secure their influence and control in the primary setting where the public purchases their products-food retail.
We conducted a qualitative study based on multiple data sources: 49 interviews with industry insiders, including chain retail managers, independent store owners, and sales representatives and distributors of major food and beverage companies; 15 business files shared by participants, including written beverage marketing agreements and contracts; and 27 purposively sampled, publicly-available industry documents. All data were thematically analyzed.
We identified that beverage agreements, which dictate the products, space, marketing, and prices of company products in retail settings, are universal regardless of the retailer's market size. While ubiquitous, the agreement terms, services, and treatment beverage companies provided varied widely-with large US retail chains receiving superior opportunities, such as financial incentives and additional services, and independent and small chain retailers often experiencing disadvantaged, more expensive, non-negotiable terms. Despite this, companies also used several strategies that diminished concerns of differential treatment and thus effectively managed their reputation among independent and small chain retailers.
Findings suggest a use of the consolidated power among beverage companies with significant implications for the healthfulness of food retail settings. We conclude by highlighting key policy and legal targets that could be leveraged in the US to address power imbalances in the retailer-beverage company relationship and ultimately shift retail towards promoting public health.
饮料行业在破坏与营养相关的人口健康方面的作用是一个日益引起全球关注的问题。影响政策、科学和公众舆论的行业策略越来越多地被揭露出来。然而，那些在零售领域使用的策略——即市场策略——在很大程度上仍未被具体说明。本研究的目的是揭示饮料公司在美国零售商中使用的市场策略，以确保其在公众购买产品的主要场所——食品零售——的影响力和控制力。
我们进行了一项基于多种数据来源的定性研究：对 49 名业内人士进行了访谈，包括连锁零售经理、独立店主以及主要食品和饮料公司的销售代表和分销商；参与者分享了 15 份商业文件，包括书面饮料营销协议和合同；并对 27 份有针对性抽样的、公开的行业文件进行了分析。所有数据都进行了主题分析。
我们发现，无论零售商的市场规模如何，在零售环境中规定公司产品的产品、空间、营销和价格的饮料协议都是普遍存在的。虽然协议条款、服务和饮料公司提供的待遇存在很大差异——美国大型连锁零售商获得了更多的机会，如财务激励和额外服务，而独立和小型连锁零售商往往面临不利、更昂贵、不可协商的条款——但公司也使用了几种策略，减轻了对差别待遇的担忧，从而有效地管理了其在独立和小型连锁零售商中的声誉。
研究结果表明，饮料公司之间存在着权力的统一，这对食品零售环境的健康状况有着重大影响。我们最后强调了美国可以利用的关键政策和法律目标，以解决零售商与饮料公司关系中的权力不平衡问题，并最终促使零售转向促进公众健康。
