Dataset Information

Changes in beverage purchases following the announcement and implementation of South Africa's Health Promotion Levy: an observational study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In 2016, South Africa announced an intention to levy a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs). In 2018, the country implemented an SSB tax of approximately 10%, known as the Health Promotion Levy (HPL). We aimed to assess changes in the purchases of beverages before and after the HPL announcement and implementation.

Methods

We used Kantar Europanel data on monthly household purchases between January, 2014, and March, 2019, among a sample of South African households (n=113 653 household-month observations) from all nine provinces to obtain per-capita sugar, calories, and volume from taxable and non-taxable beverages purchased before and after the HPL announcement and implementation. We describe survey-weighted means for each period, and regression-controlled predictions of outcomes and counterfactuals based on pre-HPL announcement trends, with bootstrapped 95% CIs, and stratify results by socioeconomic status.

Findings

Mean sugar from taxable beverage purchases fell from 16·25 g/capita per day (95% CI 15·80-16·70) to 14·26 (13·85-14·67) from the pre-HPL announcement to post-announcement period, and then to 10·63 g/capita per day (10·22-11·04) in the year after implementation. Mean volumes of taxable beverage purchases fell from 518·99 mL/capita per day (506·90-531·08) to 492·16 (481·28-503·04) from pre-announcement to post announcement, and then to 443·39 mL/capita per day (430·10-456·56) after implementation. Across these time periods, there was a small increase in the purchases of non-taxable beverages, from 283·45 mL/capita per day (273·34-293·56) pre-announcement to 312·94 (296·29-329·29) post implementation. When compared with pre-announcement counterfactual trends, reductions in taxable beverage purchase outcomes were significantly larger than the unadjusted survey-weighted observed reductions. Households with lower socioeconomic status purchased larger amounts of taxable beverages in the pre-announcement period than did households with higher socioeconomic status, but demonstrated bigger reductions after the tax was implemented.

Interpretation

The announcement and introduction of South Africa's HPL were followed by reductions in the sugar, calories, and volume of beverage purchases.

Funding

Bloomberg Philanthropies, International Development Research Centre, South African Medical Research Council, and the US National Institutes of Health.

