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

Enhancing Food Security and Physical Activity for Māori, Pacific and Low-income Peoplesdeveloped. 64 However, the effect of unit pricing on food needs to be explored further, assome consumers find it confusing or that it does not help them identify better value65 66products.Private label products have been a growth area for supermarkets. 67 They have alsohelped reduce the price of food, and supermarkets should continue to focus ondeveloping healthier private label options. 47 In New Zealand, private label products areon average one-third cheaper than branded products (2005 data). 67 Supermarkets in theUK have gone further, introducing an ‘economy line’ range of products in addition to aprivate label range. 68 The economy line products analysed were consistently muchcheaper than branded products, and were nutritionally equivalent or superior to thebranded products. In New Zealand, comparison of sodium content of private labelversus branded products found a wide range of differences in sodium content betweenthe two, depending on product type. 69 The difference ranged from -33 percent to74 percent in the salt content of private label versus branded products. In 11 of the15 categories, salt content was higher in the private label products. However, this studyonly looked at one nutritional aspect of the food, and may not be reflected whenanalysing the nutrition content of foods overall. The impact of private labels on the priceof milk was investigated in the US. 58 As private label milk sales increased, the price ofprivate label milk decreased. However, it also served to increase the price charged formanufacturer brands. This works in favour of the low-income consumer as long as theyare buying the private label products, and they are of equivalent quality.Promotions undertaken38 70Food marketing clearly influences food preferences and food purchasing. Marketingto children has been noted as a food security issue as it creates demand for higher71 72priced products from children. It has been estimated that for every dollar the WHOspends on non-communicable disease prevention, the food industry spends $500 onpromoting processed foods. 73 The combined advertising spend of Coca Cola andPepsiCo in 2004 was more than the WHO’s entire budget for 2002-03. 74 In 2002-04,Coca Cola spent 10.5 percent of their turnover on marketing, and Unilever, anothermajor food company, spent 13.6 percent. 75 Thus, there is considerable marketing aimedat encouraging purchase of advertised products. The Institute of Medicine Committee onFood Marketing to Children and Youth found that food and beverage marketing is out ofbalance with dietary guidelines and contributes to an environment that puts the health ofchildren and youth at risk. 76 An analysis in 2005 of television advertising in New Zealandduring children’s viewing time found 70 percent of food advertisements were counter toimproved nutrition. 77 In relation to food security, this means children are pressuringparents for advertised products that are likely to be higher priced 71 and often lessnutritious than other options available.In order to offset the impact of marketing, particularly on children, the Sydney Principleswere developed. This is a set of seven guiding principles to direct action on changingfood and beverage marketing to children. 70 As a direct response to the SydneyPrinciples, the food industry in New Zealand is developing a voluntary code of practiceon advertising and marketing to children. Commercial broadcasting time was alsodonated to the Feeding our Futures social marketing campaign, when it existed. 78Adherence with the Code should be closely monitored, and regulation considered in thecase of inadequate compliance.113