Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Public Health
Published in: BMC Public Health 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Debate

Use and cumulation of evidence from modelling studies to inform policy on food taxes and subsidies: biting off more than we can chew?

Authors: Ian Shemilt, Theresa M Marteau, Richard D Smith, David Ogilvie

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Food tax-subsidy policies are proposed to hold promise for helping to produce healthier patterns of food purchasing and consumption at population level. Evidence for their effects derives largely from simulation studies that explore the potential effects of untried policies using a mathematical modelling framework. This paper provides a critique first of the nature of the evidence derived from such simulation studies, and second of the challenges of cumulating that evidence to inform public health policy.

Discussion

Effects estimated by simulation studies of food taxes and subsidies can be expected to diverge in potentially important ways from those that would accrue in practice because these models are simplified, typically static, representations of complex adaptive systems. The level of confidence that can be placed in modelled estimates of effects is correspondingly low, and the level of associated uncertainty is high. Moreover, evidence from food tax-subsidy simulation studies cannot meaningfully be cumulated using currently available quantitative evidence synthesis methods, to reduce uncertainty about effects.

Summary

Simulation studies are critical for the initial phases of an incremental research process, for drawing together diverse evidence and exploring potential longer-term effects. While simulation studies of food taxes and subsidies provide a valuable and necessary input to the formulation of public health policy in this area, they are unlikely to be sufficient, and policy makers should not place excessive reliance on evidence from such studies, either singly or cumulatively. To reflect known and unknown limitations of the models, results of such studies should be interpreted cautiously as tentative projections. Modelling studies should increasingly be integrated with more empirical studies of the effects of food tax and subsidy policies in practice.
Literature
1.
Landon J, Graff H. What is the role of health-related food duties? London: National Heart Forum; 2012.
2.
Academy of Medical Royal Colleges. Measuring up: The medical profession’s prescription for the nation’s obesity crisis. London: Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; 2013.
3.
Sustain. A Children’s Future Fund: How food duties could provide the money to protect children’s health and the world they grow up in. London: Sustain; 2013.
4.
Mytton OT, Clarke D, Rayner M. Taxing unhealthy food and drinks to improve health. BMJ. 2012;344:e2931.CrossRefPubMed
5.
UK Faculty of Public Health. A duty on sugar sweetened beverages: A position statement. London: UK Faculty of Public Health; 2013.
6.
Shemilt I, Hollands GJ, Marteau TM, Nakamura R, Jebb SA, Kelly MP, et al. Economic instruments for population diet and physical activity behaviour change: a systematic scoping review. PLoS One. 2013;8(9):e75070.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Abdus S, Cawley J. Simulating the impact of a “fat tax” on body weight. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University; 2008.
8.
Allais O, Bertail P, Nichele V. The effects of a fat tax on French households’ purchases: A nutritional approach. Am J Agr Econ. 2010;92:228–45.CrossRef
9.
Andreyeva T, Chaloupka FJ, Brownell KD. Estimating the potential of taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages to reduce consumption and generate revenue. Prev Med. 2011;52:413–6.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Arnoult MH, Tiffin R, Traill WB. Models of nutrient demand, tax policy and public health impact. Reading: University of Reading; 2008.
11.
Bonnet C, Requillart V. Strategic pricing and health price policies. Toulouse: Toulouse School of Economics; 2011.
12.
Briggs ADM, Mytton OT, Kehlbacher A, Tiffin R, Rayner M, Scarborough P. Overall and income specific effect on prevalence of overweight and obesity of 20% sugar sweetened drink tax in UK: econometric and comparative risk assessment modelling study. BMJ. 2013;347:f6189.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
Chouinard HH, Davis DE, LaFrance JT, Perloff JM. Fat taxes: Big money for small change. Forum Health Econ Pol. 2007;10:2.
14.
