Analysing health claims policy in Australia : a case study of evidence in food and nutrition policy-making

Purpose: Health claims generally describe an association between a food product and a health outcome. There is debate whether health claims promote or obstruct healthy food selection behaviour. This study investigates the role of evidence in food and nutrition policy-making. The research question is how and why was health claims policy made in Australia? The research is innovative in its critical analysis design and its focus on building theory to help improve food and nutrition policy-making processes and outcomes.

Methods: A case study design was adopted in which events, stakeholders and issues associated with the policy review were described from data generated from interviews and documentary sources. A content-analysis tool is being used to critically analyse textual data. Concepts in the text are being identified and relationships among the policy concepts, stakeholders and processes are being mapped.

Findings: The analysis of data associated with the policy review is revealing a pattern of relationships among stakeholders, processes and concepts around shared values, beliefs and interests towards food and health. Broader food regulation contexts have influenced the decision-making environment. The pattern of relationships shares common characteristics with Sabatier’s ‘Advocacy Coalition Framework’ theoretical explanation of policy-making.

Conclusions: The study findings have implications for health claims policy and practice in Australia. As a case study of evidence in food and nutrition policy-making, this research highlights the role of competing interests, beliefs and values in evidence interpretation. Challenges are identified in undertaking food policy research.