SUBMITTER: Stacey N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8071067 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFew longitudinal studies examine the response to beverage taxes, especially among regular sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumers.ObjectiveThis study aimed to examine changes in objectively measured beverage purchases associated with the Philadelphia beverage tax on sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages.MethodsA longitudinal quasi-experiment was conducted with adult sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumers in Philadelphia (n = 306) and Baltimore (n = 297; a nontaxed comparison city). From 2016 to 2017 participants submitted all food and beverage receipts during a 2-wk period at: baseline (pretax) and 3, 6, and 12 mo posttax (91.0% retention; data analyzed in 2019). Linear mixed effects models were used to assess the difference-in-differences in total purchased ounces (fl oz) of taxed beverages in a 2-wk period in Philadelphia compared with Baltimore. Secondary analyses: 1) excluded weeks that contained major holidays at baseline and 12 mo (42% of measured weeks at baseline and 12 mo) because policy implementation timing necessitated data collection during holidays when SSB demand may be more inelastic, and 2) aggregated posttax time points to address serial correlation and low power.ResultsThere were no statistically significant changes in purchased ounces of taxed beverages in Philadelphia compared with Baltimore in the primary analysis. After excluding holiday purchasing, the tax was associated with statistically significant reductions of taxed beverage purchases at 3 and 6 mo (-157.1 ounces, 95% CI: -310.1, -4.1 and -175.1 ounces, 95% CI: -328.0, -22.3, respectively) but not 12 mo. Analyses aggregating all 6 wk of posttax time points showed statistically significant reductions (-203.7 ounces, 95% CI: -399.6, -7.8).ConclusionsA sweetened beverage tax was not associated with reduced taxed beverage purchases among SSB consumers 12 mo posttax in the full sample. Both secondary analyses excluding holiday purchasing or aggregating posttax time periods found reductions in taxed beverage purchases ranging from -4.9 to -12.5 ounces per day. Larger longitudinal studies are needed to further understand tax effects.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption is positively associated with obesity, type 2 diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. The World Health Organization recommends that member states implement effective taxes on SSBs to reduce consumption. The United Kingdom Soft Drinks Industry Levy (SDIL) is a two-tiered tax, announced in March 2016 and implemented in April 2018. Drinks with ?8 g of sugar per 100 ml (higher levy tier) are taxed at £0.24 per litre, drinks with ?5 to <8 g of sugar per 100 ml (lower levy tier) are taxed at £0.18 per litre, and drinks with <5 g sugar per 100 ml (no levy) are not taxed. Milk-based drinks, pure fruit juices, drinks sold as powder, and drinks with >1.2% alcohol by volume are exempt. We aimed to determine if the announcement of the SDIL was associated with anticipatory changes in purchases of soft drinks prior to implementation of the SDIL in April 2018. We explored differences in the volume of and amount of sugar in household purchases of drinks in each levy tier at 2 years post announcement. METHODS AND FINDINGS:We used controlled interrupted time series to compare observed changes associated with the announcement of the SDIL to the counterfactual scenario of no announcement. We used data from Kantar Worldpanel, a commercial household purchasing panel with approximately 30,000 British members that includes linked nutritional data on purchases. We conducted separate analyses for drinks liable for the SDIL in the higher, lower, and no-levy tiers controlling with household purchase volumes of toiletries. At 2 years post announcement, there was no difference in volume of or sugar from purchases of higher-levy-tier drinks compared to the counterfactual of no announcement. In contrast, a reversal of the existing upward trend in volume (ml) of and amount of sugar (g) in purchases of lower-levy-tier drinks was seen. These changes led to a -96.1 ml (95% confidence interval [CI] -144.2 to -48.0) reduction in volume and -6.4 g (95% CI -9.8 to -3.1) reduction in sugar purchased in these drinks per household per week. There was a reversal of the existing downward trend in the amount of sugar in household purchases of the no-levy drinks but no change in volume purchased. At 2 years post announcement, these changes led to a 6.1 g (95% CI 3.9-8.2) increase in sugar purchased in these drinks per household per week. There was no evidence that volume of or amount of sugar in purchases of all drinks combined was different from the counterfactual. This is an observational study, and changes other than the SDIL may have been responsible for the results reported. Purchases consumed outside of the home were not accounted for. CONCLUSIONS:The announcement of the UK SDIL was associated with reductions in volume and sugar purchased in lower-levy-tier drinks before implementation. These were offset by increases in sugar purchased from no-levy drinks. These findings may reflect reformulation of drinks from the lower levy to no-levy tier with removal of some but not all sugar, alongside changes in consumer attitudes and beliefs. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN18042742.

Project description:Study questionWhat has been the effect on purchases of beverages from stores in Mexico one year after implementation of the excise tax on sugar sweetened beverages?MethodsIn this observational study the authors used data on the purchase of beverages in Mexico from January 2012 to December 2014 from an unbalanced panel of 6253 households providing 205 112 observations in 53 cities with more than 50 000 inhabitants. To test whether the post-tax trend in purchases was significantly different from the pretax trend, the authors used a difference in difference fixed effects model, which adjusts for both macroeconomic variables that can affect the purchase of beverages over time, and pre-existing trends. The variables used in the analysis included demographic information on household composition (age and sex of household members) and socioeconomic status (low, middle, and high). The authors compared the predicted volumes (mL/capita/day) of taxed and untaxed beverages purchased in 2014-the observed post-tax period-with the estimated volumes that would have been purchased if the tax had not been implemented (counterfactual) based on pretax trends.Study answer and limitationsRelative to the counterfactual in 2014, purchases of taxed beverages decreased by an average of 6% (-12 mL/capita/day), and decreased at an increasing rate up to a 12% decline by December 2014. All three socioeconomic groups reduced purchases of taxed beverages, but reductions were higher among the households of low socioeconomic status, averaging a 9% decline during 2014, and up to a 17% decrease by December 2014 compared with pretax trends. Purchases of untaxed beverages were 4% (36 mL/capita/day) higher than the counterfactual, mainly driven by an increase in purchases of bottled plain water.What this study addsThe tax on sugar sweetened beverages was associated with reductions in purchases of taxed beverages and increases in purchases of untaxed beverages. Continued monitoring is needed to understand purchases longer term, potential substitutions, and health implications.Funding, competing interests, data sharingThis work was supported by grants from Bloomberg Philanthropies and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and by the Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública and the Carolina Population Center. The authors have no competing interests. No additional data are available.

