Advertisement

The Role of Public Policy in Addressing the Pediatric Obesity Epidemic

  • Patricia B. Crawford
  • Gail Woodward-Lopez
  • Suzanne Rauzon
  • Lorrene Ritchie
  • May C. Wang
Part of the Issues in Clinical Child Psychology book series (ICCP)

It is widely believed that broad societal changes and major shifts in worldwide nutrition and physical activity are driving the current epidemic of obesity (World Health Organization, 2003). Prevention strategies based solely on individual and family responsibility for change will not be maximally effective and must be supported by broader-based environmental programs that provide a counterbalance to the societal trends that are contributing to escalating obesity rates. Environmental policy has a proven track record in public health amelioration efforts. The reduction in U.S. smoking rates is partially attributed to excise taxes and regulation, auto fatalities were reduced by seat belt laws and mandated airbags, and local restrictions on selling handguns have reduced gun-related violence and fatalities.

This chapter will discuss environmental forces contributing to the problem, and how a community-based policy approach plays a necessary role in the prevention of childhood overweight in the United States. A specific focus on environmental change within school systems will be examined through a case study of a school nutrition policy change at the state and local levels. Such a community-based approach can make use of public policy to address structural disparities and inequities in the distribution of open space, enhance opportunities for physical activity, and increase accessibility to a variety of high quality, nutritious foods that promote health.

