Upload
geraldine-jennings
View
214
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Responsible food advertising:A proportionate response to
obesity
January 2006
Overview
1. Food advertising does not cause obesity2. Advertising bans don’t work3. The causes of obesity: food advertising
in context4. Industry is responding: some of our
initiatives5. Recommendations for policy-making6. Conclusions
I. Food advertising does not cause obesity
No evidence of an impact of food advertising on obesity
• Many studies but no consensus on the nature and extent of the impact of food advertising on children
• Three largest studies: Hastings and Ofcom reviews (UK, 2003 and 2004); IOM report (US, 2005)Only a small impact on children’s eating
behaviour and no evidence of impact on children’s weight/health
The “modest effect” of food advertising
• Banning food advertising to children would not reduce childhood obesityOfcom 2004, UK, Childhood Obesity: Food
advertising in context:• “Academic research shows ‘modest direct effects’ of
television advertising on food preference, consumption and behaviour.”
• “There is insufficient evidence to show that TV advertising has a larger, indirect effect on children’s food choices.”
• “A total ban on such advertising would be both ineffective and disproportionate in its wider impact.”
The “modest effect” of food advertising
• German Consumer Protection Ministry, April 2005 study on food advertising to children:– Food advertising rarely targets children
directly– Violations of self-regulatory rules are rare
Any advertising ban would be inappropriate
The empirical evidence
• Food advertising in decline in mature markets - but obesity keeps rising
• No correlation between obesity levels and food advertising volume
• No impact of marketing restrictions on obesity
Food and drink advertising in decline- UK
£100
£200
£300
£400
£500
£600
£700
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Expenditure in Millions of 1994 £s
Source: Nielsen Media Research
Years
Ann
ual E
xpen
ditu
res
in M
illio
ns
Estimated Inflation – Adjusted Expenditures: Food, Drink and Restaurant Advertising
Food and drink advertising stable: Germany
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Food Drink (excluding alcoholic drinks) Fast-food restaurants
Years
An
nu
al E
xpe
nd
iture
s in
€ 0
00
(co
nst
an
t 2
00
0
pric
es)
Source: AC Nielsen Media Research
15231599 1637
17171779 1822
1756
1597 16091644
Note: At ratecard
Germany TV Media Expenditure (Inflation–Adjusted) : Food and Restaurant Advertising
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Food Drink (excluding alcoholic drinks) Fast-food restaurants
Food and Restaurant Advertising stable: Italy
Source: Ad Quest Millennium
Years
An
nu
al E
xpe
nd
iture
s in
€
mill
ion
(c
on
sta
nt
20
00
pric
es)
11411196
Note: Discounted NMR weightings
11701150
12011155
TV Media Expenditure (Inflation–Adjusted):
While advertising declines, obesity rises - UK
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Prevalence of obesity in children aged 2- 10
Estimated no. food and restaurantcommercials viewed per child aged 4-15
Childhood obesity & food advertising in the UK: An inversely proportional trend
Sources:
-Nielsen Media Research
-UK Office for National Statistics, March 2004
While advertising declines, obesity rises - USA
Obesity keeps rising despite falling ad spend (USA) – Federal Trade Commission data, 2005
While advertising declines, obesity rises - USA
• Food advertising is in significant decline:
• The US Federal Trade Commission (2005) concludes that:
Between 1977 and 2004, food ads are down on national TV shows:
• By 34% on kids’ shows• By 50% on family shows
While advertising declines, obesity rises - USA
Meanwhile, childhood obesity has quadrupled:
Source: US Centres for Disease Control, 2005
II. Advertising bans don’t work
Advertising bans are not public health measures
• A few countries/provinces (Sweden, Norway*, Quebec) have banned TV advertising to children on ‘ethical grounds’.
“Where there there has been research on the effectiveness of TV advertising bans on food advertising in relation to obesity in other countries, the conclusions are at best both unclear and contested.” (Ofcom, 2004)
Overweight/obesity rates in Sweden are above the European average (IOTF data)
* Norway bans children’s advertising on terrestrial TV before 9pm
Advertising bans have no impact on obesity
levels• Quebec, a good case study:
– Banned advertising to children on Québec (Francophone) TV in 1980
– 86.4% of Quebec children (2-13) are French-speaking– 91.6% of their TV viewing hours are in French-
language programming – Only 7.9% of their TV viewing hours is spent with
English-language programming (which includes some advertising to children from USA).
• Therefore Québecois children are virtually isolated from TV commercials
Overweight and obesity rates, by province, household population aged 2 to 17, Canada excluding territories, 2004
Childhood obesity is not significantly lower in Quebec than the Canadian average:
Advertising bans have no impact on obesity levels
Advertising and obesity levels are unrelated
Source: Based on IOTF obesity figures and Consumers International data on advertising.
No correlation between exposure to food advertising and overweight/obesity:
What effect would a ban have?
• Arnaud Langlois, JP Morgan Equity Research, illustrated at the 1st Annual European Obesity Conference in Brussels on 14-15 June 2005, how a ban on advertising will result in lower sales growth and diminished brand equity:
Worst case scenario: creation of barriers to entry and development of oligopolistic situations.