Project description:ImportanceData are needed to evaluate community interventions to reduce consumption of sugary drinks. Supermarket sales data can be used for this purpose.ObjectiveTo compare beverage sales in Howard County, Maryland (HC), with sales in comparison stores in a contiguous state before and during a 3-year campaign to reduce consumption of sugary beverages.Design, setting, and partipicantsThis observational experiment with a control group included 15 HC supermarkets and 17 comparison supermarkets. Weekly beverage sales data at baseline (January 1 to December 31, 2012) and from campaign years 1 to 3 (January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2015) were analyzed. A difference-in-differences (DID) regression compared the volume sales per product per week in the HC and comparison stores, controlling for mean product price, competitor's product price, product size, weekly local temperature, and manufacturer.ExposuresThe campaign message was to reduce consumption of all sugary drinks. Television advertising, digital marketing, direct mail, outdoor advertising, social media, and earned media during the 3-year period created 17 million impressions. Community partners successfully advocated for public policies to encourage healthy beverage consumption in schools, child care, health care, and government settings.Main outcomes and measuresSales were tracked of sugary drinks highlighted in the campaign, including regular soda, sports drinks, and fruit drinks. Sales of diet soda and 100% juice were also tracked. Sales data are expressed as mean fluid ounces sold per product, per store, per week.ResultsRegular soda sales in the 15 HC supermarkets decreased (-19.7%) from 2012 through 2015, whereas sales remained stable (0.8%) in the 17 comparison supermarkets (DID adjusted mean, -369 fl oz; 95% CI, -469 to -269 fl oz; P < .01). Fruit drink sales decreased (-15.3%) in HC stores and remained stable (-0.6%) in comparison stores (DID adjusted mean, -342 fl oz; 95% CI, -466 to -220 fl oz; P < .001). Sales of 100% juice decreased more in HC (-15.0%) than comparison (-2.1%) stores (DID mean, -576 fl oz; 95% CI, -776 to -375 fl oz; P < .001). Sales of sports drinks (-86.3 fl oz; 95% CI, -343.6 to 170.9 fl oz) and diet soda (-17.8 in HC stores vs -11.3 in comparison stores; DID adjusted mean, -78.9 fl oz; 95% CI, -182.1 to 24.4 fl oz) decreased in both communities, but the decreases were not significantly different between groups.Conclusions and relevanceA locally designed, multicomponent campaign to reduce consumption of sugary drinks was associated with an accelerated decrease in sales of regular soda, fruit drinks, and 100% juice. This policy-focused campaign provides a road map for other communities to reduce consumption of sugary drinks.

Project description:IntroductionU.S. policy actions focus on reducing sugar-sweetened beverage purchases. Yet, there are no studies on trends in overall purchase distribution and how it has changed by key subpopulations. This study examined changes in distributions of total sugar-sweetened beverage purchases and its major subtypes (regular carbonated soft drinks and fruit/sports/energy drinks) in 2002-2014 and distinguished among low, moderate, and high purchasers.MethodsLongitudinal data on sugar-sweetened beverage purchases of U.S. households from the 2002-2014 Nielsen Homescan Panel were used. Sugar-sweetened beverages were defined as all caloric non-alcoholic beverages containing added sugars. Longitudinal quantile regression model examined trends across distributions (from quantile 25 to 95) of purchases (measured in kcal/day/capita), while accounting for households' unobserved differences. All statistical analyses were conducted in 2019.ResultsAll households across the total purchase distribution significantly reduced their purchases. High purchasers made less proportional reductions than low purchasers (e.g., 35% at 95th quantile vs 62% at 25th quantile). However, the smaller relative reductions among higher purchasers translated into larger absolute decreases (e.g., 134 kcal/day/capita at 95th quantile vs 23 kcal/day/capita at 25th quantile). Similar patterns in heterogeneity were observed across sugar-sweetened beverage subtype distributions and among racial/ethnic and income groups. In addition, there were significant racial/ethnic and income disparities in total sugar-sweetened beverage purchases in 2002-2003. Although racial/ethnic disparities among higher purchasers improved, income disparity patterns at all purchase levels persisted into 2013-2014.ConclusionsFrom 2002‒2003 to 2013-2014, U.S. households at all purchase levels made meaningful reductions in sugar-sweetened beverage purchases in both absolute and relative terms. Furthermore, racial/ethnic disparities in total sugar-sweetened beverage purchases narrowed, but income disparity patterns persisted.

