A Case Study of the Philadelphia Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Tax Policymaking Process: Implications for Policy Development and Advocacy

Jonathan Purtle, Brent Langellier, Félice Lê-Scherban

Research output: Research - peer-reviewArticle

  • 1 Citations

Abstract

CONTEXT:: Policymakers are increasingly proposing sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxes as an evidence-based strategy to reduce chronic disease risk; and local health departments (LHDs) are well-positioned to play a role in SSB policy development and advocacy. However, most SSB tax proposals fail to become law and limited empiric guidance exists to inform advocacy efforts. In June 2016, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, passed an SSB tax. OBJECTIVE:: To identify features of the Philadelphia SSB tax policymaking process that contributed to the proposalʼs passage. DESIGN:: Qualitative case study. Semistructured interviews were conducted with key informants closely involved with the policymaking process. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Local news media about the SSB tax proposal were analyzed to triangulate interview findings. Analysis was conducted in NVivo 10 using inductive qualitative content analysis. SETTING:: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, during the SSB tax policymaking in process. PARTICIPANTS:: Nine key informants (2 city councilpersons, 4 city agency officials, 1 community-based advocate, 1 news reporter, and 1 researcher). RESULTS:: The Philadelphia SSB tax proposal was introduced with the explicit goal of financing universal prekindergarten and deliberately not framed as a health intervention. This framing shifted contentious debates about government involvement in individual behavior toward discussions about how to finance universal prekindergarten, a goal for which broad support existed. The LHD played an important role in communicating research evidence about potential health benefits of the SSB tax proposal at the end of the policymaking process. CONCLUSIONS:: During local SSB tax policy development processes, LHD officials and other advocates should encourage policymakers to design SSB tax policies so that revenue is directed toward community investments for which broad public support exists. When communicating with policymakers and the public, LHDs should consider emphasizing how SSB tax revenue will be used in addition to presenting evidence about the potential health benefits of the SSB tax at the local level.

LanguageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Public Health Management and Practice
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Mar 1 2017

Fingerprint

Policy Making
Beverages
Taxes
Health
Interviews
Insurance Benefits
Chronic Disease
Public Health
Research Personnel
Research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

@article{c9aadf7fed4e4fdeb1b6904446cd148b,
title = "A Case Study of the Philadelphia Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Tax Policymaking Process: Implications for Policy Development and Advocacy",
abstract = "CONTEXT:: Policymakers are increasingly proposing sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxes as an evidence-based strategy to reduce chronic disease risk; and local health departments (LHDs) are well-positioned to play a role in SSB policy development and advocacy. However, most SSB tax proposals fail to become law and limited empiric guidance exists to inform advocacy efforts. In June 2016, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, passed an SSB tax. OBJECTIVE:: To identify features of the Philadelphia SSB tax policymaking process that contributed to the proposalʼs passage. DESIGN:: Qualitative case study. Semistructured interviews were conducted with key informants closely involved with the policymaking process. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Local news media about the SSB tax proposal were analyzed to triangulate interview findings. Analysis was conducted in NVivo 10 using inductive qualitative content analysis. SETTING:: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, during the SSB tax policymaking in process. PARTICIPANTS:: Nine key informants (2 city councilpersons, 4 city agency officials, 1 community-based advocate, 1 news reporter, and 1 researcher). RESULTS:: The Philadelphia SSB tax proposal was introduced with the explicit goal of financing universal prekindergarten and deliberately not framed as a health intervention. This framing shifted contentious debates about government involvement in individual behavior toward discussions about how to finance universal prekindergarten, a goal for which broad support existed. The LHD played an important role in communicating research evidence about potential health benefits of the SSB tax proposal at the end of the policymaking process. CONCLUSIONS:: During local SSB tax policy development processes, LHD officials and other advocates should encourage policymakers to design SSB tax policies so that revenue is directed toward community investments for which broad public support exists. When communicating with policymakers and the public, LHDs should consider emphasizing how SSB tax revenue will be used in addition to presenting evidence about the potential health benefits of the SSB tax at the local level.",
author = "Jonathan Purtle and Brent Langellier and Félice Lê-Scherban",
year = "2017",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1097/PHH.0000000000000563",
journal = "Journal of Public Health Management and Practice",
issn = "1078-4659",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Case Study of the Philadelphia Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Tax Policymaking Process

