Planning guidance to limit hot food takeaways: Understanding the possible economic impacts
Daniel Derbyshire,
Antonieta Medina-Lara,
Ben Amies-Cull,
Michael Chang,
Steven Cummins,
Suzan Hassan,
Matthew Keeble,
Bochu Liu,
Oliver Mytton,
John Rahilly,
Bea Savory,
Claire Thompson,
Martin White,
Jean Adams,
Thomas Burgoine,
Richard Smith
Affiliations
Daniel Derbyshire
Public Health Economics Group, Department of Public Health and Sports Science, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Exeter, UK; Corresponding author.
Antonieta Medina-Lara
Public Health Economics Group, Department of Public Health and Sports Science, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Exeter, UK
Ben Amies-Cull
Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
Michael Chang
Office for Health Improvement and Disparities, Department of Health and Social Care, UK
Steven Cummins
Department of Public Health, Environments & Society, Faculty of Public Health & Policy, London School of Tropical Hygiene and Medicine, UK
Suzan Hassan
Department of Public Health, Environments & Society, Faculty of Public Health & Policy, London School of Tropical Hygiene and Medicine, UK
Matthew Keeble
MRC Epidemiology Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, UK
Bochu Liu
MRC Epidemiology Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, UK; Department of Urban Planning, College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tongji University, Shanghai, China
Oliver Mytton
Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, UK
John Rahilly
MRC Epidemiology Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, UK; Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, UK
Bea Savory
Department of Public Health, Environments & Society, Faculty of Public Health & Policy, London School of Tropical Hygiene and Medicine, UK
Claire Thompson
School of Health and Social Work, University of Hertfordshire, UK
Martin White
MRC Epidemiology Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, UK
Jean Adams
MRC Epidemiology Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, UK
Thomas Burgoine
MRC Epidemiology Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, UK
Richard Smith
Public Health Economics Group, Department of Public Health and Sports Science, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Exeter, UK
Local and national policymakers are seeking innovative solutions to create healthier food environments around the world. Between 2009 and 2017, 35 local authorities across England (UK) adopted planning guidance designed to limit the proliferation of hot food takeaways near schools. Whilst these policies are intended to improve population health, they are also likely to have economic impacts. Often a decision to introduce such policies comes down to consideration of whether the short-term economic imperatives of allowing new takeaway outlets to open outweighs the potential long-term public health implications and associated economic consequences. These potential negative and positive economic impacts have not previously been clearly described and are summarised here. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of the potential economic impacts of takeaway management zones. In particular, we present a Causal Loop Diagram (CLD) that outlines the possible economic impacts of takeaway management zones based on researcher knowledge of the interventions and the industry. Potential negative impacts fall across sectors and may include a loss of employment opportunities and reductions in local and national tax receipts, and may impact the economic vitality of local communities. In the longer term, there is the potential for positive impacts such as reductions in healthcare resource utilisation, social care expenditure and sickness-related absence from work. Part of a robust case would a better economic understanding, that would enable local authorities to improve understanding of the trade-offs associated with the policy, such as short-versus long-term, and business-related versus society-related health benefits and costs.