Project description:BackgroundBeverages, especially sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), have been increasingly subject to policies aimed at reducing their consumption as part of measures to tackle obesity. However, precision targeting of policies is difficult as information on what types of consumers they might affect, and to what degree, is missing. We fill this gap by creating a typology of beverage consumers in Great Britain (GB) based on observed beverage purchasing behaviour to determine what distinct types of beverage consumers exist, and what their socio-demographic (household) characteristics, dietary behaviours, and weight status are.Methods and findingsWe used cross-sectional latent class analysis to characterise patterns of beverage purchases. We used data from the 2016 GB Kantar Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) panel, a large representative household purchase panel of food and beverages brought home, and restricted our analyses to consumers who purchase beverages regularly (i.e., >52 l per household member annually) (n = 8,675). Six categories of beverages were used to classify households into latent classes: SSBs; diet beverages; fruit juices and milk-based beverages; beer and cider; wine; and bottled water. Multinomial logistic regression and linear regression were used to relate class membership to household characteristics, self-reported weight status, and other dietary behaviours, derived from GB Kantar FMCG. Seven latent classes were identified, characterised primarily by higher purchases of 1 or 2 categories of beverages: 'SSB' (18% of the sample; median SSB volume = 49.4 l/household member/year; median diet beverage volume = 38.0 l), 'Diet' (16%; median diet beverage volume = 94.4 l), 'Fruit & Milk' (6%; median fruit juice/milk-based beverage volume = 30.0 l), 'Beer & Cider' (7%; median beer and cider volume = 36.3 l; median diet beverage volume = 55.6 l), 'Wine' (18%; median wine volume = 25.5 l; median diet beverage volume = 34.3 l), 'Water' (4%; median water volume = 46.9 l), and 'Diverse' (30%; diversity of purchases, including median SSB volume = 22.4 l). Income was positively associated with being classified in the Diverse class, whereas low social grade was more likely for households in the classes SSB, Diet, and Beer & Cider. Obesity (BMI > 30 kg/m2) was more prevalent in the class Diet (41.2%, 95% CI 37.7%-44.7%) despite households obtaining little energy from beverages in that class (17.9 kcal/household member/day, 95% CI 16.2-19.7). Overweight/obesity (BMI > 25 kg/m2) was above average in the class SSB (66.8%, 95% CI 63.7%-69.9%). When looking at all groceries, households from the class SSB had higher total energy purchases (1,943.6 kcal/household member/day, 95% CI 1,901.7-1,985.6), a smaller proportion of energy from fruits and vegetables (6.0%, 95% CI 5.8%-6.3%), and a greater proportion of energy from less healthy food and beverages (54.6%, 95% CI 54.0%-55.1%) than other classes. A greater proportion of energy from sweet snacks was observed for households in the classes SSB (18.5%, 95% CI 18.1%-19.0%) and Diet (18.8%, 95% CI 18.3%-19.3%). The main limitation of our analyses, in common with other studies, is that our data do not include information on food and beverage purchases that are consumed outside the home.ConclusionsAmongst households that regularly purchase beverages, those that mainly purchased high volumes of SSBs or diet beverages were at greater risk of obesity and tended to purchase less healthy foods, including a high proportion of energy from sweet snacks. These households might additionally benefit from policies targeting unhealthy foods, such as sweet snacks, as a way of reducing excess energy intake.

