Register      Login
Public Health Research and Practice Public Health Research and Practice Society
The peer-reviewed journal of the Sax Institute
RESEARCH ARTICLE (Open Access)

Qualitative insights into Australian consumers’ views for and against government action on sugary drinks

Caroline Miller A B * , Annette Braunack-Mayer C , Melanie Wakefield D , David Roder E , Kerin O’Dea F , Joanne Dono B and Kerry Ettridge B G
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A School of Public Health, University of Adelaide, SA, Australia

B Health Policy Centre, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide

C School of Health and Society, University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia

D Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Australia

E Cancer Epidemiology and Population Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide

F Centre for Population Health Research, University of South Australia, Adelaide

G School of Psychology, University of Adelaide, SA, Australia

* Correspondence to: caroline.miller@sahmri.com

Public Health Research and Practice 31, e30122003 https://doi.org/10.17061/phrp30122003
Published: 9 June 2021

Abstract

Objectives:Despite significant evidence of harms associated with high levels of sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption, and international moves towards regulation to curb overconsumption of such drinks, Australia has been slow to take policy action. This study provides in-depth insights into consumers’ reactions to different SSB policy options. Methods: Eight focus groups were undertaken with 59 regular SSB consumers and/or household purchasers, stratified by: young adults aged 21–29 years (no children), parents aged 35–50 (with children at home); gender; and socio-economic status. Consumer responses to potential government intervention and policy options were explored using thematic analysis. Results: Three main themes were identified. Theme 1 describes participants’ changing views on regulation of SSBs throughout the focus groups, expressed through shifts in understandings of personal responsibility and the role of government. It was noted that the term ‘regulation’ should be used judiciously, as it was widely misunderstood to infer bans. Theme 2 articulates the participants’ preference for child-focused measures and educative measures such as clearer front-of-pack labelling. Taxation on SSBs was viewed more favourably if paired with investment into education. Theme 3 describes the parallels that participants drew between SSBs and other substances. Conclusions: A comprehensive approach that includes education, child-focused interventions and regulatory approaches may increase acceptability of policy measures to curb overconsumption of SSBs.

2021 © Miller et al. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International Licence, which allows others to redistribute, adapt and share this work non-commercially provided they attribute the work and any adapted version of it is distributed under the same Creative Commons licence terms.