Advanced search
Start date
Betweenand
Related content
(Reference retrieved automatically from Web of Science through information on FAPESP grant and its corresponding number as mentioned in the publication by the authors.)

Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxes in Brazil

Full text
Author(s):
Claro, Rafael M. [1] ; Levy, Renata B. [2] ; Popkin, Barry M. [3] ; Monteiro, Carlos A. [4]
Total Authors: 4
Affiliation:
[1] Univ Sao Paulo, Sch Publ Hlth, Ctr Epidemiol Studies Hlth & Nutr, Sao Paulo - Brazil
[2] Univ Sao Paulo, Fac Med, Dept Prevent Med, Sao Paulo - Brazil
[3] Univ N Carolina, Carolina Populat Ctr, Dept Nutr, Chapel Hill, NC - USA
[4] Univ Sao Paulo, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Nutr, Sao Paulo - Brazil
Total Affiliations: 4
Document type: Journal article
Source: American Journal of Public Health; v. 102, n. 1, p. 178-183, JAN 2012.
Web of Science Citations: 36
Abstract

Objectives. We investigated whether taxing sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) would improve the diets of households in Brazil. Methods. We used household food consumption data that the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics collected in 2002-2003 from a nationally representative sample of 48470 Brazilian households. The consumption of SSBs is expressed as the total SSB calories consumed and as the SSB percentage of the total calories purchased. We investigated price elasticity with regression models, controlling for demographic variables, income, and prices of all other foods and drinks. Results. Increases in the price of SSBs led to reductions in consumption. A 1.00% increase in the price of SSBs led to a 0.85% reduction of SSB calories consumed (1.03% reduction for the poor and 0.63% for the nonpoor). Increased income had a positive effect on SSB consumption, but the effect was less than half the size of the price elasticity (0.41% increase in SSB calories consumed for every 1.00% increase in income). Conclusions. High SSB price elasticity in Brazil indicates that a tax on purchased weight or volume would lead to reductions in SSB consumption. (Am J Public Health. 2012;102:178-183. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2011.300313) (AU)