Fernandez, M.

Discrepancies in support for nutrition policies between the general public and policy influencers in Alberta
Fernandez, M.A., McGetrick, J.A., Nykiforuk, I.J., Raine, K.D.

Discerning attitudes towards potential nutrition policies helps target actions to influence policy adoption among decision-makers. The purpose of this study was to assess support for healthy eating policies among policy influencers (PI) and the general public (GP) in Alberta.

In 2017, a random sample of 1500 members of the GP and 157 PIs from a census sample completed surveys that included 15 questions about potential healthy eating policies. The level of intrusiveness of each policy was characterized using the Nuffield Council on Bioethics' intervention ladder framework. Differences in support for policies between the GP and PIs were assessed with Pearson's χ2.

Support was significantly greater for 10/15 policies among the GP compared to PIs (p87%). Restricting or banning new fast food drive-through restaurants had the lowest support among both groups (<37%). The three policies with least support among both groups all aimed to restrict choice (i.e., more intrusive), whereas three policies with the most support among both groups aimed to either provide information or enable choice (i.e., less intrusive).

Large discrepancies between the GP and PIs signal an opportunity to target advocacy efforts towards nutrition policies that already have high support among constituents. Policies with high support and agreement between the GP and PIs are low-hanging fruit to push forward to adoption. Strong justifications will be needed to advocate among the GP and PIs for the support of nutrition policies that are more intrusive in Alberta.