Dharmasena S, Capps O. Intended and unintended consequences of a proposed national tax on sugar-sweetened beverages to combat the U.S. obesity problem. Health Econ. 2012;21:669–94.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Dong D, Lin B-H. Fruit and vegetable consumption by low-income Americans: Would a price reduction make a difference? Washington DC: US Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service; 2009.
16.
Finkelstein EA, Zhen C, Nonnemaker J, Todd JE. Impact of targeted beverage taxes on higher- and lower-income households. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170:2028–34.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Finkelstein EA, Zhen C, Bilger M, Nonnemaker J, Farooqui AM, Todd JE. Implications of a sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) tax when substitutions to non-beverage items are considered. J Health Econ. 2013;32:219–39.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Gabe T. Fiscal and economic impacts of beverage excise taxes imposed by Maine Public Law 629. Orono, ME: University of Maine; 2008.
19.
Griffith R, Nesheim R, O'Connell M. Empirical estimates of the impact of a fat tax. London: Institute for Fiscal Studies; 2009.
20.
Gustavsen GW: Public policies and the demand for carbonated soft drinks: A censored quantile regression approach. In Proceedings of the XIth Congress of the European Association of Agricultural Economists ‘The Future of Rural Europe in the Global Agri-Food System’ 2005; Copenhagen.
21.
Gustavsen GW, Rickertsen K. The effects of taxes on purchases of sugar-sweetened carbonated soft drinks: A quantile regression approach. Appl Econ. 2011;43:707–16.CrossRef
22.
23.
Kuchler F, Tegene A, Harris JM. Taxing snack foods: What to expect for diet and tax revenues. Curr Issues Econ Food Markets. 2004;747:1–11.
24.
Kuchler F, Tegene A, Harris JM. Taxing snack foods: Manipulating diet quality or financing information programs? Rev Agr Econ. 2005;27:4–20.CrossRef
25.
Levy DT, Friend KB. Simulation Modeling of Policies Directed at Youth Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Consumption. Am J Community Psychol. 2013;51:299–313.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Lin B-H, Yen ST, Dong D, Smallwood DM. Economic incentives for dietary improvement among food stamp recipients. Contemp Econ Pol. 2010;28:524–36.CrossRef
27.
Lin B-W, Smith TA, Lee J-Y, Hall KD. Measuring weight outcomes for obesity intervention strategies: The case of a sugar-sweetened beverage tax. Econ Hum Biol. 2011;9:329–41.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Lopez RA, Fantuzzi KL. Demand for carbonated soft drinks: Implications for obesity policy. Appl Econ. 2012;44:2859–65.CrossRef
29.
Madden D: The poverty effects of a ‘fat-tax’ in Ireland. Health Econ, in press.
30.
31.
Ng SW, Ni Mhurchu C, Jebb SA, Popkin BM. Patterns and trends of beverage consumption among children and adults in Great Britain, 1986–2009. Br J Nutr. 2012;108:536–51.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Nnoaham KE, Sacks G, Rayner M, Mytton O, Gray A. Modelling income group differences in the health and economic impacts of targeted food taxes and subsidies. Int J Epidemiol. 2009;38:1324–33.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Nordström J, Thunström L. The impact of tax reforms designed to encourage healthier grain consumption. J Health Econ. 2009;28:622–34.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Sacks G, Veerman JL, Moodie M, Swinburn B. ‘Traffic-light’ nutrition labelling and ‘junk-food’ tax: A modelled comparison of cost-effectiveness for obesity prevention. Int J Obes. 2011;35:1001–9.CrossRef
35.
Schroeter C, Lusk J, Tyner W. Determining the impact of food price and income changes on body weight. J Health Econ. 2008;27:45–68.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Smed S, Jensen JD, Denver S. Socio-economic characteristics and the effect of taxation as a health policy instrument. Food Policy. 2007;32:624–39.CrossRef
37.
Smith TA, Lin BH, Lee JY. Taxing caloric sweetened beverages: Potential effects on beverage consumption, calorie intake and obesity. Alexandria, VA: US Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service; 2010.
38.
39.
Wang YC. The potential impact of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes in New York State. New York, NY: Columbia University; 2010.
40.
Wang YC, Coxson P, Shen Y-M, Goldman L, Bibbins-Domingo K. A Penny-Per-Ounce Tax On Sugar-Sweetened Beverages Would Cut Health And Cost Burdens Of Diabetes. Health Aff (Millwood). 2012;31:199–207.CrossRef
41.
Zhen C, Finkelstein EA, Nonnemaker JM, Shawn AK, Todd JE. Predicting the effects of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes on food and beverage demand in a large demand system. Am J Agri Econ. 2014;96:1070–83.CrossRef
42.
Fletcher JM, Frisvold DE, Tefft N. The effects of soft drink taxes on child and adolescent consumption and weight outcomes. J Publ Econ. 2010;94:967–74.CrossRef
