Abstract
Background
The amount of candy sold in Denmark peaked in 2021, and sales of pick and mix candy (loose candy selected and mixed by consumers) have increased substantially since 2013. A high consumption of sugary products increases the risk of weight gain, overweight, and obesity. This study aims to test whether the size of candy bags influences the amount of pick and mix candy purchased in Danish supermarkets.
Methods
We examined the effect of two candy-bag sizes on the weight of pick and mix candy purchased in a crossover design in 10 supermarkets for 12 weeks. The cluster crossover intervention was conducted in cooperation with the supermarket chain Rema 1000. During the first six weeks of the intervention, five supermarkets provided a small candy bag and five provided a large candy bag, after which the candy-bag sizes were switched for the remaining six weeks.
Results
A total of 35,512 transactions of pick and mix candy were recorded during the 12-week period. More pick and mix candy (8.7%) was purchased in supermarkets that provided the large candy bag (339 g [95% CI: 335.51—342.49]) compared to supermarkets that provided the small bag (312 g [95% CI: 309.02—314.98]). We found a negative association between price levels and the mean weight of pick and mix candy purchased. Results showed the average weight of pick and mix candy per transaction was 38% higher in the supermarket with lowest price level per 100 g compared to supermarkets with highest price level per 100 g.
Conclusions
Candy-bag size was significantly associated with purchases of pick and mix candy. Consumers purchased less pick and mix candy when smaller bags were provided compared to larger bags. Results suggest that downsizing candy bags in supermarkets’ pick and mix departments may influence this specific purchasing behaviour. Following the presentation of the study’s results, Rema 1000 chose to discontinue the large candy bag in all pick and mix departments in their supermarkets.
More research is needed on environmental influences on purchases of pick and mix candy and potential substitution effects with other snack or savoury products.
Keywords: Purchase behaviour, Candy-bag size, Supermarket intervention, Crossover intervention, Downsizing, Public health, Food Environment
Background
Sales data from 100 countries, show that Danish citizens had the highest consumption of candy in 2021. Danish citizens purchased an average of 6.6 kg candy per year, topped with an average of 5.7 kg chocolate per year (a total of 12.3 kg per year.) [1]. A study from 2020 showed an increase in the sales of pick and mix candy (loose candy selected and mixed by consumers) in Denmark from 2.6 million kg in 2013 to 18.1 million kg in 2018 [2]. In 2023, the prevalence of overweight or obesity among Danish adults was 53%, including 19% with obesity [3]. A modelling study estimates that, if current trends continue, the prevalence of overweight or obesity among adult Danes will increase to 66%, including 29% with obesity, in 2045 [4].
A high consumption of sugary products such as candy increases the risk of weight gain, overweight, and obesity, and it can displace other important nutrients in the diet, particularly in children’s diets [5–7]. Besides diet, several factors like biology, behaviour, norms, as well as social, environmental, structural, and commercial determinants can influence the development of overweight and obesity [8]. This study focuses on purchases of pick and mix candy in Danish supermarkets as a specific purchasing behaviour among Danish consumers.
Previous literature has shown that changes in portion size and food prices can influence food intake and purchasing behaviours [2, 9–14]. Results from a meta-analysis showed that doubling served portion sizes increased meal intake by 35% on average [9]. Another meta-analysis found a statistically significant moderate-to-large reduction in daily energy intake (standardized mean difference = –0.71, 95% CI: –0.96 to –0.46, p < 0.001) when smaller portions were served compared to when larger portions we served. Furthermore, larger reductions in portion size (20–74%) were associated with larger decreases in daily energy intake (14–1865 kcal/day) [10]. The present study contributes to the existing literature by examining the association between candy-bag size and purchasing behaviour in Danish supermarkets regarding pick and mix candy specifically. The aim of the study was to test whether larger candy bags at the pick and mix candy department would result in consumers purchasing a greater amount of pick and mix candy (in grams).
Method
The supermarket chain Rema 1000 gave the Danish Cancer Society permission to conduct a cluster-crossover intervention in 10 of their supermarkets to investigate the association between two different candy-bag sizes and the amount of candy purchased (g) in the pick and mix candy department. The study was conducted over a 12-week period. During this period, the average weight of pick and mix candy purchased was recorded using the supermarket account registry.
