Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T16:05:51.035Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Availability of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program-authorised retailers’ voluntary commitments to encourage healthy dietary purchases using marketing-mix and choice-architecture strategies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 March 2020

Bailey Houghtaling*
Affiliation:
School of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Louisiana State University AgCenter, 271 Knapp Hall, Baton Rouge, LA70803, USA
Elena Serrano
Affiliation:
Family Nutrition Program, Department of Human Nutrition, Foods, and Exercise, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA24061, USA
Vivica I Kraak
Affiliation:
Department of Human Nutrition, Foods, and Exercise, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA24061, USA
Samantha M Harden
Affiliation:
Department of Human Nutrition, Foods, and Exercise, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA24061, USA
George C Davis
Affiliation:
Department of Human Nutrition, Foods, and Exercise, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA24061, USA Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA24061, USA
Sarah Misyak
Affiliation:
Family Nutrition Program, Department of Human Nutrition, Foods, and Exercise, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA24061, USA
*
*Corresponding author: Email [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

To examine public commitments for encouraging United States consumers to make healthy dietary purchases with their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits among of prevalent SNAP-authorised retailers.

Setting:

National SNAP-authorised retail landscape in addition to stores located in California and Virginia, two states targetted for a Partnership for a Healthier America pilot social marketing campaign.

Participants:

SNAP-authorised retailers with the most store locations in selected settings.

Design:

A review of retailers’ publicly available business information was conducted (November 2016–February 2017). Webpages and grey literature sources were accessed to identify corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports and commitments describing strategies to encourage healthy consumer purchases aligned with the 2015–2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Evidence was organised using a marketing-mix and choice-architecture (MMCA) framework to characterise strategies used among eight possible types (i.e. place, profile, portion, pricing, promotion, priming, prompting and proximity).

Results:

Of the SNAP-authorised retailers (n 38) reviewed, more than half (n 20; 52·6 %) provided no information in the public domain relevant to the research objective. Few retailers (n 8; 21·1 %) had relevant CSR information; grey literature sources (n 52 articles across seventeen retailers) were more commonly identified. SNAP-authorised retailers in majority committed to increasing the number of healthy products available for purchase (profile).

Conclusions:

Substantial improvements are needed to enhance the capacity and commitments of SNAP-authorised retailers to use diverse strategies to promote healthy purchases among SNAP recipients. Future research could explore feasible approaches to improve dietary behaviours through sector changes via public–private partnerships, policy changes, or a combination of government regulatory and voluntary business actions.

Type
Short Communication
Copyright
© The Authors 2020

Engaging with food retailers to create environments that encourage consumers to choose nutritious options aligned with the 2015–2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA)(1) may be an important step to address obesity in the USA(Reference Haddad, Hawkes and Webb25). Currently, food store retailers use marketing-mix and choice-architecture (MMCA)(Reference Kraak, Englund and Misyak6) strategies to prompt consumer purchase of foods and beverages high in saturated fats, added sugar and sodium(1,Reference Cohen and Babey7Reference Rivlin9) . As estimates indicate more than 71 % of US adults and 52 % of youth are high risk for adverse health conditions on the basis of BMI (kg/m2 ≥ 25)(10), food retailers have been under increasing scrutiny for their influence on the quality of consumers’ dietary choices(Reference Swinburn, Sacks and Hall4,5,Reference McKee and Stuckler11Reference Tempels, Verweij and Blok13) .

Underserved US consumers may be most vulnerable to business practices that favour the consumption of energy-dense and nutrient-poor dietary products(Reference Thompson, Cummins and Brown14,Reference Fielding-Singh15) . For example, the US Department of Agriculture’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participants may be disproportionately targeted for unhealthy product advertisements(Reference Powell, Wada and Kumanyika16,Reference Yancey, Cole and Brown17) and experience reduced access to foods and beverages aligned with the DGA(Reference Larson, Story and Nelson18,Reference Hilmers, Hilmers and Dave19) . These factors likely contribute to the lower dietary quality scores of SNAP consumers’ food and beverage purchases when compared with the dietary purchases of higher-income consumers(Reference Mancino, Guthrie and Ver Ploeg20,Reference Lacko, Popkin and Smith Taillie21) . The identification of shared goals between food retail businesses and public health nutrition priorities may help to initiate feasible marketplace change within SNAP-authorised stores that support improved SNAP dietary quality and retailers’ interests (e.g. profits)(Reference Davis and Serrano22,Reference Houghtaling, Serrano and Kraak23) .

