No abstract

Issue addressed: Previous research has highlighted children's frequent exposure to advertisements of unhealthy food and beverages on television. However, the food industry is increasingly utilising non-broadcast channels such as outdoor advertising (eg billboards, bus shelters, shop fronts) for product marketing. Few studies have investigated children's exposure to outdoor food advertising around primary and secondary schools. This study aimed to quantify the presence and content of outdoor food advertisements within a 500 m radius of primary and secondary schools in Perth, Western Australia. Methods:A cross-sectional design was used to capture outdoor advertisements within a 500 m radial buffer around the school boundary. The INFORMAS protocol for monitoring outdoor advertising around child-serving institutions was used. Sixtyfour primary and secondary schools in Perth, Australia, were selected using random sampling within socio-economic and population density strata. Results:In total, 5636 outdoor advertisements were identified within a 500 m radius of all 64 schools combined and 30% were for food. Of the 1708 food advertisements, 74% were for unhealthy (non-core) food. The most frequently advertised food products were alcohol, fast food and sugar-sweetened beverages. Only 8% of food advertisements featured a healthy product. The majority of schools (75%) had at least one food advertisement within 500 m (mean 36, range 3-190). Schools in lower socioeconomic areas had more food advertisements and a significantly higher proportion of unhealthy food advertisements within 250 m. Conclusion:Outdoor advertising around schools constitutes a potential frequent source of children's exposure to unhealthy food and alcohol advertising.

BackgroundWidespread availability of tobacco has been shown to contribute to ongoing smoking and make quitting harder. This study investigates why some retailers in three Australian states decided to stop selling tobacco, others might stop selling and why others continue to sell in a declining market.MethodsA telephone survey of 4527 randomly selected retailers was conducted in August 2018 (response rate=72.4%). This study examines responses to open-ended questions in the survey probing retailers’ attitudes and beliefs regarding selling (or not selling) tobacco.Results27.3% of the sample sold tobacco, and 13.3% had formerly sold. Outlets that had stopped selling most frequently mentioned minimal profit and/or sales as the reason for stopping selling (27.7% across all states). This was also the most frequent reason why retailers said they might stop selling. Uniquely in Western Australia (the only state in the study with a fee-based licensing scheme), 12.5% of former tobacco retailers named tobacco licensing as the reason for stopping sales—the second most frequent reason in Western Australia. Of current sellers who were unlikely to stop, the potential to lose sales was the most frequently named reason (31.0% across all states).ConclusionRetailers report being driven by the profitability of tobacco when deciding whether or not to stop selling, although only a small percentage discussed losing incremental sales if they stopped selling. An annual licence fee contributed to some retailers stopping selling, showing that a fee-based tobacco license can contribute to a decline in retail availability of tobacco.

BackgroundIn countries banning advertising and display of tobacco at point-of-sale, little is known about tobacco companies’ continuing promotion of products through incentives and benefits to retailers.MethodA telephone survey of 4527 randomly selected Australian retailers was conducted in August 2018, and identified 800 current tobacco retailers (response rate: 72.4%) who were asked a series of questions about benefits offered to them by tobacco companies and what retailers agreed to in return.Results41.1% of retailers reported being provided with a tobacco cabinet and 38.3% reported having a price list supplied by a tobacco company. One-third (33.3%) reported being offered at least one benefit from a tobacco company for doing something in return. Price discounts were the most frequently reported benefit (19.0%), followed by rebates (8.4%) and gifts (3.0%). Retailers also reported offers of prizes and incentives for increasing sales or demonstrating product knowledge. In return, retailers reported giving companies benefits such as prominence on the price list and/or in the tobacco cabinet and/or influence over the product range and stock levels.ConclusionTobacco companies are continuing to market tobacco and influence sales through provision of incentives and benefits to retailers. Laws that ban the supply of benefits to consumers should be extended to also prohibit the provision of benefits to tobacco retailers.

Unhealthy food marketing influences attitudes, preferences, and consumption of unhealthy foods, leading to excess weight gain. Outdoor advertising is highly visible (often displayed on publicly owned assets), but the evidence supporting regulation is unclear. This systematic scoping review of academic and grey literature aimed to (1) describe potential health and economic impacts of implementing government-led policies that restrict unhealthy food advertising in outdoor spaces or on public assets (including studies examining prevalence of advertising, associations with health outcomes and interventional studies); (2) identify and describe existing policies; and(3) identify factors perceived to have influenced policy implementation. Thirty-six academic studies were eligible for inclusion. Most reported on prevalence of