43.
Oaks B. An evaluation of the snack tax on the obesity rate of Maine. San Marcos, TX: Texas State University; 2005.
44.
Powell LM, Chriqui J, Chaloupka FJ. Associations between state-level soda taxes and adolescent body mass index. J Adolesc Health. 2009;45 Suppl 1:S57–63.CrossRefPubMed
45.
Sturm R, Powell LM, Chriqui JF, Chaloupka FJ. Soda taxes, soft drink consumption, and children’s body mass index. Health Aff (Millwood). 2010;29:1052–8.CrossRef
46.
Tefft N. The effects of a soft drink tax on household expenditures. Lewiston, MN: Bates College; 2008.
47.
Yarnoff B. The effectiveness and efficiency of a soft drink tax for reducing calorie consumption. Chicago, IL: University of Illinois at Chicago; 2010.
48.
Mytton OT, Eyles H, Ogilvie D: Evaluating the health impacts of food and beverage taxes. Curr Obes Rep 2014, 10.1007/s13679-014-0123-x.
49.
Epstein LH, Jankowiak N, Nederkoorn C, Raynor HA, French SA, Finkelstein E. Experimental research on the relation between food price changes and food-purchasing patterns: a targeted review. Am J Clin Nutr. 2012;95:789–809.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
50.
Weinstein MC, Toy EL, Sandberg EA, Neumann PJ, Evans JS, Kuntz KM, et al. Modeling for health care and other policy decisions: uses, roles, and validity. Value Health. 2001;4:348–61.CrossRefPubMed
51.
Campbell M, Fitzpatrick R, Haines A, Kinmonth AL, Sandercock P, Spiegelhalter D, et al. Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health. BMJ. 2000;321:694–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
52.
Anderson LM, Petticrew M, Chandler J, Grimshaw J, Tugwell P, O’Neill J, et al. Introducing a series of methodological articles on considering complexity in systematic reviews of interventions. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:1205–8.CrossRefPubMed
53.
Hartmann S. The World as a Process: Simulations in the Natural and Social Sciences. In: Hegselmann R, Mueller U, Troitzsch KG, editors. Modelling and Simulation in the Social Sciences from the Philosophy of Science Point of View. Dordrecht: Kluwer; 1996. p. 77–100.CrossRef
54.
Shemilt I, Wilson E, Vale L. Quality Assessment in Modeling in Decision Analytic Models for Economic Evaluation. In: Culyer AJ, editor. Encyclopedia of Health Economics, vol. 3. San Diego: Elsevier; 2014. p. 218–23.CrossRef
55.
Glanville J, Paisley S. Chapter 7: Searching for evidence for cost-effectiveness decisions. In: Shemilt I, Mugford M, Vale L, Marsh K, Donaldson C, editors. Evidence-Based Decisions and Economics: Health care, social welfare, education and criminal justice. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell; 2010. p. 79–92.CrossRef
56.
Green R, Cornelsen L, Turner R, Dangour AD, Shankar B, Mazzocchi M, et al. The effect of rising food prices on food consumption: systematic review with meta-regression. BMJ. 2013;346:f3703.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
57.
Cornelsen L, Green R, Turner R, Dangour AD, Shankar B, Mazzocchi M, Smith RD: What happens to consumption when food prices change? Evidence from a global systematic review and meta-analysis of food cross-price elasticities. Health Econ, in press.
58.
Cornelsen L, Green R, Turner R, Dangour AD, Shankar B, Mazzocchi M, RD Smith: Estimating the relationship between food prices and food consumption – methods matter. Soc Sci Med, in press.
59.
Cornelsen L, Green R, Dangour AD, Smith RD. Is a tax on sugary drinks too bitter to swallow? BMJ. 2013;347:f7039.CrossRefPubMed
60.
Petticrew M, Anderson L, Elder R, Grimshaw J, Hopkins D, Hahn R, et al. Complex interventions and their implications for systematic reviews: a pragmatic approach. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:1209–14.CrossRefPubMed
61.
Noyes J, Gough D, Lewin S, Mayhew A, Michie S, Pantoja T, et al. Systematic reviews that ask complex questions about complex interventions: a research and development agenda. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:1262–70.CrossRefPubMed
62.
Bonnet C, Requillart V. Does the EU sugar policy reform increase added sugar consumption? An empirical evidence on the soft drink market. Health Econ. 2011;20:1012–24.CrossRefPubMed
63.
Spiegelhalter DJ, Riesch H. Don’t know, can’t know: embracing deeper uncertainties when analysing risks. Phil Trans R Soc A. 2011;369:4730–50.CrossRefPubMed
64.
Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Systematic reviews: CRD’s guidance for undertaking reviews in health care. York: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination; 2008.
65.
Chalmers I, Hedges LV, Cooper H. A brief history of research synthesis. Evaluation & the Health Professions. 2002;25:12–37.CrossRef
66.