The potential influence of the candy-bag size on amount of pick and mix candy purchased (g) was tested using a cluster-crossover design, where five supermarkets (group 1) offered a large bag (5.23 L) during the first six weeks (time-period 1), and the other five supermarkets (group 2) offered a smaller bag size (2.45 L) during the same period. Only one bag size (either the large or the small one) was available at each store at any time during the intervention period. The bags provided were the standard bags used by Rema 1000. The allocation of supermarkets to either group 1 or 2 was randomly determined. After the first six weeks, the supermarkets switched bag size for the following six weeks (time-period 2). The intervention was conducted from 19 August to 10 November 2023.
All purchase transactions in the supermarkets including the amount in weight of pick and mix candy were recorded as independent observations. Furthermore, we recorded price levels (n = 3), number of weeks (n = 12), day of the week (n = 7), group (n = 2), time period (n = 2), supermarket number (n = 10), and amount of pick and mix candy (g) per transaction (divided into ten 100-g weight intervals).
Supermarkets included were dispersed geographically in Denmark in the following cities: Aarhus (n = 4), Aarhus’ suburbs (n = 2), Odense (n = 2), and minor municipalities in Northern Jutland (n = 2). The price of pick and mix candy varied between supermarkets. There were three different price levels: 8.95 DKK/100 g (n = 1 supermarket), 10.95 DKK/100 g (n = 1 supermarket), and 11.95 DKK/100 g (n = 8 supermarkets). All prices were set by the respective store managers. The price of pick and mix candy remained constant within each supermarket during the 12-week study period. The candy bags were provided free of charge to the consumers, so consumers paid only for weight of candy selected.
The association between the main outcome of candy-weight intervals (g) and candy-bag size was analysed with a chi-square test of independence. Factors with a statistically significant difference in distribution of pick and mix candy weight were included as possible explanations and tested with a chi-square test of independence. A chi-square test of independence was chosen since the cluster-randomized crossover design, where each supermarket acts as its own control, reduces the potential influence of store-level differences, such as consumer characteristics, customer volume, municipality size, income level, and proximity to competing supermarkets. The crossover design also reduces the potential risk of bias from variables that may interact with the intervention across study periods. We report means and 95% confidence intervals. For all tests, p values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
Results
A total of 10 supermarkets were included in the study. In total, we registered 35,512 transactions from the pick and mix candy departments in the 10 supermarkets during the 12-week period. Higher amounts of pick and mix candy per purchase were bought in supermarkets that offered the large candy bag (339 g [95% CI: 335.51—342.49]) compared to the amount bought in supermarkets that offered the small candy bag (312 g [95% CI: 309.02—314.98]). On average, there were 27 g (8.7%) more candy in the large candy bags. The difference between large and small candy bags was consistent between period 1 and 2.
The share of pick and mix transactions varied significantly by weight intervals (g) (1.4%- 24.9%), price (10.2%−77.8%), supermarket number (4.7%—14%), time-period (49%−51%), week number (6.9%—9.4%) and weekday (5.5%—44.7%) but not with group. (see Tables 1, 2, 3). Most purchase transactions were in weight intervals 2 (101–200 g, 24.9%) and 3 (201–300 g, 24%), and under 5% of purchase transactions were in weight intervals 7–10 (601–900 + g) (see Table 1). Thus, most purchase transactions of pick and mix candy weighted between 101–300 g (n = 17,360) and least transactions weighted between 601–900 g or above (n = 3,672). When stratifying the transactions in 100-g weight intervals, the lower intervals accounted for a larger share of purchase transactions using smaller bags (p < 0.001) and conversely, 60% of purchase transactions for more than 900 g of pick and mix candy occurred when the large bag was provided. Thus, the distribution skewed towards a minor weight interval when using the small bag in the pick and mix departments (p < 0.001) (Fig. 1). The greatest variation in share of transactions was found by weekday: Friday was the day of the week with the largest share of purchases with pick and mix candy (44.7%), whereas Monday was the weekday with the smallest share of purchases (5.5%). Supermarket number 4 had the largest share of purchases (14%) which was three times higher than the share recorded at supermarket number 9 that had the lowest share of purchases (4.7%). There was no significant difference between group 1 (the five supermarkets starting with the large bag) and group 2 (the five supermarkets starting with the smaller bag) regarding number of transactions, but the average pick and mix candy weight was higher in group 1 (355 g) compared to group 2 (296 g) regardless of time-period.
Table 1.
