Public appetite for new restrictions runs out in HFSS debate
Only 11% of people think tobacco-style controls would have a big impact on their shopping habits
New survey by SPQR Communications reveals the majority of Brits would not support the introduction of tobacco-style controls on high fat, sugar, and salt (HFSS) products. From brand character bans all the way through to plain packaging, only 18% of people back all the restrictions in a YouGov survey of 2,000 people.
45% of people disagree that HFSS products should carry mandatory health warnings, compared with 34% who agree.
Similarly, 43% are opposed to “tobacco-style” plain packaging for HFSS foods, with 34% in support of the move.
And less than half of adults think plain packaging would have any impact on their decision to buy HFSS products. The most sceptical are the over 55s.
But when it comes to the problem of childhood obesity, public attitudes harden - nearly twice as many people support as oppose the removal of brand-generated characters from HFSS products to make them less appealing to children.
LONDON, 11 April 2022: The majority of British adults would not support tobacco-style restrictions on products that are high in fat, sugar, and salt (HFSS) as a means of fighting obesity, a new survey reveals. The report by SPQR Communications also found that only 11% of people believe restrictions on packaging would have a significant effect on their purchasing decisions. It comes as proposals to restrict the advertisement and promotion of HFSS products are expected later this year.
The survey of 2,000 people conducted by YouGov is part of a white paper exploring the parallels between the war on smoking in the last decade and the new battle with obesity. The report argues that the current approach to junk food follows the trajectory of tobacco control, with worrying implications for brand value.
Michael Coppen-Gardner, Managing Director of SPQR Communications, said:
“The playbook that was developed for tobacco control has been repurposed and applied to the new enemy of our times - obesity. From the soft drinks levy in 2018 to the recommendations of Henry Dimbleby’s National Food Strategy in 2021, interventionism is becoming the de facto approach for tackling obesity. But our research raises an important question for policymakers – namely, how effective will anti-obesity measures be if they are out of step with public opinion?”
The latest government figures show that 28% of adults in England are obese, and a further 36.2% are overweight, while a recent study from the University of Glasgow found that obesity is now a bigger killer in England and Scotland than smoking.
How significant would an increase in regulation be?
It’s estimated that British shoppers currently spend some 40% of their grocery budget on HFSS goods, 15% of which goes to the types of products that will face the most restrictions. There have been varying estimates as to the financial impact on brands, with estimates ranging from revenue losses of anywhere between £27m and £1.2bn. Research by brand valuation consultancy Brand Finance has estimated that the potential value loss to businesses worldwide would be around $430bn if standardised packaging were extended to drinks, including alcoholic drinks alone.
What does the public think?
In the YouGov survey commissioned by SPQR, people were asked for their views on a variety of potential future restrictions, including branding bans, the removal of brand generated characters, mandatory health warnings and full-on plain packaging.
Incredibly, only 18% of people back all the restrictions in the survey. 47% of people thought plain packaging would have no impact on their decision to buy HFSS products; only 11% thought it would have a big impact. 47% of people disagreed that HFSS products should carry mandatory health warnings vs. 35% who agreed. Interestingly, more than half of women aged 18-44 disagreed with health warnings. 29% of the public support the removal of all branding (including logos and mascots) from HFSS products.
Despite the public opposition to the restrictions however, there is still cause for concern for some brands: nearly twice (44%) as many people would support the removal of brand-generated characters from HFSS products to make them less appealing to children, compared to those who oppose (23%).
Coppen-Gardner added:
“We risk going backwards if the government continues down this path. The public aren’t on board with these measures – in fact, our YouGov survey suggests we’ve already reached the boundary of public tolerance with the proposed advertising and promotion restrictions. Instead, we need new ideas that align public health objectives with public opinion. On few topics is that more important than when it comes to the food we eat.”
The exclusive polling by SPQR was commissioned following government proposals to introduce legislation to limit brand advertising and promotions for both online and in-store sales on all products classified as HFSS, set to come into force in October 2022. Further proposals are set to be introduced from January 2023 relating to television and online advertising.
-ENDS-
SPQR Communications is available to comment to the press and Michael Coppen-Gardner is available for an interview to discuss the whitepaper and regulatory trends within the HFSS category.