This paper will discuss the initiation of a policy of taxing sugared beverages using Longest’s policy cycle model. Longest’s model consists of three phases: formulation, implementation, and modification, all of which depend on the external environment, including stakeholders’ interests (Meacham, 2020). The policy cycle begins when the window of opportunity opens, that is, when problems, potential solutions, and political circumstances are favorably aligned (Meacham, 2020). Hence, in order to initiate a policy that would impose taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages, policymakers would need to frame sugared beverage consumption as a problem, propose solutions, and get stakeholders’ buy-in.
Several arguments can be used to make a case for the proposed policy. First, consuming sugared beverages harms human health by leading to weight gain, cardiovascular disease, and type 2 diabetes (Allcott et al., 2019). Although many foods include sugars, sugar-sweetened beverages are the most harmful to health because sugars from drinks are digested more quickly than from food (Allcott et al., 2019).
Therefore, taxing sugared beverages may decrease the number of people with the mentioned diseases by discouraging consumers from buying these products. Second, imposing taxes would lead to a decrease in healthcare costs because of a potential decline in the prevalence of diabetes, obesity, and cardiovascular disease and, consequently, the decreased costs of treating them. It is estimated that a 1% ounce tax would save from $17.1 billion to $23.6 billion over ten years (Allcott et al., 2019). Finally, taxing sugar-sweetened beverages will make Americans healthier as a nation as, currently, Americans consume 3-4 times more calories from sugared drinks than the rest of the world on average (Allcott et al., 2019). This final argument would use the recent trend for healthier lifestyles to promote the tax.
While the arguments in favor of the tax seem persuasive, the opponents of the policy can make their counterarguments. For example, they may state that studies measuring the effects of sugared beverage consumption are mostly correlational, meaning that they do not allow for establishing a causal effect between sugar consumption and obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease (Allcott et al., 2019).
Second, the opponents may argue that, since sugared drinks are consumed mostly by low-income individuals, the tax will be regressive because it will affect low-income households more than high-income ones (Allcott et al., 2019). However, this argument seems to suggest that there is no substitute for sugared beverages, which is why individuals will have to continue buying them. This is not true: if sugared beverages become more expensive, individuals will be able to shift to cheaper and healthier alternatives, such as diet drinks or water.
In order to get buy-in for the proposed policy, one should consider the interests of various stakeholders and find an appropriate solution. For example, the policy may target only those individuals who are the most harmed by the consumption of sugared beverages. According to Allcott et al. (2019), children are an example of such individuals since, because of a lack of self-control, they tend to make unhealthy food choices more often. Hence, the policy may impose high taxes on the sale of sugar-sweetened beverages in schools. Another way to get buy-in is to tax grams of sugar in the drink instead of ounces of liquid, which is standard practice (Allcott et al., 2019).
This solution may bring several benefits: first, consumers buying sugar-sweetened beverages will take less sugar when drinking such beverages. Second, manufacturers may be motivated to reduce the content of sugar in their products to achieve lower prices.
The promotion of the policy will involve stakeholder groups, which will be the most affected by the policy. They include beverage manufacturers, consumer protection organizations, and healthcare professionals dealing with cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and obesity. These stakeholders are important in promoting the policy because it influences them directly, so their interests should be considered at all stages of Longest’s model, from formulation to modification. Government is also an important stakeholder because policy initiatives advocated by the president and other authoritative officials are likely to find more support from the public.
References
Allcott, H., Lockwood, B. B., & Taubinsky, D. (2019). Should we tax sugar-sweetened beverages? An overview of theory and evidence. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 33(3), 202-227. Web.
Meacham, M. R. (2020). Longest’s health policymaking in the United States (7th ed.). AUPHA/HAP Book.