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a voluntary platform for corporations to commit to using their reach to help improve social and environmental issues(Reference Rockefeller24Reference Bhattacharya, Hildebrand and Sen26) and could be a useful tool for assessing the alignment/misalignment of public health nutrition objectives with business models (e.g. commercial viability)(Reference Blake, Backholer and Lancsar27). For example, researchers have explored food retailers’ CSR commitments to improve food system sustainability(Reference Pinard, Byker and Serrano28) and consumer nutrition behaviours(Reference Pulker, Trapp and Scott29,Reference Jones, Comfort and Hillier30) . However, commitments to use MMCA strategies that favour DGA-aligned products could impact populations’ dietary quality(5,Reference Kraak, Englund and Misyak6,Reference Arno and Thomas31) and have not been assessed within the context of CSR or SNAP. Therefore, researchers explored the availability of SNAP-authorised food retailers’ public commitments to encourage consumer purchase of products aligned with the DGA using a MMCA framework(Reference Kraak, Englund and Misyak6).

Methods

A cross-sectional review of publicly available information was conducted from November 2016 to February 2017 among prevalent SNAP-authorised retailers. The availability of retailers within a geographic location may vary by format (e.g. grocery, convenience, dollar, drug) and parent corporation (e.g. national v regional chains)(32). SNAP-authorised retailers with the most store locations nationally and in two regionally different states were selected based on a targeted social marketing campaign. For example, the Partnership for a Healthier America (PHA) aims to favourably influence food retailers’ practices(33) and piloted a fruit and vegetable marketing campaign in one city in California and in Virginia(Reference Kraak, Englund and Zhou34). These states were chosen to identify prevalent SNAP-authorised retailers potentially influenced by PHA.

In 2016, the top fifteen retailer corporations/chains (by number of store locations) were systematically selected each at a national level, state level, and in urban and rural areas within each state (using Rural-Urban Continuum Code classifications)(35). This method was intended to capture stores more widely available in rural but not urban areas (or vice-versa) to broaden the scope of research results for relevance to hard-to-reach areas. Stores were identified using the SNAP Retailor Locator(32). SNAP-authorised retailer search results by location are available upon request; retailers identified for research inclusion using this method are listed in Table 1.

Table 1 Public corporate social responsibility (CSR) commitments of prevalent Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)-authorised food retailers to use marketing-mix and choice-architecture strategies to encourage healthy consumer purchases aligned with dietary guidance in the USA, n 38

Bolded text indicates no relevant information identified among all searches.

Publicly available commitments

Methods for identifying relevant information included: (i) SNAP-authorised retailers’ business reports and (ii) a grey literature search. To be noted as available, data needed to focus on the use of in-store strategies to encourage consumer purchasing behaviours aligned with the DGA. For example, the DGA recommends the consumption of foods and beverages low in saturated fats, added sugars and Na(1), such as multiple forms of fruits, vegetables, lean and plant-based proteins and low-fat dairy products. This excluded gluten-free or natural products, for example. Also, due to the research focus on SNAP, all nutrition commitments were required to be US based. Figure 1 shows a visual representation of the search process for the identification of relevant, public information described below.

Fig. 1 Process used to review and identify relevant corporate social responsibility (CSR) commitments of prevalent supplemental nutrition assistance program-authorised retailers in the USA to use marketing-mix and choice-architecture (MMCA) strategies to encourage healthy consumer purchases

Webpage searches

Retailers’ corporate webpages were identified between 3 November 2016 and 7 November 2016 using Google. A researcher browsed materials to identify CSR reports and/or webpages describing business practices. If no CSR report was identified, annual or business reports were scanned for information aligned with the research focus. Sustainability reports were also scanned in this instance; however, none were found to include relevant information. It was assumed CSR reports indicated a stronger commitment by SNAP-authorised retailers to enhance consumers’ dietary quality than press releases or statements.

Grey literature search

A Research Librarian helped form the search strategy and key terms. Three databases were used to capture national as well as regional information: LexisNexis Academic; Access World News; and Ethnic News Watch. Search terms included the SNAP-authorised retailers’ name (Table 1) (e.g. 7-Eleven) along with key words: healthy food(s), nutritious option(s), dietary choice(s), healthy choice(s), fruit*, vegetable*, whole grain(s), low fat dairy, healthy snack(s), healthy diet(s) and nutrition. PHA began engaging with food industry stakeholders in 2010 to address childhood obesity(33); therefore, all articles published during or after this time were of interest. The search was conducted between 19 January 2017 and 2 February 2017. Items (n 2712) were extracted to EndNote and reviewed for study relevance. Duplicate reports from multiple sources were removed, and fifty-two independent items were found to meet the study focus. Search results are available in Table 1, which displays the types of materials identified or not identified for research inclusion.

