Expert views on high fat, salt and sugar food marketing policies to tackle obesity and improve dietary behaviours in the UK: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: There has been a lack of progress in reducing obesity in the United Kingdom (UK) despite Government strategies released over the last 30 years. These strategies, including the most recent publication from July 2020, have focused on childhood obesity and high fat, sugar and/or salt (HFSS) marketing restrictions, particularly broadcast advertising. In this study, we aimed to examine a range of expert views on the potential impact and the relative importance of such policies. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 42 experts in policy (n = 19), industry (n = 10), and advocacy (n = 13) with an interest in obesity. The UK Government's 2020 obesity strategy was used as a prompt to guide discussion on policy options. Qualitative thematic analysis was employed to answer the three research questions and themes were inductively coded within each research question. Data were also cross compared using matrix coding and a form of framework analysis to examine the views expressed by the different types of stakeholders. RESULTS: Reactions to the July 2020 proposal were mixed among policy and advocacy stakeholders, while commercial stakeholders expressed disappointment. A main theme emerging in all groups was frustration with the policy process and wishing to see more clarity regarding restrictions and their implementation. There was an overall lack of trust that the government would carry out their proposed plan and agreement that a more comprehensive, multi-sector approach aimed at the underlying drivers of obesity would be most effective, with some stakeholders indicating that some of the proposed policies could make a difference if implemented robustly. On the theme of promoting healthier options, some stakeholders suggested lowering the prices of 'healthy' products and making them more accessible to combat regressivity. There was a potentially surprising level of agreement between policy/advocacy stakeholders and commercial stakeholders, although commercial stakeholders were more likely to advocate for collaboration between government and industry as well as voluntary industry measures. CONCLUSION: While HFSS marketing restrictions have a role to play and send a strong signal - provided they are implemented comprehensively - investment in these policies needs to be part of wider efforts to tackle the underlying drivers of obesity.

Young people's perspectives on addressing UK health inequalities: utopian visions and preferences for action.

INTRODUCTION: It is increasingly recognised by UK researchers and population health advocates that an important impetus to effective policy action to address health inequalities is activation of public dialogue about the social determinants of health and how inequalities might be addressed. The limited body of existing scholarship reaches varying conclusions on public preferences for responding to health inequalities but with consensus around the importance of tackling poverty. Young people's perspectives remain underexplored despite their increasingly visible role in activism across a range of policy issues and the potential impact of widening inequalities on their generation's health and wellbeing. METHODS: Six groups of young people (39 in total) from two UK cities (Glasgow and Leeds) were engaged in online workshops to explore views on health inequalities and potential solutions. Inspired by calls to employ notions of utopia, artist-facilitators and researchers supported participants to explore the evidence, debating solutions and imagining a more desirable society, using visual and performance art. Drawing together data from discussions and creative outputs, we analysed participants' perspectives on addressing health inequalities across four domains: governance, environment, society/culture and economy. FINDINGS: Proposals ranged from radical, whole-systems change to support for policies currently being considered by governments across the United Kingdom. The consensus was built around embracing more participatory, collaborative governance; prioritising sustainability and access to greenspace; promoting inclusivity and eliminating discrimination and improving the circumstances of those on the lowest incomes. Levels of acceptable income inequality, and how best to address income inequality were more contested. Individual-level interventions were rarely presented as viable options for addressing the social inequalities from which health differences emanate. CONCLUSION: Young people contributed wide-ranging and visionary solutions to debates around addressing the enduring existence of health inequalities in the United Kingdom. Their reflections signal support for 'upstream' systemic change to achieve reductions in social inequalities and the health differences that flow from these. PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: An advisory group of young people informed the development of project plans. Participants shaped the direction of the project in terms of substantive focus and were responsible for the generation of creative project outputs aimed at influencing policymakers.

Love Shouldn't Hurt - E le Saua le Alofa: Co-designing a theory of change for preventing violence against women in Samoa.

Despite the widespread adoption of Theories of Change (ToC) for programme evaluation, the process of collaboratively developing these theories is rarely outlined or critical analysed, limiting broader methodological discussions on co-production. We developed a ToC as part of E le Saua le Alofa ('Love Shouldn't Hurt') - a participatory peer-research study to prevent violence against women (VAW) in Samoa. The ToC was developed in four phases: (1) semi-structured interviews with village representatives (n = 20); (2) peer-led semi-structured interviews with community members (n = 60), (3) community conversations with 10 villages (n = 217) to discuss causal mechanisms for preventing VAW, and (4) finalising the ToC pathways. Several challenges were identified, including conflicting understandings of VAW as a problem; the linearity of the ToC framework in contrast to intersecting realities of people's lived experiences; the importance of emotional engagements, and theory development as a contradictory and incomplete process. The process also raised opportunities including a deeper exploration of local meaning-making, iterative engagement with local mechanisms of violence prevention, and clear evidence of ownership by communities in developing a uniquely Samoan intervention to prevent VAW. This study highlights a clear need for ToCs to be complemented by indigenous frameworks and methodologies in post-colonial settings such as Samoa.