enhancing food security and physical activity for maori, pacific and ...

Enhancing Food Security and Physical Activity for Māori, Pacific and Low-income Peoplesprocessed foods, restrict hydrogenation of oils, and reduce the sugar content of23 28beverages. Elsewhere, it has been suggested that incentives for positive outcomesare likely to be more palatable to the food industry than restrictions or regulation, andmay be more effective than undertaking actions that the food industry will resist. 23In contrast, Sugarman 39 has argued that there are limits to the degree and speed ofchange that can be expected from the food industry under a voluntary cooperativeapproach. He suggested that while industry is needed as an ally, voluntary agreementswould not work due to the conflict of interest between sacrificing profits and changing thefood supply. Instead, he proposed a performance-based regulatory approach, whichwould be outcome focused. As an example of this approach, the food industry would berequired to ensure that fewer schoolchildren become obese. Industry would therefore begiven the task to find ways to meet this legally enforceable goal.Midstream: DistributionThere is a growing interest in ‘food miles’ or the ‘carbon footprint’ caused by longdistance food distribution, driven by concerns about climate change. It is generating aresurgence of interest in locally grown foods, and calls for country of origin labelling onfood. Some New Zealand retailers have responded by labelling country of origin onfresh produce, which gives consumers the choice to purchase locally grown or not. 40There has been discussion, however, around the need to differentiate between ‘foodmiles’ and the ‘carbon footprint’. Food miles are considered a poor indicator of41 42environmental impact. Food that has travelled a long distance, for example fromNew Zealand to the United Kingdom, may have a lot of food miles, but a much smallercarbon footprint due to production methods. 43The impact of a local distribution system on food security is uncertain. While it wouldseem intuitive that food grown locally would be more affordable, this is often not thecase. Further analysis needs to be conducted on the benefits of a local food supplychain, 42 including consideration of food security and cost implications alongsidesustainability and environmental issues.Downstream: RetailSupermarkets in New Zealand are dominated by two food companies: Foodstuffs andProgressive Enterprises Limited. Progressive is a subsidiary of the Australian companyWoolworths Limited. It operates the Foodtown, Woolworths and Countdownsupermarket brands and is the franchise co-ordinator for FreshChoice and SuperValue. 44Progressive Enterprises controls approximately 42 percent of the New Zealand grocerymarket. 44 Based on data from the Retail Trade Survey, 45 this is likely to representannual sales of approximately $6.3 billion. Foodstuffs (New Zealand) Limited consists ofthree regionally based companies (Auckland, Wellington and South Island). Foodstuffsoperates the New World, Pak’nSave, Four Square, On the Spot, Shoprite and WritePrice brands. 46 Foodstuffs total wholesale turnover for the year ending 2008 was$7.6 billion.There are five core areas where supermarkets can influence the diet of consumers,according to Hawkes 47 , and we will address these in turn:• location and format of stores,• foods sold in stores,• prices charged,110