Journal of Consumer Policy

, Volume 39, Issue 3, pp 285–306 | Cite as

Do Target Groups Appreciate Being Targeted? An Exploration of Healthy Eating Policy Acceptance

  • Jessica Aschemann-Witzel
  • Tino Bech-Larsen
  • Sara Capacci
Original Paper


The impact of healthy eating policies falls behind policy maker’s expectations. Better targeting and stakeholder support should improve their effectiveness. The research aims to identify whether a target group (the group impacted by the policy measure) is characterised by higher acceptance levels or not. Acceptance among citizens from the target was compared to a matching non-target group, based on data from an online survey on citizens’ support of healthy eating policies conducted among 3003 adult respondents from five European countries (Belgium, Denmark, Italy, Poland, UK). The policies explored were bans of advertising to children or school vending machines, school meal regulations, education campaigns at schools and workplaces, menu nutrition information and food labelling, price subsidies for healthy food, and accessibility measures for the elderly. It was found that target groups showed more support than others for four policies: parents were more supportive of vending machine bans in schools and workers eating out at lunch of education campaigns at workplaces, food labelling was more supported by those considering nutrition content in food purchase, and price subsidies for healthy food more supported by respondents in financial difficulties. However, parents were less supportive of school education campaigns, and the pattern of support through the target group differed by country. It is concluded that members of the target group tend to, but are not per se especially supportive of healthy eating policy measures concerning themselves or their children, and there are great country differences. Acceptance of policies should be surveyed per target group and country in advance of implementation. In the case of lack in acceptance, further exploration of the barriers should be conducted so that the benefit of the policy can be more effectively communicated, assuming that this increases stakeholder cooperation and favourable peer influence.


Healthy eating Public policy Acceptance Target group Social marketing 


Authors’ Contribution

JEAW has formulated the research question and written the manuscript except for the data analysis section, SC has conducted the analysis and written the data analysis section, TBL has contributed to the formulation of the research question; all authors have contributed to the design of the overall study, commented on the manuscript, and agreed to the final version.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Financial Support

This research was supported by a grant from the European Community (EC) FP7 Research Programme to the EATWELL consortium under grant agreement no. 226713, Eatwell Project ( The EC had no role in the design, analysis or writing of this article.

Conflict of Interest


Supplementary material

10603_2016_9327_MOESM1_ESM.docx (23 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 22 kb)
10603_2016_9327_MOESM2_ESM.docx (16 kb)
ESM 2 (DOCX 16 kb)
10603_2016_9327_MOESM3_ESM.docx (18 kb)
ESM 3 (DOCX 18 kb)
10603_2016_9327_MOESM4_ESM.docx (19 kb)
ESM 4 (DOCX 19 kb)
10603_2016_9327_MOESM5_ESM.docx (17 kb)
ESM 5 (DOCX 16 kb)
10603_2016_9327_MOESM6_ESM.docx (24 kb)
ESM 6 (DOCX 24 kb)


