قابلیت انتقال عوامل موفقیت در بازاریابی خصوصی مواد غذایی به سیاست های بهداشتی و عمومی مواد غذایی : مطالعه کارشناس دلفی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی|
|1052||2012||11 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید|
نسخه انگلیسی مقاله همین الان قابل دانلود است.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله بر اساس تعداد کلمات مقاله انگلیسی محاسبه می شود.
این مقاله تقریباً شامل 11120 کلمه می باشد.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله توسط مترجمان با تجربه، طبق جدول زیر محاسبه می شود:
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Food Policy, Volume 37, Issue 6, December 2012, Pages 650–660
Public policy activities to promote healthy diets have been criticised for their lack of success. Applying a marketing approach to non-commercial policy objectives such as healthy eating, termed social marketing, is an emerging but as yet underdeveloped field. An earlier study conducted a case analysis of recent successful commercial food marketing and identified key success factors that may be further transferred to the public sector. Six of these factors (trend awareness, endorsement, emotion, common value, media coverage, and ‘why and how’) were presented to and discussed by 31 experts in a two-round Delphi survey. The objective was to determine to what extent these factors are used in public information and social marketing campaigns for healthier eating, and what is required to successfully transfer those factors into the public arena. The analysis shows that ‘classic’ information campaigns prevail. In considering which factors to explore, emphasis is given to low-cost factors, trust building, and the potential to lead to long-term behaviour change. Close cooperation with stakeholders, targeted approaches with a fitting combination of factors, and a consistent message are highlighted. Important target group differences regarding the application of the success factors are age, life-cycle stage, education, and level of healthy eating involvement. It is argued that policy makers possess the data to help prepare targeted approaches and that they enjoy good credibility, but lack the knowhow to exploit the data and understand the target groups. Weaknesses are also seen in a lack of coordination and effective decision-making structures, as well as a lack of accountability among policy makers. A number of themes were repeatedly mentioned as being important, including the need for evaluating effectiveness, the issue of funding, and improved stakeholder cooperation and knowledge exchange. It is concluded that, depending on the objective and target group in question, all factors are deemed relevant to consider, but low cost techniques can be an especially favourable addition. Effectiveness measurements ought to be established to determine the added value of new and different approaches. Of crucial importance for long-term success is building trust in public policy institutions and activities, cooperative efforts and consistency, and coupling public information and social marketing campaigns with structural changes.
A large number of European citizens are overweight or obese (WHO, 2007), a fact that is detrimental not only to the individual’s quality of life, but also for current and future public health spending. Public policy makers as well as stakeholders from non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and the food industry have engaged in discussions on how best to promote healthy diets. Repeatedly, public campaigns that promote healthy choices and eating have been criticised for their lack of success (Hornik and Kelly, 2007, Jepson et al., 2010 and Mazzocchi and Traill, 2005), while the food industry and the marketing of food has been rebuked for aggravating citizens’ difficulties with healthy eating (Seiders and Petty, 2004 and IOM, 2006). The fact that food marketing is negatively affecting public healthy eating objectives is, however, only one of the possible interactions between often-conflicting private and public activities. The application of marketing approaches to public, non-commercial activities for promoting favourable behaviour of citizens (for their own benefit or that of the society) is an emerging field termed social marketing. An empirical and comparative case study was conducted using recent successful cases in Europe to determine the key success factors in commercial food marketing (Aschemann-Witzel et al., 2012). The cases selected were those with a specific focus on foods that are regarded as relatively healthy or on campaigns that use health-related messages in their communications. The 27 cases analysed led to the identification of six clusters of success factors, each consisting of two to three success factors. There are key differences between the public promotion of healthy eating and the commercial marketing of food products. Major differences include the aim of changing dietary patterns and discouraging overconsumption versus encouraging the choice of a single food item. In only a few cases does the latter require the establishment of changed consumption behaviours. Also, there are great differences in how commercial marketing is organised and equipped with resources and competencies compared with how public policy-makers arrive at decisions, conduct their work, and allocate resources and knowhow. Therefore, transferring the success factors identified in commercial food marketing to the public arena requires an assessment of the challenges and possibilities. In this study, a two-round Delphi survey was conducted in which 31 experts assessed and discussed the transferability of selected food marketing success factors. The objective of this study is 2-fold: first, to outline the possible interaction between private food marketing activities and public activities for healthy diets, highlighting the possible success factors that had been previously discussed in each field; second, to present and describe the results of the Delphi survey and to conclude with recommendations for the successful transferability of the factors, as well as their implications for the development of public activities in the promotion of healthy diets. Interaction between food marketing and public policy Three possible interactions or relationships between food marketing and public policy are discussed in the literature. First, food marketing can negatively affect public health and thus evoke public policy ‘counteractions’ (actions by the public sector destined to lessen the negative effects of food marketing or restrict food marketing). Second, food marketing can positively affect public health, and this may call for public policy support of these actions in food marketing or call for increased cooperation. Third, food marketing may provide lessons to be learnt in public policy activities. A fourth potential direction, where food marketing learns from public policy activities, is of little relevance here even though Hastings and Saren (2003, p. 306) argued that it is time to regard the relationship between social and commercial marketing as “an adult to adult one”. Most authors, but especially those emphasising the second direction, stress that the food industry can and should be ‘part of the solution’ of combating obesity via the contribution of expertise and by engaging in public–private partnerships, but the authors are also cautious about the various limitations (e.g., Kraak et al., 2009). The following is an outline of the various issues discussed on the three directions of the interaction of food marketing and public policy.Food marketing can negatively affect public health The food industry may have a negative impact on public health, first by their food marketing activities, and second by counteracting calls to restrict their marketing activities. Food marketing is often depicted as the ‘next battlefield’ following tobacco marketing (by both sides of the ‘battle’). A large number of studies and reviews have analysed the influence of food marketing on consumers, especially children’s food choices (e.g., Hartmann and Maschkowski, 2009, Hastings et al., 2006, IOM, 2006 and Matthews, 2007), mostly to identify possible negative influences that call for counteraction. It has, for example, been shown that children’s food preferences, purchase-related behaviour, and short-term consumption behaviour are influenced by food advertising (IOM, 2006), which is alarming given that advertising directed at children has been found to primarily show savoury snacks and confectionary (Matthews, 2007). Seiders and Petty (2004) identified food industry marketing practices most criticised in the debate. These are (1) product formulation and package size, (2) nutrition disclosure, (3) advertising and promotion, and (4) product distribution. They argued that policy remedies are required to address the current market failures that contribute to obesity: the lack of disseminated information on the causes and consequences of obesity, the long-term and probabilistic nature of obesity-related health-threats, incomplete nutrition information with regard to obesity, and the restricted food choices for some consumers. In reaction to the criticism that food marketing is facing, it has been argued that the food industry has tried to redirect attention to physical activity, “implicitly de-emphasising the role of food” (Kraak et al., 2009, p. 2030), as well as trying to divert attention away from the companies’ roles by stressing the individual’s responsibility through “talking about ‘choice’ and ‘balance’” (Dorfman and Yancey, 2009, p. 304).