Variations in transactions including pick and mix candy, by price and weight interval (N = 35,512)
| Price per 100 g (DKK) *** | Weight Intervals (grams)*** | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
8.95 (n = 1) |
10.95 (n = 1) |
11.95 (n = 8) |
1 (≤ 100) |
2 (101–200) |
3 (201–300) |
4 (301–400) |
5 (401–500) |
6 (501–600) |
7 (601–700) |
8 (701–800) |
9 (801–900) |
10 (> 900) |
|
|
Frequency (n) |
3636 | 4251 | 27,625 | 2718 | 8840 | 8520 | 5689 | 3744 | 2329 | 1442 | 832 | 509 | 889 |
| Share (%) | 10.24 | 11.97 | 77.79 | 7.65 | 24.89 | 23.99 | 16.02 | 10.54 | 6.56 | 4.06 | 2.34 | 1.43 | 2.50 |
n.s. non-significant
*p < 0.05
**p < 0.01
***p < 0.001
Table 2.
Variations in transactions including pick and mix candy, by supermarket number, time-period and group (N = 35,512)
| Supermarket no.*** | Time-period*** | Group (n.s.) | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | |
| Frequency (n) | 4251 | 3636 | 4792 | 4968 | 4293 | 2784 | 3628 | 2552 | 1673 | 2935 | 18,250 | 17,262 | 17,853 | 17,659 |
| Share (%) | 11.97 | 10.24 | 13.49 | 13.99 | 12.09 | 7.84 | 10.22 | 7.19 | 4.71 | 8.26 | 51.39 | 48.61 | 50.27 | 49.73 |
n.s. non-significant
*p < 0.05
**p < 0.01
***p < 0.001
Table 3.
Variations in transactions including pick and mix candy, by week and weekday (N = 35,512)
| Week*** | Weekday*** | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | M | T | W | Th | F | Sa | Su | |
| Frequency (n) | 2844 | 2969 | 2867 | 3320 | 3104 | 3146 | 3307 | 3037 | 2437 | 2845 | 2933 | 2703 | 1966 | 2403 | 2655 | 3058 | 15,867 | 6651 | 2912 |
| Share (%) | 8.01 | 8.36 | 8.07 | 9.35 | 8.74 | 8.86 | 9.31 | 8.55 | 6.86 | 8.01 | 8.26 | 7.61 | 5.54 | 6.77 | 7.48 | 8.61 | 44.68 | 18.73 | 8.20 |
n.s. non-significant
*p < 0.05
**p < 0.01
***p < 0.001
Fig. 1.
Distribution of share of purchase transactions (%) by candy-bag size
The mean weight of pick and mix candy bought (g) per transaction was higher when the price level was lower (p < 0.001) (Fig. 2). There was a difference in price-levels within the included supermarkets. The lowest price-level (11.95 DKK/100 g, n = 8 supermarkets) was 25% higher than the highest price-level (8.95 DKK/100 g, n = 1 supermarket), and 8% higher than the middle price-level (10.95 DKK/100 g). The average weight of pick and mix candy per purchase transaction was 38% higher (431 g [95% CI: 422.10–439.90]) in the supermarkets practicing the highest price-level, compared to the supermarket practicing the lowest price-level (311 g [95% CI: 308.53 −313.47]), and 5% higher compared to the supermarket practicing the middle price-level (327 g [95% CI: 320.57–333.43]).
Fig. 2.
Distribution of average purchase transaction weight (g) of pick and mix candy by price level
Discussion
This study shows that the availability of larger candy bags was associated with an increased amount of candy purchased (g) in the pick and mix candy department in 10 Danish supermarkets. Lager candy bags were associated with a higher average of purchased weight of pick and mix candy (8.7% more, 339 g vs. 312 g). The use of smaller candy bags was associated with decreased purchases of pick and mix candy, suggesting that downsizing candy bags may influence this specific purchasing behaviour. Results also showed a negative association between price and total weight of pick and mix candy purchases. Lower price levels were associated with higher amounts purchased (38% higher at the lowest price level, with a 25% price difference).
The main finding, that candy-bag size affects the amount of pick and mix candy purchased, is supported by previous studies. Greater portion sizes increase intake of food and beverages, and downsizing portions can decrease daily energy intake [2, 9, 10]. The current study adds to existing evidence by contributing results from a real-life supermarket intervention instead of experimental settings, and by zooming in on bag size as a structural cue that can affect the purchasing behaviour of pick and mix candy. In this study, replacing the large candy bag with the small bag was a downsizing of more than 50% in bag volume. Based on this study alone, it is not possible to conclude whether there is a limit for how much the candy bags could be downsized, and whether the amount of pick and mix candy purchased will continue to decrease with even smaller candy bags, but previous data hints that is a possibility. Findings from a meta-analysis report a curvilinear association between portion size and daily energy intake showing that the effect of reducing portion sizes on intake is dependent on the size of the portion in the beginning. The same study found that reductions in energy intake were smaller when very large portions were downsized compared to when moderate portions were downsized [10].