Marketing-mix and choice-architecture framework

Researchers extracted SNAP-authorised retailers’ commitments to a MMCA framework. Eight MMCA categories identified as relevant to food stores(Reference Houghtaling, Serrano and Kraak23) were used to standardise and compare the availability of language in support of encouraging healthy consumer purchases: place, profile, portion, pricing, promotion, priming, prompting and proximity(Reference Kraak, Englund and Misyak6). For example, place strategies included changes to the structure or atmosphere of stores to encourage DGA-aligned food and beverage purchases. Profile strategies included commitments to improve the availability of DGA-aligned products. Portion strategies altered product sizes. Pricing strategies focused on improving the affordability of DGA-aligned choices. Promotion strategies included in-store marketing approaches to encourage healthy product purchases. Priming strategies included the use of subtle visual cues and prompting strategies the use of labelling. Last, proximity strategies included moving the physical location of DGA-aligned products to enhance their convenience to consumers(Reference Kraak, Englund and Misyak6).

Results

Of the SNAP-authorised retailers (n 38) reviewed, more than half (n 20; 52·6 %) provided no information in the public domain relevant to encouraging consumers’ dietary purchases to align with the DGA (presented using bolded text in Table 1). Few retailers (n 8; 21 %) had relevant CSR information, and grey literature sources (n 52 articles across seventeen retailers) were more commonly identified (Table 1). Most retailers described business strategy commitments focused on increasing the number of DGA-aligned products available (profile strategies) (Table 2). Commitments minimally reflected retailers’ use of other MMCA categories, with portion strategies the least regularly documented (n 1).

Table 2 Available* corporate social responsibility (CSR) or press information of prevalent Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)-authorised retailers in the USA to use marketing-mix and choice-architecture strategies to encourage healthy consumer purchases

* The number of SNAP-authorised retailers committing to use marketing-mix and choice-architecture strategies were place, n 4; profile, n 16; portion, n 1; price, n 7; promotion, n 10; priming, n 2; prompting, n 5; and proximity, n 5.

SNAP-authorised retailers’ commitments in majority seemed to indicate broad reach regarding strategy implementation within all store locations; however, at times commitments identified within press sources indicated smaller-scale health promotion strategies used only in a regional subset of store locations(3652). For example, a Dollar Tree location discontinued the sale of sugar-sweetened beverages in response to the Berkeley soda tax and a select Shell store in Massachusetts partnered with practitioners to offer more healthful options(Reference Clough and Rodriguez51,52) .

Discussion

SNAP-authorised retailers have the potential to favourably influence the dietary behaviours of numerous US shoppers, including vulnerable SNAP consumers(5,Reference Mancino, Guthrie and Ver Ploeg20,32) . This research identified SNAP-authorised retailers with the most store locations in the USA and within two states influenced by a PHA campaign to examine commitments to alter the store environment to promote product purchases aligned with the DGA(Reference Kraak, Englund and Misyak6,Reference Houghtaling, Serrano and Kraak23) . However, few commitments were identified overall. Of available commitments, a limited number were committed to store changes beyond expanding consumers’ selection of healthy foods and beverages.

These results align with other work that has in majority identified food retailers’ commitments to environmentally sustainable practices rather than to obesity reduction strategies(Reference Pinard, Byker and Serrano28Reference Jones, Comfort and Hillier30). Sustainability commitments reflect consumer demand for environmentally friendly practices(53) and the focus on profile or product stocking changes that were most commonly identified in this research likely reflects an increased consumer demand for healthy products(Reference Steingoltz, Picciola and Wilson54). However, while food system sustainability is a necessary component of global health, food retailers are not advised to commit to one goal without the other as both are inherently interconnected(Reference Swinburn, Kraak and Allender3). Partnerships may help retailers and public health practitioners achieve goals for this sector in support of reducing high rates of consumer obesity(10).

Results of this research may inform SNAP-authorised retailers who would be most open to healthy retail partnerships with local SNAP-Education organisations(Reference Blake, Backholer and Lancsar27,55) , due to their public commitments to consumer health and store availability of DGA-aligned products(Reference Houghtaling, Serrano and Kraak23,Reference Kraak, Harrigan and Lawrence56) . In contrast, the many SNAP-authorised retailers with no identified commitments may indicate opportunities for dynamic teams (e.g. nutrition scientists, health economists, corporate marketing professionals) to create mutually beneficial CSR messaging to favourably impact business outcomes and consumers’ dietary behaviours(Reference Bhattacharya, Hildebrand and Sen26). However, the recommended approach remains inconclusive, and more research is warranted to define best approaches.

