The Acceptability of Food Policies

Public acceptance of default nudges to promote healthy and sustainable food choices

BACKGROUND

Default nudges are an increasingly prominent tool for promoting healthy and sustainable food choices; however, questions of acceptance remain. While default nudges are more acceptable to the public than traditionally paternalistic tools that aim to restrict choice, they are also the least acceptable amongst nudging strategies. Little research has investigated the aspects of default nudge design that can be leveraged to better uphold freedom of choice, increase public acceptance, and therefore heighten legitimacy of default nudges. Consequently, this study examines public acceptance of five food choice default nudges with demonstrated precedent of effectiveness, as drawn from research studies and/or real-world policies, along with a design variation of each anticipated to increase acceptance. Three drivers of acceptance - perceived intrusiveness, perceived effectiveness, and own behavior - are examined.

METHODS

An online survey was administered in Germany (N = 451) to a sample representative of the adult population on quotas of age, gender and income. Acceptance and drivers were measured using seven-point Likert scales. Significant differences in median acceptance of the nudge were determined and displayed graphically. Ten proportional odds ordered logit models were applied and estimated using a maximum likelihood approach to investigate the mechanisms of nudge acceptance.

RESULTS

Examined changes in nudge design, particularly decreasing costliness of opting out and increasing transparency, increased the acceptance of three of the five nudges (N2.2: p = 0.000; N3.2: p = 0.000; N4.2: p = 0.008). Perceived intrusiveness emerged as the most prominent driver of acceptance (negative relationship), followed by perceived effectiveness (positive relationship). Own engagement in the target behavior of the nudge and socio-demographic variables demonstrated negligible impact on acceptance.

CONCLUSIONS

Mitigating the costliness of opting out and improving nudge transparency emerge as key opportunities for choice architects to improve public acceptance, and thereby potentially identify 'sweet spots' in designing default nudges that are both effective and acceptable. The protection of individual freedom of choice and effectiveness are key aspects for choice architects to communicate to increase acceptance.

UK government's new placement legislation is a 'good first step': a rapid qualitative analysis of consumer, business, enforcement and health stakeholder perspectives

BACKGROUND

The current food system in England promotes a population diet that is high in fat, sugar and salt (HFSS). To address this, the UK government has implemented legislation to restrict the promotion of HFSS products in prominent locations (e.g. store entrances, checkouts) in qualifying retailers since October 2022. This study investigated the perceived impact of the legislation for affected stakeholders.

METHODS

A pre-implementation rapid qualitative evaluation of stakeholder interviews. One hundred eight UK stakeholders participated in the study including 34 consumers, 24 manufacturers and retailers, 22 local authority enforcement officers and 28 academic and charitable health representatives. A participatory conference was used to enable policy recommendations to be confirmed by stakeholders.

RESULTS

Stakeholders perceived the legislation to be a 'good first step' towards improving population diet but recognised this needed to be considered amongst a range of long-term obesity policies. Areas of further support were identified and these are presented as six recommendations for government to support the successful implementation of the legislation: (1) provide a free central HFSS calculator, (2) refine legislation to enhance intent and clarity, (3) conduct a robust evaluation to assess intended and unintended outcomes, (4) provide greater support for smaller businesses, (5) provide ring-fenced resources to local authorities and (6) create and communicate a long-term roadmap for food and health.

CONCLUSIONS

This legislation has the potential to reduce impulse HFSS purchases and makes a solid start towards creating healthier retail outlets for consumers. Immediate government actions to create a freely accessible HFSS calculator, support smaller businesses and provide additional resources to local authorities would support successful implementation and enforcement. Independent evaluation of the implementation of the legislation will enable monitoring of potential unintended consequences identified in this study and support refinement of the legislation. A long-term roadmap is necessary to outline strategies to support equal access to healthier and sustainable food across the whole food system within the next 20-30 years.