The observed bag-size effect could be explained by the difference in the visual cue consumers met in the intervention when given candy bags of different volumes. Larger bags may unconsciously encourage filling them with more candy, since the larger volume might give a sense of “bag-emptiness” and erroneously give a sense of having filled the bag with lesser candy or making it difficult to assess the total amount correctly.
The association between price and purchases of food and beverages is supported by existing literature. A negative association between price increase and purchases and intake of different food and beverage products is consistently reported in previous studies [11–18]. Fiscal policies that increase food and beverage prices were shown to decrease purchases and intake of the targeted products, and inversely lower prices led to an increase in purchases and intake [11–14]. An umbrella review [14] from 2024 reported that imposing taxes on unhealthy foods and beverages (e.g., high in fat, salt or sugar products) can decrease purchases and consumption of the targeted products [14]. Our study showed that purchasing behaviour of pick and mix candy was most influenced when price levels differed by 25% (comparing 8.95 DKK with 11.95 DKK per 100-g). This is aligned with other studies that suggest price increases for foods and beverages must be high enough and at least 20% to detect significant changes in purchasing and consumption-related outcomes [14, 19, 20].
Strengths and limitations
The cluster-randomized crossover design ensured that each group of supermarkets received both interventions (large bag size vs. small bag size), thereby working as its own control and reducing the impact of individual differences between supermarkets’ consumers (e.g., consumer habits and preferences), as well as other differences between the included supermarkets and sociodemographic areas. Furthermore, the use of real-world purchase data ensures a large sample size of instances of pick and mix candy purchasing behaviour and concurrently reduces respondent burden.
Study limitations encompass the use of supermarket transaction data that captures only purchasing behaviour, not actual consumption in weight or energy intake from the amount of pick and mix candy purchased. Transaction data was collected at the supermarket level and therefore not possible to associate with customer-level data, so the data collected only describes the amount of pick and mix candy purchased per transaction. Hence, we have no information on total candy purchased over the 12-week study period per customer, nor knowledge on sharing or potential storage behaviour at home. Another limitation is the lack of sales data for potential substitution products. Potential substitution products refer to alternative snack or savoury products that consumers may purchase instead of pick and mix candy such as prepackaged candy, chocolates, chips, or other snacks, but such data were not available. Differences in the availability, promotion, or pricing of substitution products across supermarkets and weeks during the crossover time-period, could have impacted the observed purchasing patterns for pick-and-mix candy; however, it is most likely that any event is evenly spread between supermarkets. The difference between two candy-bag sizes was the only test in the intervention. Unfortunately, it was not possible to combine other interventions, e.g. different price levels per 100 g. Our data shows a negative association between price and purchases of pick and mix candy. However, the data used for this analysis could be stronger, if there had been an equal distribution of supermarkets with the three different price levels. If different price levels had been included as a part of the crossover design, the generalizability of the findings regarding the effect of price would have been stronger. The external validity of our findings is limited. The included sample was not representative for all supermarket chains in Denmark, and other supermarket retailers or countries could have customer groups with different purchasing behaviours. However, Denmark is a small homogeneous society, and the areas where the supermarkets were located are not outliers in this context.
Broader implications
Several organizations, including the World Health Organization, the World Cancer Research Fund and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development recommend increases in price levels and reductions in portion sizes for unhealthy products as policy tools that can help create healthier food environments for consumers [21–23]. Supermarket retailers as well as the food and beverage industry can voluntarily implement initiatives like these as a way of showing corporate social responsibility (CSR) for improving population health. Following the presentation of the study’s results, Rema 1000 chose to discontinue the large candy bag in all pick and mix departments in their supermarkets. Downsizing candy bag-size alone will probably not contribute significantly to the prevention of the increasing rates of overweight and obesity among Danes, and this type of CSR-initiative may not be feasible for other commercial actors. While 8.7% less pick and mix candy per bag per day in average does not seem much, this would correspond to an estimated 44000 kg less of pick and mix candy sold per year in all Rema 1000 stores providing pick and mix candy in Denmark1, which could be a substantial change for the consumer population. Even though retailers can take on voluntary CSR-initiatives to promote their CSR position and promote healthier choices among their customers, there is still a risk that such minor initiatives, can be both limited in scale and potentially delay stronger structural or legislative measures. National policies on product sizes and price levels for unhealthy food and beverage products could be more favourable towards securing healthier choices for people and equal business circumstances for all commercial actors. It is, however, important to recognize that these initiatives can lead to potential financial losses for stakeholders.
