We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Different forms of public and private regulation have been used to improve the healthiness of food retail environments. The aim of this scoping review was to systematically examine the types of private regulatory measures used to create healthy food retail environments, the reporting of the processes of implementation, monitoring, review and enforcement and the barriers to and enablers of these.
Design:
Scoping review using the Johanna Briggs Institute guidelines. Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL Plus, Business Source Complete and Scopus databases were searched in October 2020 and again in September 2023 using terms for ‘food retail’, ‘regulation’ and ‘nutrition’. Regulatory measure type was described by domain and mechanism. Deductive thematic analysis was used to identify reported barriers and enablers to effective regulatory governance processes using a public health law framework.
Setting:
Food retail.
Participants:
Food retail settings using private regulatory measures to create healthier food retail environments.
Results:
In total, 17 694 articles were screened and thirty-five included for review from six countries, with all articles published since 2011. Articles reporting on twenty-six unique private regulatory measures cited a mix of voluntary (n 16), mandatory (n 6) measures, both (n 2) or did not disclose (n 2). Articles frequently reported on implementation (34/35), with less reporting on the other regulatory governance processes of monitoring (15/35), review (6/35) and enforcement (2/35).
Conclusions:
We recommend more attention be paid to reporting on the monitoring, review and enforcement processes used in private regulation to promote further progress in improving the healthiness of food retail environments.
National public health organizations recommend that local governments improve access to healthy foods. One way is by offering incentives for food retailer development and operation, but little is known about incentive use nationwide. We aimed to describe the national prevalence of local government reported incentives to increase access to healthy food options in three major food retail settings (farmers’ markets, supermarkets, and convenience or corner (smaller) stores) overall and by municipality characteristics.
Design:
Cross-sectional study using data from the 2014 National Survey of Community-Based Policy and Environmental Supports for Healthy Eating and Active Living.
Setting:
USA, nationally representative survey of 2029 municipalities.
Participants:
Municipal officials (e.g. city/town managers or planners; n 1853).
Results:
Overall, 67 % of municipalities reported incentives to support farmers’ markets, 34 % reported incentives to encourage opening new supermarkets, and 14 % reported incentives to help existing convenience or corner stores. Municipality characteristics significantly associated with incentive use were larger population size (all settings), location in Midwest v. West (supermarkets, smaller stores), higher poverty level (farmers’ markets) and ≤50 % of the population non-Hispanic White (supermarkets, smaller stores). The most commonly reported individual incentives were permission of sales on city property for farmers’ markets, tax credits for supermarkets and linkage to revitalization projects for smaller stores.
Conclusions:
Most municipalities offered food retail incentives for farmers’ markets, but fewer used incentives to open new supermarkets or assist existing smaller stores. National data can set benchmarks, provide relative comparisons for communities and identify areas for improvement.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.