Hammersley M. Systematic or Unsystematic, Is That The Question? Some reflections on the science, art and politics of reviewing research evidence. London: Health Development Agency Public Health Steering Group; 2002.
67.
Gough D, Thomas J. Commonality and Diversity in Reviews. In: Gough D, Oliver S, Thomas J, editors. An Introduction to Systematic Reviews. London: Sage; 2012. p. 35–66.
68.
Eyles H, Ni Mhurchu C, Nghiem N, Blakely T. Food Pricing Strategies, Population Diets, and Non-Communicable Disease: A Systematic Review of Simulation Studies. PLoS Med. 2012;9:e1001353.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
69.
Powell LM, Chriqui JF, Khan T, Wada R, Chaloupka FJ. Assessing the potential effectiveness of food and beverage taxes and subsidies for improving public health: a systematic review of prices, demand and body weight outcomes. Obes Rev. 2013;14:110–28.CrossRefPubMed
70.
Faulkner G, Grootendorst P, Nguyen VH, Ferrence R, Mendelson R, Donnelly P, et al. Economic Policy, Obesity and Health: A Scoping Review. Toronto: Exercise Psychology Unit; 2010.
71.
Faulkner GEJ, Grootendorst P, Nguyen VH, Andreyeva T, Arbour-Nicitopoulos K, Auld MC, et al. Economic instruments for obesity prevention: results of a scoping review and modified delphi survey. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011;8:109.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
72.
Thow AM, Jan S, Leeder S, Swinburn B. The effect of fiscal policy on diet, obesity and chronic disease: a systematic review. Bull World Health Org. 2010;88:609–14.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
73.
Hawkes C. Financial incentives and disincentives to encourage healthy eating. London: Which? Ltd; 2009.
74.
Popay J, Roberts H, Sowden A, Petticrew M, Arai L, Rodgers M, et al. Guidance on the Conduct of Narrative Synthesis in Systematic Reviews: A Product from the ESRC Methods Programme. Lancaster: Lancaster University; 2006.
75.
Rodgers M, Sowden A, Petticrew M, Arai L, Roberts H, Britten N. Testing Methodological Guidance on the Conduct of Narrative Synthesis in Systematic Reviews: Effectiveness of Interventions to Promote Smoke Alarm Ownership and Function. Evaluation. 2009;15:49–74.CrossRef
76.
Reeves BC, Deeks JJ, Higgins JPT, Wells GA. Chapter 13: Including non-randomized studies (Section 13.6.2.4). In: Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). 2011. The Cochrane Collaboration.
77.
MacCoun RJ. Biases in the interpretation and use of research results. Annu Rev Psychol. 1998;49:259–87.CrossRefPubMed
78.
Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Higgins JPT, Vist GE, Glasziou P, Guyatt GH. Chapter 11: Presenting results and ‘Summary of findings’ tables. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). 2011. The Cochrane Collaboration.
79.
Deeks JJ, Higgins JPT, Altman DG. Chapter 9: Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). 2011. The Cochrane Collaboration.
80.
Lipsey MW, Wilson DB. Selecting, Computing and Coding the Effect Size Statistic. In: Lipsey MW, Wilson DB, editors. Practical Meta-Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2001. p. 34–72.
81.
82.
Webber L, Mytton OT, Briggs ADM, Woodcock J, Scarborough P, McPherson M, et al. The Brighton declaration: the value of non-communicable disease modelling in population health sciences. Eur J Epidem. 2014;29:867–70.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Use and cumulation of evidence from modelling studies to inform policy on food taxes and subsidies: biting off more than we can chew?
Authors
Ian Shemilt
Theresa M Marteau
Richard D Smith
David Ogilvie
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-1641-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

BMC Public Health 1/2015 Go to the issue

Research article

Do consumers ‘Get the facts’? A survey of alcohol warning label recognition in Australia

Research article

Understanding the complex determinants of height and adiposity in disadvantaged daycare preschoolers in Salvador, NE Brazil through structural equation modelling

Research article

The rise in stunting in relation to avian influenza and food consumption patterns in Lower Egypt in comparison to Upper Egypt: results from 2005 and 2008 Demographic and Health Surveys

Research article

How do national cultures influence lay people’s preferences toward doctors’ style of communication? A comparison of 35 focus groups from an European cross national research

Research article

Developing the Moti-4 intervention, assessing its feasibility and pilot testing its effectiveness

Research article

The prevalence of excessive weight in Balearic Islands’ young and middle-aged women and its association with social and socioeconomic factors: a ten-year trend (2000–2010)