Combining pick and mix candy purchases from supermarket transaction-level data combined with consumer-level data (e.g. loyalty cards), and introducing more variations on bag size and price level, as well as data on longer-term purchasing patterns, frequency of candy purchasing behaviour, and substitution effects could add to the body of evidence regarding pick and mix candy purchasing behaviour.
Conclusion
This study shows that downsizing candy bags in the pick and mix candy department in Danish supermarkets may influence this specific purchasing behaviour. Consumers that bought pick and mix candy when the small bag was provided purchased 8.7% less pick and mix candy in average (312 g) compared to consumers that bought it when the large bag was provided (339 g). Price might also have a considerable effect on the amount of pick and mix candy purchased. In the supermarket where price was 25% lower than the highest price level for the Rema 1000 retailer, the amount of pick and mix candy purchased was 38% higher on average. Following the presentation of the study’s results, Rema 1000 chose to discontinue the large candy bag in all pick and mix departments in their supermarkets. However, there is a need for more knowledge about pick and mix candy purchases specifically and potential substitution effects that could occur by changing the bag. Also, it is relevant to research whether changing the bag size or price of pick and mix candy could contribute significantly to the reduction of pick and mix candy intake at a population level, and whether this would be achieved best through voluntary or mandatory initiatives.
Acknowledgements
Not applicable.
Abbreviations
- g
Grams
- kg
Kilograms
- e.g.
Exempli gratia (for example)
- kcal
Kilocalorie
- L
Liter
- DKK
Danish crown (currency)
- n.s.
Non-significant
- No.
Number
- CSR
Corporate Social Responsibility
Authors’ contributions
PBL drafted the manuscript. ST and BK conceptualized and designed the study. ST executed the intervention in collaboration with Rema 1000. BK did the analysis, and SML revised the manuscript. All authors contributed to writing, reviewing and approving the final manuscript.
Funding
The study is funded by the Novo Nordic Foundation as a part of a greater project about downsizing. The Novo Nordic Foundation had no role in the development, conduction, analysis and interpretation of the intervention as well as the dissemination of results in this article.
Data availability
The dataset supporting the conclusions of this article are not publicly available as it was provided by a third-party retail store, Rema 1000, under a confidentiality agreement. The data contains commercially sensitive information and cannot be made publicly available. The corresponding author is responsible for the integrity of the data and its analysis.
Declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable. The authors determined that the study be exempt from review by an ethics committee, since the data used were fully anonymized such that no individual can be identified directly or indirectly. Furthermore, the data in case is neither identifiable human material, nor identifiable human data.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Footnotes
This estimate is based on the number of stores selling pick and mix candy. Number of stores was provided by Rema 1000 in confidentiality.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
- 1.Biltoft-Jensen AP, Gibbons SJ, Kørup K, Bestle SMS, Christensen BJ, Trolle E, et al. Danskere er verdensmestre i slikindkøb [Danes are world champions in candy purchases]. E-article from DTU National Food Institute. 2021;2021(1):1–10. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Hansen S, Kragelund Hall K, Kidmose U, Lähteenmäki L. Danskernes forbrug af slik og chips - en undersøgelse af portionsstørrelser [Danes' consumption of candy and chips: a study of portion sizes]. Aarhus University, DCA – Danish Centre for Food and Agriculture. 2020. DCA report No. 170.
- 3.National Institute of Public Health (SDU), Danish Health Authority. Den Nationale Sundhedsprofil. Totalerne fra 2023 [The National Health Profile 2023]. Copenhagen: Danish Health Authority. 2023. Available from: https://www.danskernessundhed.dk/index.html. Accessed 16 Apr 2025.