Qualitative inquiry will be important to understand corporate retailers’ rationale for limited CSR that supports healthy consumer behaviours. While the lack of SNAP-authorised retailers’ commitments to use MMCA strategies to encourage DGA-aligned purchases likely indicates poor fit with business models that balance social issues and profits (revenue minus costs)(Reference Davis and Serrano22,Reference Blake, Backholer and Lancsar27,Reference Glanz, Resnicow and Seymour57) , evidence suggests improving the selection of DGA-aligned products in isolation may not be enough to improve dietary behaviours and product sales(Reference Cummins, Flint and Matthews58). Therefore, if retailers are committing to making healthy products available, it may be within their best business interest to use comprehensive MMCA strategies to nudge sales(Reference Arno and Thomas31). More research is needed to explore the impact of scaling up MMCA strategy implementation on outcomes of costs, revenue, and overall profit among corporate chain retailers.

SNAP-authorised retailers may also be committed to promoting consumer health in other ways, not captured by this research. A recently published Business Impact Assessment–Obesity (BIA-Obesity) tool scores retailers on store promotion variables as well as corporate relationships and strategies to improve consumer health more broadly(Reference Sacks, Vanderlee and Robinson59). Application of this tool among SNAP-authorised retailers with large reach in US communities is needed (forthcoming). Holistic knowledge of corporate strategies to improve consumers’ dietary quality and reduce the prevalence of obesity may help leverage meaningful public–private partnerships and/or policy intervention within this sector(5,Reference Kraak, Harrigan and Lawrence56,Reference Sacks, Vanderlee and Robinson59) . However, despite the utility of scoring SNAP-authorised retailers using BIA-Obesity(Reference Sacks, Vanderlee and Robinson59), the tool does not include comprehensive MMCA strategy indicators(Reference Kraak, Englund and Misyak6). Therefore, the approach used in this research could prove a useful complement to future, similar studies.

Finally, at the time of this investigation, three SNAP-authorised retailers identified for research inclusion were engaged with PHA to promote health among their consumer base(33). This engagement likely influenced their CSR communications. To maximise the impact, PHA should consider the use of the MMCA framework(Reference Kraak, Englund and Misyak6) as a guide for future food retailer engagements that aim to improve store variables and improve consumer health outcomes. However, currently, there is a lack of information about how and if CSR translates to the food store environment to influence behaviour. Lam et al. (2018) found that corporate retailers’ policies regarding healthy checkout lanes were linked with the purchase of healthy products(Reference Lam, Ejlerskov and White60). More investigations are warranted that link CSR messaging to favourable food store change, as food retailers’ accountability on this front is controversial(Reference Bhattacharya, Hildebrand and Sen26,Reference Brownell and Warner61) .

Limitations

This research was a novel approach to understand prevalent retailers’ commitments to improve the dietary quality of vulnerable US consumers. However, the captured commitments may underrepresent SNAP-authorised retailers’ strategies to improve consumer behaviours using MMCA strategies as low-sodium, saturated fat, or added sugar were not used for grey literature search terms. The selected databases may have been inadequate in identifying literature, as Google was not utilised and would have identified social media outlets where information may be posted. Despite these limitations, all SNAP-authorised retailers’ webpages and potentially relevant reports were identified and searched systematically for CSR language about encouraging healthy consumer purchases. It was assumed that these sources would have provided robust evidence of SNAP-authorised retailers’ health promotion strategies and were limited in number. Further, one author was responsible for extracting information meeting the research scope and there was potential for bias without multi-author agreement. The search for data occurred up to 3 years before publication and may not represent contemporary practices, and an ‘available’ commitment does not indicate strategy comprehensiveness at the store level.

Conclusion

Substantial improvements are needed to enhance the capacity and commitments of SNAP-authorised retailers to use diverse strategies to promote healthy purchases among SNAP recipients. Future research could explore feasible approaches to improve dietary behaviours through sector changes via public–private partnerships, policy changes or a combination of government regulatory and voluntary business actions.

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements: Virginia Pannabecker, Health, Life Science and Scholarly Communication Librarian at Virginia Tech, for helping to construct the search syntax and select search databases. Financial support: None to report. Conflict of interest: Authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. Authorship: B.H. is responsible for leading the research including research inception, study design, data analysis, manuscript writing and revisions. E.S. contributed to the research inception, study design, data interpretation and editing. V.I.K., S.M.H., G.C.D. and S.M. contributed to study design, data interpretation and editing. All authors edited and approved the final manuscript. Ethics of human subject participation: This research did not utilise human subjects and was exempt from Virginia Tech’s Institutional Review Board review.