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
This study gathered experts from different disciplines and sectors to assess possible lessons to be learnt from private food marketing for the implementation of healthy eating policies. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, very little previous work has bridged the public and private sectors and the disciplines of marketing and food and public health policy. The work conducted in the PorGrow research project is one of the few examples (Millstone and Lobstein, 2007). The results of the Delphi expert survey regarding the transferability of food marketing success factors to public healthy eating communications and social marketing, based on the opinions of experts from both ‘sides’ (Grier and Bryant, 2005, Hastings and Saren, 2003 and Seiders and Petty, 2007), will help to improve knowledge regarding further fruitful interactions between the two sectors. Furthermore, the study is unique in that it builds on an empirical study, and therefore enables a greater ease of understanding regarding our findings on food marketing success factors and their practicability. Thus, this study fills the research gap about “what actually works”, as called for by Evans et al. (2008, p. 738). To briefly summarise the results of the Delphi expert survey regarding the transferability of the food marketing success factors into public policy activity, it can first be confirmed that the experts stated that public activities often use ‘classical’ approaches for spreading factual information; the campaigns explain the ‘why and how’ and use mass media to do so. There are different views as to whether public activities currently use the full set of success factors discussed in the survey. The experts agreed on and strongly emphasised the need to implement effectiveness measurements to a greater degree than currently used today. The results suggest that all factors are deemed relevant for consideration in future public information campaigns or social marketing for healthier eating, depending on the objective and the target group in question. All factors were also regarded as ethically acceptable when used in good practice and transparently. Less expensive factors, as well as factors with a potential to have a long-term influence and those that can build up trust, for instance by creating ‘public health brands’, should be especially considered. Consistency of messages and the combined use of factors, not least embedding them into broader efforts for structural change as well as strengthening cooperation among public institutions and public and private stakeholders, were highlighted as crucial for the successful use of marketing success factors in public policy applications. Three issues emerged as particularly important in the analysis. The first is effectiveness measurement, a topic greeted with broad agreement and emphasis by many experts. The second issue that underlies a number of considerations and expert comments is the question of financial resources and funding, a problem that is likely to remain a limit on future activities. As a third issue we identified the expectation of citizens’ scepticism towards ‘marketing-like’ approaches in public activities, an issue that might not only reflect the citizens’ but also the experts’ own scepticism. Two conclusions can be drawn from the survey results regarding transferability of food marketing success factors to public healthy eating promotion activities. On the more technical level, it can be concluded that food marketing techniques are deemed potentially useful when they are targeted at the objective and citizen group in question, appropriate combinations of techniques have been considered, and consistent messages are used. Transparency and ethically acceptable practices should guide the use of marketing techniques. Participatory approaches should ensure that stakeholders endorse and further develop activities, and special focus should be given to long-term views, which also favour investments in building trust for public institutions or public brands. In practice, this might mean, for example, a code of conduct for social marketing for healthy eating, or public relations experts advising public health institutions in their relations with the public, but especially a stronger development of social marketing activities in general in the healthy eating promotion. On a non-technical level, however, the issues brought forward by the experts clearly show that to exploit the potential of marketing techniques for healthy eating promotion, the scepticism towards marketing techniques must be overcome. As underlined by the experts, we suggest that stronger cooperation between public and private sector stakeholders is required, as well as increased knowledge exchange and interdisciplinarity. Perhaps even the exchange of human capital and people between both ‘sides’ will achieve a better understanding of what marketing can or cannot do. Effectiveness measurement definitely plays an important role, as emphasised by the experts. Only then will public policy makers positively embrace the right ‘dose’ of creative and marketing-like aspects. This is especially important given the fact that the experts highlighted the importance of combining various factors, using ‘classical’ as well as ‘marketing-like’ factors, and in that, saw a potential to increase impact while keeping costs reasonable. The opportunities offered by new media should be given special thought in this regard. While this calls for action from the public sector, the private food marketing sector can further support the public food policy sector with ‘good practice’ and business ethics in the use of commercial marketing, so that the level of citizens’ scepticism towards marketing is lessened.