Most of us know that unhealthy food and physical inactivity increase the risk of everything from obesity to cancer and cardiovascular disease. Most of us also know exactly what we should eat less of – and more of.
However, it turns out that making these healthy choices is difficult. To influence us towards new habits, various attempts have been made around the world. In several countries, for example, a special sugar tax has been tested. But despite the fact that consumption has decreased, the effect on public health is difficult to prove.
Hard to stop
In the UK, several attempts have been made to restrict the supply of fast-food restaurants near schools, but the battle against powerful companies has been tricky. A review, published in the journal BMJ, shows that, among other things, McDonald's has driven lawsuits with arguments that there are healthy options on the menus, such as salads, or that visitors can walk to the restaurant.
In a new report, researchers from Chalmers University of Technology, the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, and the Karolinska Institute are now proposing a new method – food tax shift.
If it becomes more expensive with unhealthy products and cheaper with healthy ones, it will affect people's choices, says Liselotte Schäfer Elinder, professor of public health science at the Karolinska Institute and one of the report authors.
Introducing point taxes on, for example, sugar has previously been shown to hit low-income groups particularly hard. But by introducing a broad tax shift, where VAT is removed on healthy foods and tax is increased on unhealthy ones, it will be a zero-sum game for the consumer, the researchers believe.
Cheaper whole grain
Examples of products that researchers think could be taxed higher than today are sugary drinks and processed meat. For fruit, vegetables, and legumes, VAT would be completely removed, as would be the case for keyhole-labelled bread and cereals.
Introducing restrictions on certain companies, such as fast-food chains, to establish themselves, similar to the attempts in the UK, does not believe Liselotte Schäfer Elinder is a viable way.
I don't think that's the society we want with such restrictions. What drives the sale of unhealthy food is a profit motive, and if we use economic steering instruments correctly, we can influence people's choices, she says.
Recently, the Public Health Agency and the National Food Agency submitted proposals to the government on how to facilitate healthy food choices for children and young people. This includes, for example, regulating advertising to children and young people up to 18 years old and limiting which foods can be sold at, for example, swimming pools.
The purpose of the report, which comes from the Mistra Sustainable Consumption research program, is to analyze tax changes that would bring benefits for both public health and the climate without affecting consumers' economy.