A knock-on effect on editorial: 94% of revenues from children’s TV advertising in Europe is reinvested in children’s programmes (egta).
Loss of jobs, stifled innovation, reduced consumer choice, etc.
III. The causes of obesity: food advertising in context
Obesity is multi-factorial
• Obesity is a multi-factorial condition and there is no evidence that advertising is a factor:
Imbalance between energy intake and output is fundamental
Advertising is clearly a minor influence on children’s taste preferences, food choices and eating habits
The family food environment is a primary influenceThe child’s own taste preferences, price, familiarity
with the product and peer influence are other major influences.
The modest impact of advertising
• Advertising is a minor influence on children:
Ofcom, UK 2004:– “In the context of the multiplicity of influences on
children’s food preference, consumption and behaviour, it is not surprising that the direct contribution of TV advertising has been found to be modest.”
– “The influence of advertising is small compared to the child’s own taste preferences, price and familiarity. Peer pressure is also a notable influence.”
Energy in versus energy out
• Jebb and Prentice, BMJ, 1995:– “The paradox of increasing obesity in the face of decreasing food
intake can only be explained if levels of energy expenditure have declined faster than energy intake […] In sharp contrast to the suggestion that a secular drift towards high-fat diets has induced people to overeat, there is evidence […] that the British are becoming fatter in spite of consuming less energy than in the 1970s. Even for adjustments for meals eaten outside the home, and for consumption of alcohol, soft drinks and confectionery, average per capita energy intake seems to have declined by 20% since 1970.”
• UK Health Select Committee Report on Obesity, 2005: – "Summing up the energy equation, the Royal College of General
Practitioners suggested that food intake had fallen on average by 750 kcal per day; but activity levels by 800 kcal. Out of this small imbalance has come the wave of obesity."
The importance of physical activity
• WHO Report on Diet, Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases, 2003:– “A decrease in energy expenditure through decreased physical activity is
likely to be one of the major factors contributing to the global epidemic of overweight and obesity”
– "A sizeable proportion of deaths in overweight and obese populations are probably a result of low levels of cardio-respiratory fitness rather than obesity per se."
• EU Green Paper on Healthy Diets and Physical Activity, 2005:– “60% of Europeans have no vigorous physical activity in a typical week
and 40% not even moderate physical activity”– “Europe-wide, only about one third of schoolchildren appear to be
meeting recognised physical activity guidelines.”
• UK National Audit Office, 2001:– “Extra physical activity involved in daily living 50 years ago compared
with today was the equivalent to running a marathon a week.”
The importance of physical activity
Source: KOPS, Germany (International Journal of Obesity 2004-28, 1494-1502 (1497)
Physical activity is a major determinant, regardless of all other factors:
The importance of the family
• The family food environment is a major determinant: Johnson et al., 1991:
• “The primary agent of socialisation, including learning dietary habits, physical activity levels and overall approach to good health, is the family – regardless of nationality”
Dickinson, R., 1997: • “The decision-making structure in families has changed
away from a hierarchical model and towards a ‘democratic unit.’ These numerous factors, and the interaction between them, have impacted the family food environment and young people’s approach to diet and have contributed to a fundamental shift in society’s relationship with food.”
Latest German Research
• Kiel Obesity Prevention Study (KOPS)
• Survey among parents of 5-7 year-old children conducted in all primary schools in Kiel (248,000 inhabitants; northwest Germany)
• 1996-2003 (preliminary results from 2001)
• Bavarian Study (Koletzko et al.)
• Survey among parents of 5-6 year-old children conducted in Bavarian primary schools (6862 children in high, medium and low population density areas)
• Study published in 2004
51.049.0
47.045.0
43.041.0
39.037.0
35.033.0
31.029.0
27.025.0
23.021.0
19.017.0
15.013.0
11.0
300
200
100
0
poor satisfactory good verypoor satisfactory good very goodgood 35% 62% 3% 0%
Num
ber
of
Chi
ldre
n
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 52
300
200
100
0
Dietary Habits:
Distribution of Healthy Eating Index
and
Source: KOPS (International Journal of Obesity 2004-28, 1494-1502 (1499)Beziehung zwischen Beziehung zwischen
dem Ernährungszustand dem Ernährungszustand der Kinder und dem der Kinder und dem Ernährungs-musterindexErnährungs-musterindex
normalgewichtig
30
25
18
15
10
overweight
obese
BM
I [k
g/m
²]
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 52
Healthy Eating Index (points)
normal weight
corresponding Distribution of BMI
Dietary Habits and Obesity
Schokolade
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Normal Übergew. Normal Übergew.
0 - 1/Woche > 1/Woche
%
Gezuckerte Getränke
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Normal Übergew. Normal Übergew.
0 - 1/Tag > 1/Tag
%
Normal Obese Normal Obese
0 – 1/Week > 1/Week
Normal Obese Normal Obese
0 – 1/Day > 1/Day
Chocolate Soft Drinks
Source: Koletzko, B. et al., Bundesgesundheitsblatt 47 (3), 227-234
Chocolate and soft drink intake vs. obesity
No apparent correlation:
Source: KOPS, 1998-2001
Socio-Economic Status and Obesity
0
10
20
30
low middle high
socio-economic Status
Pre
va
len
ce
of
Ov
erw
eig
ht/
Ob
es
ity
(%
)
19,611,9
6,0
Insights from latest research
Strong correlation between physical activity and obesity levels.
