Improving Consumption and Purchases of Healthier Foods in Retail Environments: A Systematic Review

Abstract

This review examines current research on manipulations of U.S. food retail environments to promote healthier food purchasing and consumption. Studies reviewed use marketing strategies defined as the 4Ps (product, price, placement, promotion) to examine results based on single- and multi-component interventions by study design, outcome, and which of the “Ps” was targeted. Nine electronic databases were searched for publications from 2010 to 2019, followed by forward and backward searches. Studies were included if the intervention was initiated by a researcher or retailer, conducted in-store, and manipulated the retail environment. Of the unique 596 studies initially identified, 64 studies met inclusion criteria. Findings show that 56 studies had at least one positive effect related to healthier food consumption or purchasing. Thirty studies used single-component interventions, while 34 were multi-component. Promotion was the most commonly utilized marketing strategy, while manipulating promotion, placement, and product was the most common for multi-component interventions. Only 14 of the 64 studies were experimental and included objective outcome data. Future research should emphasize rigorous designs and objective outcomes. Research is also needed to understand individual and additive effects of multi-component interventions on sales outcomes, substitution effects of healthy food purchases, and sustainability of impacts.

Perseverative Cognition and Snack Choice: An Online Pilot Investigation

“…The results of reduced availability of unhealthy snack choices leading an individual to be less likely to choose a higher calorie snack (relative to a balanced availability) is in line with previous investigations [ 6 , 59 ] and adds to the growing literature of the potential benefit of using such behavioural economic tactics to improve acute dietary choices [ 4 , 5 ]. The results from this pilot investigation, would certainly suggest that such a snack choice paradigm may be a useful tool going forward to provide an insight to eating behaviours.…”

“…For decades, behavioural research has attempted to highlight the contribution of an individual’s food environment and the surrounding obesogenic cues that may function to direct dietary choices towards innutritious, calorie dense foods [ 2 , 3 ]. This is further supported by the successful application of a number behavioural economic tactics; whereby reducing the availability, accessibility, and associated cues to innutritious foods (or alternatively increasing these cues towards healthier foods), can lead to improved food choice [ 4 , 5 ]. Associated literature has also sought to test the efficacy of such behavioural approaches, even when monitoring for several cognitive and demographic predictors of food choice including, impulsivity, cognitive load, social norms and social economic status [ 6 , 7 , 8 ].…”

USDA Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Vendor Criteria: An Examination of US Administrative Agency Variations

“…In-store marketing approaches for healthy foods and beverages are well established and viable mechanisms to increase their consumption [ 47 ]. Strategies aligned with the “4 P’s” of marketing (product, price, promotion, placement) have demonstrated effectiveness at increasing product sales, both alone and in combination.…”

The Retail Food Environment: Time for a Change

“…This Special Issue includes two systematic reviews examining effects of interventions to support healthy eating. Karpyn and colleagues [10] review 64 in-store marketing studies published between 2010 and 2019 intending to promote nutritious food choices. The authors find that in-store interventions are often multi-component, including changes to in-store promotions (e.g., signage or shelf labels), pricing (e.g., discounts or subsidies), placement (e.g., product prominence or display); and/or product (e.g., availability within the store).…”