Project description:IntroductionFive U.S. states have proposed policies to require health warnings on sugar-sweetened beverages, but warnings' effects on actual purchase behavior remain uncertain. This study evaluated the impact of sugar-sweetened beverage health warnings on sugar-sweetened beverage purchases.Study designParticipants completed one study visit to a life-sized replica of a convenience store in North Carolina. Participants chose six items (two beverages, two foods, and two household products). One item was randomly selected for them to purchase and take home. Participants also completed a questionnaire. Researchers collected data in 2018 and conducted analyses in 2019.Setting/participantsParticipants were a demographically diverse convenience sample of 400 adult sugar-sweetened beverage consumers (usual consumption ≥12 ounces/week).InterventionResearch staff randomly assigned participants to a health warning arm (sugar-sweetened beverages in the store displayed a front-of-package health warning) or a control arm (sugar-sweetened beverages displayed a control label).Main outcome measuresThe primary trial outcome was sugar-sweetened beverage calories purchased. Secondary outcomes included reactions to trial labels (e.g., negative emotions) and sugar-sweetened beverage perceptions and attitudes (e.g., healthfulness).ResultsAll 400 participants completed the trial and were included in analyses. Health warning arm participants were less likely to be Hispanic and to have overweight/obesity than control arm participants. In intent-to-treat analyses adjusting for Hispanic ethnicity and overweight/obesity, health warnings led to lower sugar-sweetened beverage purchases (adjusted difference, -31.4 calories; 95% CI= -57.9, -5.0). Unadjusted analyses yielded similar results (difference, -32.9 calories; 95% CI= -58.9, -7.0). Compared with the control label, sugar-sweetened beverage health warnings also led to higher intentions to limit sugar-sweetened beverage consumption and elicited more attention, negative emotions, thinking about the harms of sugar-sweetened beverage consumption, and anticipated social interactions. Trial arms did not differ on perceptions of sugar-sweetened beverages' added sugar content, healthfulness, appeal/coolness, or disease risk.ConclusionsBrief exposure to health warnings reduced sugar-sweetened beverage purchases in this naturalistic RCT. Sugar-sweetened beverage health warning policies could discourage sugar-sweetened beverage consumption.Trial registrationThis study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT03511937.

Project description:BackgroundOn October 1, 2014, the Chilean government modified its previous sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) tax, increasing the tax rate from 13% to 18% on industrialized beverages with high levels of sugar (H-SSBs) (greater than 6.25 grams [g] sugar/100 milliliters [mL]) and decreasing the tax rate from 13% to 10% on industrialized beverages with low or no sugar (L-SSBs) (less than 6.25 g sugar/100 mL). This study examines changes in beverage prices and household beverage purchases following the implementation of the tax reform.Methods and findingsWe used longitudinal data collected between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2015, from 2,000 households. We defined the pretax period as January 1, 2013, to September 30, 2014, and the posttax period as October 1, 2014, to December 31, 2015. We conducted a pre-post analysis for changes in prices and purchases, with the latter examined by volume and calories. We compared posttax changes in prices and purchases to a counterfactual, defined as what would have been expected in the posttax period based on pretax trends. All results are stated as comparisons to this counterfactual. We linked beverages at the bar code level to nutrition facts panel data collected by a team of Chilean nutritionists who categorized them by taxation level and beverage subcategory, which included carbonated and noncarbonated H-SSBs and concentrated, ready-to-drink L-SSBs and untaxed beverages. We reconstituted concentrated beverages and analyzed all beverages using as-consumed volumes and calories. Posttax monthly prices of H-SSBs increased, but these changes were small. Prices of carbonated H-SSBs increased by 2.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0%-3.0%), while those of noncarbonated H-SSBs increased by 3.9% (95% CI 1.6%-6.2%). Prices of L-SSB concentrates decreased after the tax by 6.7% (95% CI -8.2%--4.6%), and prices of ready-to-drink L-SSBs increased by 1.5% (95% CI 0.3%-2.7%). Households decreased monthly per capita purchases of H-SSBs by 3.4% by volume (95% CI -5.9%--0.9%) and 4.0% by calories (95% CI -6.3%--1.9%), and this change was greater among high socioeconomic status (SES) households. The volume of household purchases of L-SSBs increased 10.7% (95% CI 7.5%-13.9%), while that of untaxed beverage purchases decreased by 3.1% (95% CI -5.1%--1.1%). The main limitation of this study was that there was no control group, so we were unable to assess the causal impact of the tax.ConclusionsThe modifications of Chile's SSB tax were small, and observed changes in prices and purchases of beverages after the tax were also small. Our results are consistent with previous evidence indicating that small increases in SSB taxes are unlikely to promote large enough changes in SSB purchases to reduce obesity and noncommunicable diseases (NCDs).