References

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services & U.S. Department of Agriculture (2015–2020) Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 8th ed. December 2015. Available at http://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/.Google Scholar
Haddad, L, Hawkes, C, Webb, Pet al. (2016) A new global research agenda for food. Nature 540, 3032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swinburn, BA, Kraak, VI, Allender, Set al. (2019) The global syndemic of obesity, undernutrition, and climate change: The Lancet Commission report. Lancet 393, 791846.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swinburn, BA, Sacks, G, Hall, KDet al. (2011) The global obesity pandemic: shaped by global drivers and local environments. Lancet 378, 804814.10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60813-1CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Royal Society for Public Health (2019) Health on the Shelf. London: John Snow House.Google Scholar
Kraak, V, Englund, T, Misyak, Set al. (2017) A novel marketing-mix and choice-architecture framework to nudge restaurant customers toward healthy food environments to reduce obesity in the United States. Obes Rev 18, 852868.10.1111/obr.12553CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, DA & Babey, SH (2012) Contextual influences on eating behaviours: heuristic processing and dietary choices. Obes Rev 13, 766779.10.1111/j.1467-789X.2012.01001.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, DA (2008) Obesity and the built environment: changes in environmental cues cause energy imbalances. Int J Obesity 32, Suppl. 7, S137S142.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rivlin, G (2016) Rigged: Supermarket Shelves for Sale. Washington, DC: Center for Science in the Public Interest.Google Scholar
National Center for Health Statistics (2017) Obesity and Overweight. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/obesity-overweight.htm (accessed July 2019).Google Scholar
McKee, M & Stuckler, D (2018) Revisiting the corporate and commercial determinants of health. Am J Public Health 108, 11671170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kickbusch, I, Allen, L & Franz, C (2016) The commercial determinants of health. Lancet 4, e895e896.Google ScholarPubMed
Tempels, T, Verweij, M & Blok, V (2017) Big food’s ambivalence: seeking profit and responsibility for health. Am J Public Health 107, 402406.10.2105/AJPH.2016.303601CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thompson, C, Cummins, S, Brown, Tet al. (2013) Understanding interactions with the food environment: an exploration of supermarket food shopping routines in deprived neighbourhoods. Health Place 19, 116123.10.1016/j.healthplace.2012.10.003CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fielding-Singh, P (2017) A taste of inequality: food’s symbolic value across the socioeconomic spectrum. Sociological Sci 4, 424448.10.15195/v4.a17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, LM, Wada, R & Kumanyika, SK (2014) Racial/ethnic and income disparities in child and adolescent exposure to food and beverage television ads across the U.S. media markets. Health Place 29, 124131.10.1016/j.healthplace.2014.06.006CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yancey, AK, Cole, BL, Brown, Ret al. (2009). A cross-sectional prevalence study of ethnically targeted and general audience outdoor obesity-related advertising. Milbank Q 87, 155184.10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00551.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larson, NI, Story, MT & Nelson, MC (2009) Neighborhood environments disparities in access to healthy foods in the US. Am J Prev Med 36, 7481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilmers, A, Hilmers, DC & Dave, J (2012) Neighborhood disparities in access to healthy foods and their effects on environmental justice. Am J Public Health 102, 16441654.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mancino, L, Guthrie, J, Ver Ploeg, Met al. (2018) Nutritional Quality of Foods Acquired by Americans: Findings from USDA’s National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey. Washington, DC: Economic Research Service.Google Scholar
Lacko, AM, Popkin, BM & Smith Taillie, L (2018) Grocery stores are not associated with more healthful food for participants in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. J Acad Nutr Diet 119, 400415.10.1016/j.jand.2018.06.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, GC & Serrano, EL (2016) Food and Nutrition Economics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Houghtaling, B, Serrano, E, Kraak, VIet al. (2019) A systematic review of factors that influence food store owner and manager decision making and ability/willingness to use choice architecture and marketing mix strategies to encourage healthy consumer purchases in the United States, 2005–2017. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 16, 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rockefeller, RC (1971) Turn public problems to private account. Harv Bus Rev 49, 131138.Google Scholar
