IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v126y2022i8p738-743.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Examining the policy process of sugar-sweetened beverage taxation in Ireland

Author

Listed:
  • Crosbie, Eric
  • Florence, Davis
  • Nanthaseang, Mickey
  • Godoy, Lindsey

Abstract

Sugar sweetened beverages (SSBs) are a growing source of weight gain, obesity, and type 2 diabetes that contain high added sugar amounts and provide minimal nutritional benefit. Taxing SSBs are effective in reducing sugar consumption and increasing awareness about health effects. The 2014 European Union Action Plan on Childhood Obesity combined with neighboring SSB tax proposals in the U.K. and France helped stimulate political discussions in Ireland. Following this momentum, in 2015, public health groups lead by the Irish Heart Foundation proposed an SSB tax with earmarked funds for public health and worked with the Irish Health Department through a whole-of-government approach to convince the Finance Department to introduce an SSB tax. These efforts resulted in the Finance Department proposing the Sugar Sweetened Drinks Tax (SSDT) in September 2016, which taxes non-alcoholic, water-based and juice-based drinks, which have an added sugar content of 5g per 100mL and above. Opposing stakeholders including the Irish Beverage Council and Food & Drink Industry Ireland argued that the tax would not decrease consumption of SSBs or impact obesity, disproportionately impact individuals with a low socioeconomic background, and create illicit trade. However, health groups argued the tax would reduce sugar consumption, encourage consumers to purchase healthier options, and help reduce obesity levels. These efforts with political will helped Ireland become the 36th country in the world (9th in Europe) to implement an SSB tax policy in May 2018. While the government reportedly raised €16.5 million (20.012 million USD) in 2018 and €33 million (40.024 million USD) in 2019 from the SSDT, the tax was not earmarked for public health purposes nor has it been evaluated despite multiple requests by public health groups representing an important missed opportunity. While other countries should follow Ireland's lead in enacting an SSB tax, it is important to evaluate the tax's impact on reducing sugar consumption and ensure the tax has earmarked funds for public health to further maximize the impact of reducing sugar consumption, promoting health equity and helping curb the NCD epidemic.

Suggested Citation

  • Crosbie, Eric & Florence, Davis & Nanthaseang, Mickey & Godoy, Lindsey, 2022. "Examining the policy process of sugar-sweetened beverage taxation in Ireland," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(8), pages 738-743.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:126:y:2022:i:8:p:738-743
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2022.06.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851022001348
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.healthpol.2022.06.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barry M Popkin & Shu Wen Ng, 2021. "Sugar-sweetened beverage taxes: Lessons to date and the future of taxation," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(1), pages 1-6, January.
    2. Campbell, Norah & Mialon, Melissa & Reilly, Kathryn & Browne, Sarah & Finucane, Francis M., 2020. "How are frames generated? Insights from the industry lobby against the sugar tax in Ireland," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 264(C).
    3. Frank Convery & Simon McDonnell & Susana Ferreira, 2007. "The most popular tax in Europe? Lessons from the Irish plastic bags levy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(1), pages 1-11, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jingze Jiang, 2016. "Peer Pressure in Voluntary Environmental Programs: a Case of the Bag Rewards Program," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 155-190, June.
    2. Mattauch, Linus & Hepburn, Cameron & Stern, Nicholas, 2018. "Pigou pushes preferences: decarbonisation and endogenous values," INET Oxford Working Papers 2018-16, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    3. Doreen Fedrigo-Fazio & Jean-Pierre Schweitzer & Patrick Ten Brink & Leonardo Mazza & Alison Ratliff & Emma Watkins, 2016. "Evidence of Absolute Decoupling from Real World Policy Mixes in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-22, May.
    4. Norton, Daniel & Hynes, Stephen, 2014. "Valuing the non-market benefits arising from the implementation of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 84-96.
    5. Xiufeng Xing & Hongyu Liu, 2018. "Is Plastic Bag Ordinance Effective? Evidence from Carbon Emissions in China," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(3), pages 158-158, May.
    6. Jason Delaney & Sarah Jacobson, 2016. "Payments or Persuasion: Common Pool Resource Management with Price and Non-price Measures," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(4), pages 747-772, December.
    7. Díaz, Juan-José & Sánchez, Alan & Diez-Canseco, Francisco & Jaime Miranda, J. & Popkin, Barry M., 2023. "Employment and wage effects of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes and front-of-package warning label regulations on the food and beverage industry: Evidence from Peru," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    8. Yong Li & Bairong Wang & Orachorn Saechang, 2022. "Is Female a More Pro-Environmental Gender? Evidence from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-11, June.
    9. Smith, Steven M., 2018. "Economic incentives and conservation: Crowding-in social norms in a groundwater commons," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 147-174.
    10. Pritish Behuria, 2019. "The comparative political economy of plastic bag bans in East Africa: why implementation has varied in Rwanda, Kenya and Uganda," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 372019, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    11. Norton, D. & Hynes, S., 2014. "A Choice Experiment Approach to assess the costs of degradation as specified by the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive," Working Papers 186382, National University of Ireland, Galway, Socio-Economic Marine Research Unit.
    12. Abueg, Luisito, 2019. "A survey of the ocean’s plastic waste problem, and some policy developments of the Philippines," MPRA Paper 96263, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Ioana Gabriela Cosma, 2018. "Bio-plastic - between current practices and the challenges of a sustainable future," Manager Journal, Faculty of Business and Administration, University of Bucharest, vol. 27(1), pages 51-63, December.
    14. Bishal Bharadwaj, 2016. "Plastic Bag Ban in Nepal: Enforcement and Effectiveness," Working Papers id:11548, eSocialSciences.
    15. Flora Budianto & Jana Lippelt, 2010. "Kurz zum Klima: Plastiktüten - nicht länger tragbar," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 63(14), pages 41-43, July.
    16. Hüseyin GÜRBÜZ & Veysel YILMAZ, 2018. "Investigation of Attitudes and Behaviours of University Students on the Use of Plastic Bags by Structural Equation Modelling," Sosyoekonomi Journal, Sosyoekonomi Society, issue 26(38).
    17. Mattauch, Linus & Hepburn, Cameron & Spuler, Fiona & Stern, Nicholas, 2022. "The economics of climate change with endogenous preferences," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    18. Paul J. Ferraro & J. Dustin Tracy, 2022. "A reassessment of the potential for loss-framed incentive contracts to increase productivity: a meta-analysis and a real-effort experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(5), pages 1441-1466, November.
    19. Van Asselt, Joanna & Nian, Yefan & Soh, Moonwon & Morgan, Stephen & Gao, Zhifeng, 2022. "Do plastic warning labels reduce consumers' willingness to pay for plastic egg packaging? – Evidence from a choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    20. Alpizar, Francisco & Carlsson, Fredrik & Lanza, Gracia, 2024. "On the perils of environmentally friendly alternatives," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:126:y:2022:i:8:p:738-743. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.