- 4.Lund S, Frederiksen K. Notat om fremskrivning af prævalensen af overvægt i Danmark til 2045 [Projection of the prevalence of overweight in Denmark until 2045]. Copenhagen: Danish Cancer Society; 2019. [Google Scholar]
- 5.Danish Veterinary and Food Administration. Anbefalinger til snacks og søde sager [Recommendations for snacks and sweet treats]. Available from: Accessed 16 Apr 2025. https://foedevarestyrelsen.dk/kost-og-foedevarer/alt-om-mad/soed-balance/kommuner/sundhedsplejen-og-tandplejen/anbefalinger/anbefalinger-til-snacks-og-soede-sager
- 6.Matthiessen J, Fagt S. Kostens betydning for børn og unges sundhed og overvægt: 2000–2013 [The importance of diet for children’s and adolescents’ health and overweight: 2000–2013]. E-article from DTU National Food Institute. 2017;2017(2):1–23. [Google Scholar]
- 7.Tetens I, Andersen LB, Astrup A, Gondolf UH, Hermansen K, Jakobsen MU, et al. Evidensgrundlaget for danske råd om kost og fysisk aktivitet [The evidence base for Danish guidelines on diet and physical activity]. DTU National Food Institute. 2013.
- 8.UK Government. Reducing obesity: obesity system map. Department of Health and Social Care. 2007. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/reducing-obesity-obesity-system-map. Accessed 16 Apr 2025.
- 9.Zlatevska N, Dubelaar C, Holden SS. Sizing up the effect of portion size on consumption: a meta-analytic review. J Mark. 2014;78(3):140–54. 10.1509/jm.12.0303. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Robinson E, McFarland-Lesser I, Patel Z, Jones A. Downsizing food: a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the effect of reducing served food portion sizes on daily energy intake and body weight. Br J Nutr. 2023;129(5):888–903. 10.1017/S0007114522000903. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Hansen KL, Golubovic S, Eriksen CU, Jorgensen T, Toft U. Effectiveness of food environment policies in improving population diets: a review of systematic reviews. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2022;76(5):637–46. 10.1038/s41430-021-01008-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Afshin A, Penalvo J, Del Gobbo L, Kashaf M, Micha R, Morrish K, et al. CVD prevention through policy: a review of mass media, food/menu labeling, taxation/subsidies, built environment, school procurement, worksite wellness, and marketing standards to improve diet. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2015;17(11):98. 10.1007/s11886-015-0658-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.World Health Organization. Fiscal policies to promote healthy diets: policy brief. 2022. [PubMed]
- 14.Lundgaard PB, Lourenço SM. An umbrella review of the evidence on structural prevention policies and prevention of overweight and obesity among children – Nordic Cancer Union’s project: Common actions for the prevention of overweight and obesity among children (NCU-CAPOC). Danish Cancer Society. 2024.
- 15.Afshin A, Peñalvo JL, Del Gobbo L, Silva J, Michaelson M, O’Flaherty M, et al. The prospective impact of food pricing on improving dietary consumption: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(3):e0172277. 10.1371/journal.pone.0172277. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Teng AM, Jones AC, Mizdrak A, Signal L, Genc M, Wilson N. Impact of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes on purchases and dietary intake: systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Rev. 2019;20(9):1187–204. 10.1111/obr.12868. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Escobar MAC, Veerman JL, Tollman SM, Bertram MY, Hofman KJ. Evidence that a tax on sugar sweetened beverages reduces the obesity rate: a meta-analysis. BMC Public Health. 2013;13:1072. 10.1186/1471-2458-13-1072. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Powell LM, Chriqui JF, Khan T, Wada R, Chaloupka FJ. Assessing the potential effectiveness of food and beverage taxes and subsidies for improving public health: a systematic review of prices, demand and body weight outcomes. Obes Rev. 2013;14(2):110–28. 10.1111/obr.12002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Itria A, Borges SS, Rinaldi AEM, Nucci LB, Enes CC. Taxing sugar-sweetened beverages as a policy to reduce overweight and obesity in countries of different income classifications: a systematic review. Public Health Nutr. 2021;24(16):5550–60. 10.1017/S1368980021002901. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Wright A, Smith KE, Hellowell M. Policy lessons from health taxes: a systematic review of empirical studies. BMC Public Health. 2017;17(1):583. 10.1186/s12889-017-4497-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.World Health Organization. Tackling NCDs: best buys and other recommended interventions for the prevention and control of noncommunicable diseases. Second edition, 2024.
- 22.World Cancer Research Fund International. Policy Blueprint for cancer prevention. 2025. Available from: https://www.wcrf.org/research-policy/library/policy-blueprint-for-cancer-prevention/. Accessed 16 Apr 2025.
- 23.OECD. The heavy burden of obesity; the economics of prevention. World Cancer Research Fund International; 2019. [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
The dataset supporting the conclusions of this article are not publicly available as it was provided by a third-party retail store, Rema 1000, under a confidentiality agreement. The data contains commercially sensitive information and cannot be made publicly available. The corresponding author is responsible for the integrity of the data and its analysis.