Dahlsrud, A (2008) How corporate social responsibility is defined: an analysis of 37 definitions. Corp Soc Resp Env Ma 15, 113.10.1002/csr.132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhattacharya, CB, Hildebrand, D & Sen, S (2011) Corporate social responsibility: a corporate marketing perspective. Eur J Marketing 45, 13531364.Google Scholar
Blake, MR, Backholer, K, Lancsar, Eet al. (2019) Investigating business outcomes of healthy food retail strategies: A systematic scoping review. Obes Rev 20, 13841399. doi: 10·1111/obr.12912.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinard, CA, Byker, C, Serrano, Eet al. (2014) National chain restaurant practices supporting food sustainability. J Hunger Environ Nutr 9, 535545.10.1080/19320248.2014.898169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pulker, C, Trapp, G, Scott, Jet al. (2018) Global supermarkets’ corporate social responsibility commitments to public health: a content analysis. Global Health 14, 120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, P, Comfort, D, Hillier, Det al. (2005) Corporate social responsibility: a case study of the UK’s leading food retailers. Br Food J 107, 423435.10.1108/00070700510602192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arno, A & Thomas, S (2016) The efficacy of nudge theory strategies in influencing adult dietary behaviour: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health 16, 676.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
US Department of Agriculture (n.d.) SNAP Retailer Locator. http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/retailerlocator (accessed June 2016).Google Scholar
Partnership for a Healthier America (n.d.) Partnership for a Healthier America: Making the Healthy Choice the Easy Choice. http://ahealthieramerica.org/ (accessed January 2017).Google Scholar
Kraak, V, Englund, T, Zhou, Met al. (2018) Evaluation Summary: Four Studies Conducted for the Partnership for a Healthier America’s Fruits & Veggies (FNV) Campaign in California and Virginia, 2015–2017. Blacksburg VA: Virginia Tech.Google Scholar
US Department of Agriculture (2013) Rural–Urban Continuum Codes. http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/rural-urban-continuum-codes.aspx (accessed July 2016).Google Scholar
Walgreen Co (2016) Social Responsibility. https://www.walgreens.com/topic/sr/sr_in_your_neighborhood.jsp (accessed November 2016).Google Scholar
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc (2016) 2016 Global Responsibility Report. https://corporate.walmart.com/.Google Scholar
Delhaize Group (2015) Annual Report. https://www.aholddelhaize.com/en/home/.Google Scholar
CVS Health (2015) Prescription for a Better World: 2015 Corporate Social Responsibility Report. https://cvshealth.com/.Google Scholar
The White House (2011) First Lady Michelle Obama Announces Collaboration with Walmart in Support of Let’s Move! Campaign. Washington, DC: Office of the Press Secretary.Google Scholar
Adams, S (2010) Food Fight: Cv Expands Grocery Aisles in Latest Attempt by Drugstores to Compete with Supermarkets. Quincy, MA: The Patriot Ledger.Google Scholar
Wolf, AM (2010) Walgreen Preparing to Sell Salads, Other Fresh Foods. Raleigh, NC: The News and Observer.Google Scholar
Avalos, G (2011) Walgreens Jumps into Bay Area Food Fight with New Food Section in Dozens of Its Stores. Oakland, CA: Contra Costa Times.Google Scholar
Mossman, J (2013) Walgreens Store to Combat ‘Food Desert’. Denver, CO: The Denver Post.Google Scholar
Lochner, T (2015) Berkeley Retailer Takes Sodas off Shelf, in Apparent Response to Tax on Sugary Beverages. Berkeley, CA: The Oakland Tribune.Google Scholar
Roman, E (2015) Cooking Matters Highlights Affordable, Healthy Food Choices at Springfield Walmart. Springfield, MA: The Republican.Google Scholar
DeMary, T (2012) Grocery Store Tours at Walmart with Tips for Buying Healthy Food on a Budget. Baltimore, MD: Baltimore Examiner.Google Scholar
Arab American News (2016) Kroger Partners with Detroit Health System on Nutritious Eating Program. Detroit, MI: Arab American News.Google Scholar
Close-up Media (2012) Walmart Offers Shopping Matters Tours. Jacksonville, FL: Comtex.Google Scholar
Christmann, S (2014) Big Lots Puts Larger Focus on Groceries in Overhaul. Buffalo, NY: The Buffalo News.Google Scholar