  1. Adams, J., Tyrrell, R., Adamson, A. J., & White, M. (2012). Effect of restrictions on television food advertising to children on exposure to advertisements for ‘less healthy’ foods: repeat cross-sectional study. PloS one, 7(2), e31578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andreasen, A. R. (2002). Marketing social marketing in the social change marketplace. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 21(1), 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aschemann-Witzel, J. (2013). Danish mothers’ perception of the healthiness of their dietary behaviors during transition to parenthood. Journal of Family Issues, 34(10), 1335–1355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aschemann-Witzel, J., Perez-Cueto, F. J. A., Niedzwiedzka, B., Verbeke, W., & Bech-Larsen, T. (2012a). Lessons for public health campaigns from analysing commercial food marketing success factors: a case study. BMC Public Health, 12(1), 139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aschemann-Witzel, J., Perez-Cueto, F. J. A., Niedzwiedzka, B., Verbeke, W., & Bech-Larsen, T. (2012b). Transferability of private food marketing success factors to public food and health policy: an expert Delphi survey. Food Policy, 37(6), 650–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Aschemann-Witzel, J., Grunert, K. G., Van Trijp, H. C. M., Bialkova, S., Raats, M. M., Hodgkins, C., & Koenigstorfer, J. (2013). Effects of nutrition label format and product assortment on the healthfulness of food choice. Appetite, 71, 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barry, C. L., Brescoll, V. L., Brownell, K. D., & Schlesinger, M. (2009). Obesity metaphors: how beliefs about the causes of obesity affect support for public policy. The Milbank Quarterly, 87(1), 7–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barry, C. L., Jarlenski, M., Grob, R., Schlesinger, M., & Gollust, S. E. (2011). News media framing of childhood obesity in the United States from 2000 to 2009. Pediatrics, 128(1), 132–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barry, C. L., Gollust, S. E., & Niederdeppe, J. (2012). Are Americans ready to solve the weight of the nation? New England Journal of Medicine, 367(5), 389–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Basu, S., Seligman, H., & Bhattacharya, J. (2013). Nutritional policy changes in the supplemental nutrition assistance program: a microsimulation and cost-effectiveness analysis. Medical Decision Making, 33(7), 937–948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bech-Larsen, T., & Aschemann-Witzel, J. (2012). A macromarketing perspective on food safety regulation: the Danish ban on trans-fatty acids. Journal of Macromarketing, 32(2), 208–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Becker, S. O., & Ichino, A. (2002). Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scores. The Stata Journal, 2(4), 358–377.Google Scholar
  13. Blundell, R., & Dias, M. C. (2009). Alternative approaches to evaluation in empirical microeconomics. Journal of Human Resources, 44(3), 565–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bos, C., van der Lans, I., Van Rijnsoever, F. J., & Van Trijp, H. C. M. (2013). Understanding acceptance of intervention strategies for healthy food choices: a qualitative study. BMC Public Health, 13(1), 1073.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Branson, C., Duffy, B., Perry, C., & Wellings, D. (2012). Acceptable behaviour? Public opinion on behaviour change policy. Retrieved July 2, 2014, from Scholar
  16. Brehm, J. W. (1989). Psychological reactance: theory and applications. In T. K. Srull (Ed.), Advances in consumer research (Vol. 16, pp. 72–75). Provo: Association for Consumer Research.Google Scholar
  17. Capacci, S., Mazzocchi, M., Shankar, B., Macias, J. B., Verbeke, W., Perez-Cueto, F. J., & Saba, A. (2012). Policies to promote healthy eating in Europe: a structured review of policies and their effectiveness. Nutrition Reviews, 70(3), 188–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dano, A. M. (2005). Road injuries and long‐run effects on income and employment. Health Economics, Policy, and Law, 14(9), 955–970.Google Scholar
  19. de Groot, J. I., & Schuitema, G. (2012). How to make the unpopular popular? Policy characteristics, social norms and the acceptability of environmental policies. Environmental Science & Policy, 19–20, 100–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. De Sa, J., & Lock, K. (2008). Will European agricultural policy for school fruit and vegetables improve public health? A review of school fruit and vegetable programmes. European Journal of Public Health, 18(6), 558–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dehejia, R. H., & Wahba, S. (2002). Propensity score-matching methods for nonexperimental causal studies. Review of Economics and Statistics, 84(1), 151–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Diepeveen, S., Ling, T., Suhrcke, M., Roland, M., & Marteau, T. M. (2013). Public acceptability of government intervention to change health-related behaviours: a systematic review and narrative synthesis. BMC Public Health, 13(756), 1–11.Google Scholar
  23. EATWELL. (2011). Interventions to promote healthy eating habits: evaluation and recommendations: EU FP 7 Research project. Retrieved June 10, 2015, from Scholar