Keywords

School District Food Service Nutrition Policy School Food General Account Office 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Associated Press. (2004, April 23). Schools that can soda cut obesity. CBSNEWS.com. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/23/ health/main613336.shtml
  2. Byrne, D. (2003). Physical education. 2003 Health Policy Tracking Service, National Conference of State Legislatures, 1–22. Falls Church, VA: NetscanGoogle Scholar
  3. California Center for Public Health Advocacy (CCPHA). (2002). National Consensus Panel on School Nutrition: Recommendations for competitive food standards in California schools. Davis, CA. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from http://www. publichealthadvocacy.org/PDFs/school_food_stan_pdfs/standards.pdf
  4. California State Legislature. (2003, February). Senate Bill No. 677: Introduced February 21, 2003. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/03-04/ bill/sen/sb_0651-0700/sb_677_bill_20030917_chaptered.html
  5. Carl Vinson Institute of Government. (2005). Peach State Poll — October 21, 2005: Public opinions on obesity and possible policy options to address childhood obesity. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from www.cviog.uga.edu/peachpoll/2005-10-21.pdf
  6. Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). (2004). Dispensing junk: How school vending undermines efforts to feed children well. Washington, DC: CSPIGoogle Scholar
  7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (1996). Guidelines for school health programs to promote lifelong healthy eating. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 45(RR-9). Retrieved September 21, 2006 from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/ preview/mmwrhtml/00042446.htm
  8. Cline, K. P., Spradlin, T. E., & Plucker, J. A. (2005). Child obesity in Indiana: A growing public policy concern. Center for Evaluation & Education Policy: Education Policy Brief, 3 (1) Google Scholar
  9. Committee on Education and Workforce. (2004). Child nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from http://edworkforce.house.gov/ issues/108th/education/childnutrition/billsummaryfinal.htm
  10. Crawford, P. B. (2006). Soda out of schools study (SOS). Center for Weight and Health, University of California, Berkeley, and Samuels and Associates (preliminary findings)Google Scholar
  11. de Pommereau, I. (2004). French schools' new bête noire: Vending machines. The Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from www.csmonitor. com/2004/1008/p01s02-woeu.html
  12. DiMassa, C. M. (2003, November 19). Campus crowding can make P.E. a challenge, L. A. Times, B.2Google Scholar
  13. Dorfman, L., Wilbur, P., Lingas, E., Woodruff, K., Wallack, L. (2005). Accelerating policy on nutrition: Extracting lessons from tobacco alcohol, firearms, and traffic safety. Berkeley Media Studies Group, March 2005. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from www.bmsg.org/pdfs/BMSG_AccelerationReport.pdf
  14. Dwyer, J. (1995). The school nutrition dietary assessment study. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 61(Suppl 1), 173S–177SPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Fox, M. K., Crepinsek, M. K., Conner, P., & Battaglia, M. (2001). School nutrition dietary assessment study II: Final report. Alexandria, VA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Special Nutrition Programs Report No. CN-01-SNDAI-IFR. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from http://www.fns.usda.gov/oane/MENU/ Published/CNP/FILES/SNDAIIfindsum.htm
  16. Gleason, P., & Suitor, C. (2001, March). Food for thought: Children diets in the 1990s. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research. Document No. PR01-12. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/publications/PDFs/childdiet.pdf
  17. LaFee, S. (2003). Healthy choices, healthy budgets: California schools find ways to bolster the lunch line bottom line. California Schools, 61(4), 16–20, 42, 48Google Scholar
  18. Lingas, E. O., & Dorfman, L. (2005). Obesity crisis or soda scapegoat? The debate over selling soda in schools. Berkeley Media Studies Group, Issue 15. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from www.bmsg.org/pdfs/Issue15.pdf
  19. McCarthy, W. (2006). Evaluation of SB 19 Pupil Nutrition Act (SB, 19). WestEd, University of California, Los Angeles, Center for Weight and Health, University of California, Berkeley, and Samuels and Associates (preliminary findings)Google Scholar
  20. National Association for Sport and Physical Education (NASPE) and American Heart Association (May, 2006). Shape of the nation. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from www.aahperd.org/naspe/shape of the nation
  21. National Dairy Council. (2004). Creating a healthy school environment for children. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from http://www.nationaldairycouncil.org/ NationalDairyCouncil/Health/Digest/dcd73-6Page1.htm
  22. National Institute for Health Care Management (NIHCM) Foundation. (2004). Obesity in young children: Impact and intervention. Research brief. Washington, DC: NHIHCMGoogle Scholar
  23. Reuters. (2004, January 7). Soda gets the axe in Canada school crackdown. CNN.com. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from www.cnn.com/2004/EDUCATION/01/07/ canada.sodas.reut
  24. Samuels, S., Craypo, L., Boyle, M., Stone-Francisco, S., & Schwarte, L. (2006). Improving school food environments through district level policies: Findings from Six California Case Studies. Samuels and Associates, Oakland, CA. Prepared for California Endowment and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Retrieved February 8, 2008 from www.calendow.org/collection_publications.aspx?coll_id=16&ItemID=304
  25. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). (2002). State competitive foods policies. National school lunch program. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from http://www.fns.usda. gov/cnd/Lunch/CompetitiveFoods/state_policies_2002.htm
  26. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). (2005). National school lunch, special milk, and school breakfast programs; National average payments/maximum reimbursement rates, Federal Register, 70, 136Google Scholar
  27. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). (1996). Physical activity and health: A report of the surgeon general. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/sgr/pdf/sgrfull.pdf
  28. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2003). Consumer Expenditure Survey 2003. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from http://www.bls.gov/cex/csxann03.pdf
  29. U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO). (2003). School lunch program: Efforts needed to improve nutrition and healthy eating. GAO report number 03-506. Washington, DC: General Accounting Office. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from http://www.gao. gov/new.items/d03506.pdfGoogle Scholar
  30. U.S. Surgeon General David Satcher, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2001). The surgeon general call to action to prevent and decrease overweight and obesity. Available from: US GPO, Washington. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/topics/obesity/calltoaction/toc.htm
  31. Vargas, A., Woodward-Lopez, G., Kim, S., & Crawford, P. B. (2005). In-depth interviews with SHAPE California schooldistricts. Prepared for Nutrition Services Division, California Department of Education by the Center for Weight and Health, University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  32. West Virginia Department of Education. (2004). Executive summary—standards for school nutrition policy. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from http://wvde.state. wv.us/policies/p4321.1.html
  33. Woodward-Lopez, G. (2004). Model school nutrition/physical activity policy grants: Cross-site evaluation report. Prepared for Nutrition Services Division, California Department of Education by the Center for Weight and Health, University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  34. Woodward-Lopez, G., Kim, S., & Crawford, P. B. (2005). Survey of SHAPE California school districts. Prepared for Nutrition Services Division, California Department of Education by the Center for Weight and Health, University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  35. Woodward-Lopez, G., Vargas, A., Kim, S., Proctor, C., Hiort-Lorenzen, C., Diemoz, L., & Crawford, P. B. (2005). LEAF cross-site evaluation: Fiscal impact report. Center for Weight and Health, University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/cwh/PDFs/LEAF_Fiscal_Report.pdf
  36. Woodward-Lopez, G., Vargas, A., Kim, S., Proctor, C., Hiort-Lorenzen, C., Diemoz, L., & Crawford, P.B. (2006). LEAF cross-site evaluation: Report on participant assessment of the adequacy of SB 19. Center for Weight and Health, University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from http://www.cnr.berkeley. edu/cwh/PDFs/LEAF_Adequacy_Report.pdf
  37. World Health Organization (WHO). (2003). Obesity and overweight information sheet. Retrieved September 21, 2006 from http://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/ publications/facts/obesity/en/

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patricia B. Crawford
    • 1
  • Gail Woodward-Lopez
    • 1
  • Suzanne Rauzon
    • 1
  • Lorrene Ritchie
    • 1
  • May C. Wang
    • 1
  1. 1.University of CaliforniaBerkeley

Personalised recommendations