Clough, B & Rodriguez, R (2014) Smart & Final Retools Fresno Stores with Smaller Servings. Fresno, CA: The Fresno Bee.Google Scholar
CP Media (2015) Melrose Shell Named a ‘Healthy Market’. Melrose, MA: Melrose Free Press.Google Scholar
Nielsen (2018) Sustainability Sells: Linking Sustainablility Claims to Sales. https://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/article/2018/sustainability-sells-linking-sustainability-claims-to-sales/ (accessed July 2019).Google Scholar
Steingoltz, M, Picciola, M & Wilson, R (2018) Consumer Health Claims 3·0: The Next Generation of Mindful Food Consumption. L.E.K. Consulting, LLC. https://www.lek.com/insights/ei/next-generation-mindful-food-consumption (accessed July 2019).Google Scholar
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2014) Healthier Food Retail: An Action Guide for Public Health Practioners. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.Google Scholar
Kraak, VI, Harrigan, PB, Lawrence, Met al. (2012) Balancing the benefits and risks of public–private partnerships to address the global double burden of malnutrition. Public Health Nutr 15, 503517.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glanz, K, Resnicow, K, Seymour, Jet al. (2007) How major restaurant chains plan their menus: The role of profit, demand, and health. Am J Prev Med 32, 383.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cummins, S, Flint, E & Matthews, SA (2014) New neighborhood grocery store increased awareness of food access but did not alter dietary habits or obesity. Health Aff 33, 283291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sacks, G, Vanderlee, L, Robinson, Eet al. (2019) BIA-Obesity (Business Impact Assessment-Obesity and population-level nutrition): a tool and process to assess food company policies and commitments related to obesity prevention and population nutrition at the national level. Obes Rev 20, 7889. doi: 10·1111/obr.12878.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lam, CCV, Ejlerskov, KT, White, Met al. (2018) Voluntary policies on checkout foods and healthfulness of foods displayed at, or near, supermarket checkout areas: a cross-sectional survey. Public Health Nutr 12, 34623468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brownell, KD & Warner, KE (2009) The perils of ignoring history: big Tobacco played dirty and millions died. How similar is big food? Milbank Q 87, 259294.10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00555.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7-Eleven, Inc (2016) Corporate Social Responsibility: The Business of Doing Good. http://corp.7-eleven.com/corp/corporate-social-responsibility (accessed November 2016).Google Scholar
7-Eleven, Inc (2015) 7-Eleven Invites Health-Conscious Customers to 'Wise Up’ to New 7-Select GO!Smart™ Fruit and Nut Bars. Dallas, TX: PR Newswire.Google Scholar
Sheets, CA (2014) 7-Eleven Teams with P90X Creator to Offer Healthy Food Options. New York, NY: International Business Times.Google Scholar
Guerin, G (2013) 7-Eleven Joining Trend Towards Healthy Food Options. Newark, NJ: NewsBank.Google Scholar
ALDI (2013) ALDI Makes It Easier and More Affordable to Eat Right – 'Fit & Active’ Better-for-You Product Line Available Exclusively at ALDI. New York, NY: PR Newswire.Google Scholar
ALDI (2014) ALDI Exclusive 'SimplyNature’ Brand Emphasizes Affordability of Eating Well. New Delhi: India Retail News.Google Scholar
ALDI (2014) ALDI Teams Up with Registered Dietitians to Simplify Healthy Living for Shoppers. New Delhi: India Retail News.Google Scholar
ALDI (2015) ALDI Makes It Easy and Affordable to Eat Healthy – ALDI Introduces ‘Dietitian’s Picks’ to Help Shoppers Make Better Food Choices at Home. New York, NY: PR Newswire.Google Scholar
Center for Science in the Public Interest (2016) Healthier Checkout Lanes Coming to Aldi Supermarkets. Washington, DC: Targeted News Service.Google Scholar
Cv/Pharmacy (2013) Cv/Pharmacy Launches Revamped Gold Emblem Line, Featuring Enhanced Ingredients, New Snack Options and More Flavors. Woonsocket, RI: PR Newswire.Google Scholar
William, G (2015) Cv Makes Its Own Moves in Battle with Walgreens. Chicago, IL: Chicago Citizen.Google Scholar
O’Donnell, J (2015) Stopping Sales Decreased Cigarette Usage. Miami, FL: Miami Times.Google Scholar
Dimick, M (2010) Indy Dollar General Stores Feed Healthy Hearts. Indianapolis, IN: Indianapolis Examiner.Google Scholar
Mitchell, B (2013) Harris Teeter Sells Atmosphere as Well as Food. Tysons Corner, VA: USA Today.Google Scholar
Steptoe, P (2015) Harris Teeter Goes Vegan to-go. Charlotte, NC: PR.com.Google Scholar
Skinny Nutritional Corp (2015) Harris Teeter Partners with Skinny Nutritional. London, UK: Progressive Media Group Limited.Google Scholar
Close-up Media (2012) Rite Aid Offers Help for Customers to Keep New Year’s Resolutions. Jacksonville, FL: Close-Up Media, Inc.Google Scholar
Harkreader, E (2012) In Honor of American Heart Month Starting Today, Rite Aid Launches Nationwide Heart Health Campaign. Camp Hill, PA: Rite Aid Corporation.Google Scholar
Harkreader, E (2011) Rite Aid Encourages Weight Loss with Inspiration from ‘The Biggest Loser®’. San Francisco, CA: Business Wire.Google Scholar
Safeway, Inc (2016) Products: Our Priorities. http://csrsite.safeway.com/home/products/where-we-stand/ (accessed November 2016).Google Scholar
Produce for a Better Health Foundation (2010) Produce for Better Health Foundation Applauds Safeway’s New 'Lunchbox Winners’ Produce Program. Hockessin, DE: PR Newswire.Google Scholar
Kidfresh (2012) All-Natural Frozen Kids Meals Now Available Nationwide. New York, NY: PR Newswire.Google Scholar
Safeway, Inc (2012) Safeway Increases CSR Impact with New Personal Pledge and Reward Program. Pleasanton, CA: PR Newswire.Google Scholar
Safeway, Inc (2012) USDA and Safeway Join in a National Strategic Partnership to Improve the Nutrition and Well-Being of Americans. Pleasanton, CA: PR Newswire.Google Scholar
Marino, J (2014) Safeway Stores Now Offering Sprouted, Whole Grain Hotdog and Hamburger Buns from Angelic Bakehouse. Cudahy, WI: PRWeb.Google Scholar
Massingill, T (2011) Safeway Announces ‘SimpleNutrition’, an in-Store Shelf Tag System, to Help Shoppers Find the Right Nutrition. San Francisco, CA: Business Wire, Inc.Google Scholar
Araya, K (2011) Helping You to Eat Better: Safeway Adds Colored Tags to Healthy Foods. Redding, CA: Redding Record Searchlight.Google Scholar
Massingill, T (2011) Safeway Announces Open Nature™ Line of 100 % Natural Foods. San Francisco, CA: Business Wire, Inc.Google Scholar
Life Examiner (2012) Active Health Food, Inc. Soon to Be in all 444 Sheetz, Inc. Convenience Stores. Washington, DC: PR Newswatch.Google Scholar
Partnership for Healthier America (2014) Sheetz Joins Partnership for a Healthier America to Make Healthier Choices Easier for Busy Parents and Families. Las Vegas, NV: PR Newswire.Google Scholar
Clay, J (2014) Smart & Final Stores Grow Grocery Vision. Long Beach, CA: Orange County Register.Google Scholar
Stater Bros Market (2014) Stater Bros. Introduces Affordable, All Natural and Better-for-You Food Line. New Delhi: India World News.Google Scholar
Target Brands, Inc (2015) 2015 Target Corporate Social Responsibility Report. https://corporate.target.com/corporate-responsibility/.Google Scholar
D’Innocenzio, A & Murphy, T (2015) Target Developing Healthier Habits, Gives Workers Fitbits. New York, NY: The Epoch Times.Google Scholar
The White House (2011) First Lady Michelle Obama Announces Collaboration with Walmart in Support of Let’s Move! Campaign. Washington, DC: Office of the Press Secretary.Google Scholar
Egg Nutrition Center (2012) Eggs Receive Great for You Seal from Walmart. Parkridge, IL: PR Newswire.Google Scholar
Walberg, J (2013) Walmart Agrees: Nature’s Eats is Great for You. Boerne, TX: PRWeb.Google Scholar
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc (2013) Walmart Launches Fresh Produce Guarantee in U.S. Stores. Bentonville, AR: PR Newswire.Google Scholar
Somerville, H (2014) Walmart to Sell Wild Oats Organic Groceries. San Jose, CA: Bay Area News Group.Google Scholar
Dunn, A (2014) Walmart Expands New Price-Match Program to Include Produce. Raleigh, NC: The News and Observer.Google Scholar
Monaco, R (2013) Walmart Pre-Black Friday 2013 Sales Event Extends to Produce, Other Groceries. Buffalo, NY: Buffalo Examiner.Google Scholar
Lopez, L (2012) Walmart Unveils ‘Great For You’ Icon. Bentonville, AR: Business Wire.Google Scholar
Gardner, K (2015) Walmart Marks Fulfillment of Key Global Responsibility Commitments. Bentonville, AR: Business Wire.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1 Public corporate social responsibility (CSR) commitments of prevalent Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)-authorised food retailers to use marketing-mix and choice-architecture strategies to encourage healthy consumer purchases aligned with dietary guidance in the USA, n 38

Figure 1

Fig. 1 Process used to review and identify relevant corporate social responsibility (CSR) commitments of prevalent supplemental nutrition assistance program-authorised retailers in the USA to use marketing-mix and choice-architecture (MMCA) strategies to encourage healthy consumer purchases

Figure 2

Table 2 Available* corporate social responsibility (CSR) or press information of prevalent Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)-authorised retailers in the USA to use marketing-mix and choice-architecture strategies to encourage healthy consumer purchases