No apparent correlation between diet composition and obesity – what counts is energy intake.
No correlation between intake of particular foods (e.g. chocolate, soft drinks) and obesity levels.
Socio-economic status is an important determinant.
A review of the evidence
• Conclusions– The determinants of diets and health are many
and complex– Food promotion has only a small impact on
children’s food choices– No correlation between advertising volume and
obesity– No impact of marketing restrictions on obesity
• But we must nonetheless address societal concerns
IV. Industry is responding
Some advertising industry initiatives
Industry is responding• Educational campaigns
promoting healthy lifestyles
• Advertising campaigns encouraging activity
• Programmes promoting increased activity
• Partnerships between industry, government and stakeholders
• Company initiatives: http://www.wfanet.org/news/article_detail.asp?Lib_ID=1669
Investment in advertising standards
• Our vision, advertising standards that:– Function within a regulatory framework– Provide an extra layer of consumer
protection– Adapt to changing societal expectations– Involve non-industry stakeholders– Ensure accountability and transparency– Are enforced effectively
• We are in implementing this vision across Europe & worldwide
The purpose of advertising standards
• Advertising codes are not designed as public health measures
• Yet high standards enforced by codes can guarantee responsible advertising, by:– Providing an extra layer of consumer protection– Implementing the detail of the legal framework– Reflecting the views of society and needs of
consumers– Ensuring accountability and transparency
A vision for effective advertising standards
• Advertisers have a vision of effective advertising standards – the 10 principles of the EASA Charter:– Comprehensive coverage of all forms of advertising and all practitioners – Adequate and sustained funding– Comprehensive and effective codes– Broad consultation with interested parties during code development– Due consideration of the involvement of independent, non-governmental lay
persons in the complaint adjudication process.– Efficient and resourced administration of codes and independent, impartial
handling of complaints– Prompt and efficient complaint handling at no cost to the consumer– Provision of advice and training to industry practitioners– Effective sanctions and enforcement, including the publication of decisions,
combined with efficient compliance work and monitoring of codes– Effective awareness of the self-regulatory system by industry and consumers
Currently being implemented across Europe & worldwide
Responsible food advertising standards
• ICC Framework for Responsible Food and Beverage Communications
• Minimum standards for marketers: many national self-regulatory codes go further
• Currently being implemented across Europe & worldwide
Effectiveness of advertising standards
• It is widely recognised that “advertising standards in Europe generally work well in ensuring a high level of consumer protection”
– ('Study on the impact of advertising and teleshopping on minors', INRA / Bird&Bird 2001)
• and that advertising is a “notable exception” to the “often-disappointing practice of self-regulation”
– (Study to identify best practice in the use of soft law and to analyse how this best practice can be made to work for consumers in the European Union, by Lex Fori for the European Commission, 2002.)
Effectiveness of advertising standards
• Further proof in figures on complaints from the public received and dealt with by self-regulatory bodies across the EU. EASA* figures show that in 2004:– 51744 complaints were received across the EU– Of these:
• Only 259 (0.5%) related to advertising to children• Only 717 (1.38%) related to food advertising in
general• Only 40 (0.077%) related to food advertising to
children
* The European Advertising Standards Alliance
Investment in education: Media Smart
• 1 Million children taught in the UK
• Over £3.5 million ($6m) spent
• Launched in Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands (2005) and Sweden and Finland (2006)
• Over 40% of UK primary schools use Media Smart materials
• 12,500 schools by the end of 2006 (50%)
• Endorsed by the European Commission, UK and Dutch Government and charity partners
European Platform on DPAH
• Multi-stakeholder approach, including food industry and advertisers
• Commitment to significant increase in resources
• Voluntary commitments to tackle obesity
• Cross-stakeholder partnerships• Commitment to input into global and
US discussions
European Platform on DPAH
• WFA commitments:– Strengthening advertising standards in
Europe (and worldwide)– Implementing food marketing codes of
conduct across Europe (and worldwide)– Developing media literacy programmes
(Media Smart) across Europe (and worldwide)– Using advertising to promote healthy
lifestyles
Recommendations for policy-making
The industry perspective
The role of marketing
• The consumer is king– Companies cannot market what is not in demand– Consumer demand is changing
• Companies are responding– New products emerging: a boom in ‘healthy
options’– Research, investment and time needed
• The function of marketing– Essential for competition, innovation, choice
A question of proportionality
• We do not question the need for a regulatory framework
• Regulation must not stifle competition and innovation
• Regulation must be proportionate and effective
• Advertising standards effectively complement regulation
• Marketing rules must be part of the wider picture
VI. Conclusions
Conclusions
• We welcome discussions with Government to find proportionate and effective solutions to obesity
• We are committed to working with all stakeholders to stem the rise of obesity
• Changes in consumer behaviour will take time
• Together we can make a difference