  24. Etelson, D., Brand, D. A., Patrick, P. A., & Shirali, A. (2003). Childhood obesity: do parents recognize this health risk? Obesity Research, 11(11), 1362–1368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Evans, W. D., Renaud, J. M., Finkelstein, E., Kamerow, D. B., & Brown, D. S. (2006). Changing perceptions of the childhood obesity epidemic. American Journal of Health Behavior, 30(2), 167–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Felser, G. (2007). Werbe- und Konsumentenpsychologie [Advertising and consumer psychology] (3rd ed.). Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  27. Gollust, S. E., Niederdeppe, J., & Barry, C. L. (2013). Framing the consequences of childhood obesity to increase public support for obesity prevention policy. American Journal of Public Health, 103(11), 96–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Harden, A., Garcia, J., Oliver, S., Rees, R., Shepherd, J., Brunton, G., & Oakley, A. (2004). Applying systematic review methods to studies of people’s views: an example from public health research. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 58(9), 794–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hawkes, C., Smith, T. G., Jowell, J., Wardle, J., Hammond, R. A., Friel, S., & Kain, J. (2015). Smart food policies for obesity prevention. Lancet, 385, 2410–2421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Heath, J., & Norman, W. (2004). Stakeholder theory, corporate governance and public management: what can the history of state-run enterprises teach us in the post-Enron era? Journal of Business Ethics, 53, 247–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Imbens, G. W., & Wooldridge, J. M. (2009). Recent developments in the econometrics of program evaluation. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(1), 5–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jakobsson, C., Fujii, S., & Garling, T. (2000). Determinants of private car users’ acceptance of road pricing. Transport Policy, 7, 153–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jones, A. M., Koolman, X., & van Doorslaer, E. (2006). The impact of having supplementary private health insurance on the use of specialists. Annales d’Economie et de Statistique, 83–84, 251–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kotler, P., & Zaltman, G. (1971). Social marketing: an approach to planned social change. Journal of Marketing, 35, 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lang, T., & Rayner, G. (2007). Overcoming policy cacophony on obesity: an ecological public health framework for policymakers. Obesity Reviews, 8(1), 165–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Laroche, H. H., Wallace, R. B., Snetselaar, L., Hillis, S. L., & Steffen, L. M. (2012). Changes in diet behavior when adults become parents. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 112(6), 832–839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lee, W. S. (2013). Propensity score matching and variations on the balancing test. Empirical Economics, 44(1), 47–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mazzocchi, M., Cagnone, S., Bech-Larsen, T., Niedzwiedzka, B., Saba, A., Shankar, B., & Traill, W. B. (2015). What is the public appetite for healthy eating policies? Evidence from a cross-European survey. Health Economics, Policy, and Law, 10(3), 267–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. McGill, R., Anwar, E., Orton, L., Bromley, H., Lloyd-Williams, F., O’Flaherty, M., & Allen, K. (2015). Are interventions to promote healthy eating equally effective for all? Systematic review of socioeconomic inequalities in impact. BMC Public Health, 15, 457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Millstone, E., & Lobstein, T. (2007). The PorGrow project: overall cross-national results, comparisons and implications. Obesity Reviews, 8, 29–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Moore, S., Murphy, S., Tapper, K., & Moore, L. (2010). From policy to plate: barriers to implementing healthy eating policies in primary schools in Wales. Health Policy, 94(3), 239–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Oliver, J. E., & Lee, T. (2005). Public opinion and the politics of obesity in America. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 30(5), 923–954.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pechmann, C., Moore, E. S., Andreasen, A. R., Connell, P. M., Freeman, D., Gardner, M. P., & Soster, R. L. (2011). Navigating the central tensions in research on at-risk consumers: challenges and opportunities. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 30(1), 23–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pettigrew, S., Pescud, M., & Donovan, R. J. (2012). Stakeholder perceptions of a comprehensive school food policy in Western Australia. Health Policy, 108(1), 100–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Roberto, C. A., Swinburn, B., Hawkes, C., Huan, T. T.-K., Costa, S. A., Ashe, M., & Brownell, K. D. (2015). Patchy progress on obesity prevention: emerging examples, entrenched barriers, and new thinking. Lancet, 385, 2400–2409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Seiders, K., & Petty, R. D. (2007). Taming the obesity beast: children, marketing, and public policy considerations. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 26(2), 236–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sianesi, B. (2004). An evaluation of the Swedish system of active labor market programs in the 1990s. Review of Economics and Statistics, 86(1), 133–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Stok, F. M., de Ridder, D. T. D., de Vet, E., Nureeva, L., Luszczynska, A., Wardle, J., Gaspar, T., et al. (2016). Hungry for an intervention? Adolescents’ ratings of acceptability of eating-related intervention strategies. BMC Public Health, 16 (5), DOI: 10.1186/s12889-015-2665-6.Google Scholar
  49. Suggs, L. S., & McIntyre, C. (2011). European Union public opinion on policy measures to address childhood overweight and obesity. Journal of Public Health Policy, 32(February), 91–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2003). Libertarian paternalism. American Economic Review, 93(2), 175–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. WHO. (2011). Global status report on noncommunicable diseases 2010: description of the global burden of NCDs, their risk factors and determinants. Retrieved June 10, 2015, from
  52. WHO. (2014a). Health topics: obesity. Retrieved June 10, 2015, from
  53. WHO. (2014b). Health 2020: the European policy for health and well-being. Retrieved June 10, 2015, from
  54. Wolsink, M. (2007). Wind power implementation: the nature of public attitudes: equity and fairness instead of ‘backyard motives’. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 11(6), 1188–1207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jessica Aschemann-Witzel
    • 1
  • Tino Bech-Larsen
    • 1
  • Sara Capacci
    • 2
  1. 1.MAPP Centre - Research on Value Creation in the Food SectorAarhus UniversityAarhusDenmark
  2. 2.Department of EconomicsUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations