4.6 Review

Investigating business outcomes of healthy food retail strategies: A systematic scoping review

期刊

OBESITY REVIEWS
卷 20, 期 10, 页码 1384-1399

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/obr.12912

关键词

consumer; economic analysis; food environment; process

资金

  1. Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship
  2. Deakin University
  3. Australian Research Council (ARC) fellowship
  4. Department of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food at Monash University
  5. Monash University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Large changes to food retail settings are required to improve population diet. However, limited research has comprehensively considered the business implications of healthy food retail strategies for food retailers. We performed a systematic scoping review to identify types of business outcomes that have been reported in healthy food retail strategy evaluations. Peer-reviewed and grey literature were searched. We identified qualitative or quantitative real-world food or beverage retail strategies designed to improve the healthiness of the consumer nutrition environment (eg, changes to the marketing mix of product, price, promotion, and/or placement). Eligible studies reported store- or chain-level outcomes for measures of commercial viability, retailer perspectives, customer perspectives, and/or community outcomes. 11 682 titles and abstracts were screened with 107 studies included for review from 15 countries. Overall item sales, revenue, store patronage, and customer level of satisfaction with strategy were the most frequently examined outcomes. There was a large heterogeneity in outcome measures reported and in favourability for retailers of outcomes across studies. We recommend more consistent reporting of business outcomes and increased development and use of validated and reliable measurement tools. This may help generate more robust research evidence to aid retailers and policymakers to select feasible and sustainable healthy food retail strategies to benefit population health within and across countries.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据