T2 - Journal of Public Health Management and Practice

AU - Purtle,Jonathan

AU - Langellier,Brent

AU - Lê-Scherban,Félice

PY - 2017/3/1

Y1 - 2017/3/1

N2 - CONTEXT:: Policymakers are increasingly proposing sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxes as an evidence-based strategy to reduce chronic disease risk; and local health departments (LHDs) are well-positioned to play a role in SSB policy development and advocacy. However, most SSB tax proposals fail to become law and limited empiric guidance exists to inform advocacy efforts. In June 2016, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, passed an SSB tax. OBJECTIVE:: To identify features of the Philadelphia SSB tax policymaking process that contributed to the proposalʼs passage. DESIGN:: Qualitative case study. Semistructured interviews were conducted with key informants closely involved with the policymaking process. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Local news media about the SSB tax proposal were analyzed to triangulate interview findings. Analysis was conducted in NVivo 10 using inductive qualitative content analysis. SETTING:: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, during the SSB tax policymaking in process. PARTICIPANTS:: Nine key informants (2 city councilpersons, 4 city agency officials, 1 community-based advocate, 1 news reporter, and 1 researcher). RESULTS:: The Philadelphia SSB tax proposal was introduced with the explicit goal of financing universal prekindergarten and deliberately not framed as a health intervention. This framing shifted contentious debates about government involvement in individual behavior toward discussions about how to finance universal prekindergarten, a goal for which broad support existed. The LHD played an important role in communicating research evidence about potential health benefits of the SSB tax proposal at the end of the policymaking process. CONCLUSIONS:: During local SSB tax policy development processes, LHD officials and other advocates should encourage policymakers to design SSB tax policies so that revenue is directed toward community investments for which broad public support exists. When communicating with policymakers and the public, LHDs should consider emphasizing how SSB tax revenue will be used in addition to presenting evidence about the potential health benefits of the SSB tax at the local level.

AB - CONTEXT:: Policymakers are increasingly proposing sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxes as an evidence-based strategy to reduce chronic disease risk; and local health departments (LHDs) are well-positioned to play a role in SSB policy development and advocacy. However, most SSB tax proposals fail to become law and limited empiric guidance exists to inform advocacy efforts. In June 2016, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, passed an SSB tax. OBJECTIVE:: To identify features of the Philadelphia SSB tax policymaking process that contributed to the proposalʼs passage. DESIGN:: Qualitative case study. Semistructured interviews were conducted with key informants closely involved with the policymaking process. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Local news media about the SSB tax proposal were analyzed to triangulate interview findings. Analysis was conducted in NVivo 10 using inductive qualitative content analysis. SETTING:: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, during the SSB tax policymaking in process. PARTICIPANTS:: Nine key informants (2 city councilpersons, 4 city agency officials, 1 community-based advocate, 1 news reporter, and 1 researcher). RESULTS:: The Philadelphia SSB tax proposal was introduced with the explicit goal of financing universal prekindergarten and deliberately not framed as a health intervention. This framing shifted contentious debates about government involvement in individual behavior toward discussions about how to finance universal prekindergarten, a goal for which broad support existed. The LHD played an important role in communicating research evidence about potential health benefits of the SSB tax proposal at the end of the policymaking process. CONCLUSIONS:: During local SSB tax policy development processes, LHD officials and other advocates should encourage policymakers to design SSB tax policies so that revenue is directed toward community investments for which broad public support exists. When communicating with policymakers and the public, LHDs should consider emphasizing how SSB tax revenue will be used in addition to presenting evidence about the potential health benefits of the SSB tax at the local level.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85014248495&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85014248495&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/PHH.0000000000000563

DO - 10.1097/PHH.0000000000000563

M3 - Article

JO - Journal of Public Health Management and Practice

JF - Journal of Public Health Management and Practice

SN - 1078-4659

ER -