Fruit and Vegetable Advertising Linked to More Consumption

Released: 9/12/2012 4:30 PM EDT
Source Newsroom: Health Behavior News Service
Contact Information

Available for logged-in reporters only

Citations American Journal of Health Promotion

KEY POINTS

*More people reported that they ate five or more servings of fruits and vegetables in states that used marketing campaigns to promote produce than in states that did not.
*Advertising produce had the most impact on women, whose consumption of fruits and vegetables fell in states without marketing campaigns but grew in states with them.

By Randy Dotinga, Contributing Writer
Research Source: American Journal of Health Promotion
Health Behavior News Service

Newswise — The key to getting people to eat more fruits and vegetables may be advertising, finds a new study in the American Journal of Health Promotion. Marketing seems to play a role in guiding people to eat better, said study co-author Michel Faupel, of the University of Arkansas. "It’s not huge, but it's a measurable impact."

Researchers wondered if there was any difference in fruit and vegetable consumption between states with agricultural marketing programs and those without. Currently, dozens of states support advertising, packaging and in-store displays that promote fresh produce to consumers, many promoting locally grown fruits and vegetables. In Arkansas, for instance, displays at Walmart stores alert customers to sweet potatoes that were grown in the state, Faupel said.

The study examined the results of surveys held in 2000 and 2005 of 237,320 people in the U.S., asking participants about their eating habits. In states that adopted marketing campaigns during this time-frame, the percentage of those who reported they ate at least five servings of fruits and vegetables per day--the recommended amount--grew from 24 percent to 26.5 percent.

The most notable difference was in women: In states without marketing campaigns, the percentage who met the five-a-day guideline fell from 27 percent to 26.1 over the five years, but grew from 27.6 percent to 30.1 percent among those with the programs. "During a period of time when fresh produce consumption was decreasing nationally, the states that had these programs did not follow the national trend," Faupel said. "Instead their produce consumption stayed level or it increased slightly."

Harry Kaiser, Ph.D., a professor of applied economics and management at Cornell University, said the study findings are similar to those of his own research into the value of produce marketing programs. "When we look at any sort of advertising of general commodities, they generally have a positive impact. But they're pretty minor," he said.

So are these programs cost-effective? Kaiser thinks so, based on his studies of industry programs to promote the sales of things like walnuts, raisins, beef and milk. "From an industry standpoint," he said, "you don't have to have a humongous impact for it to be profitable."

TERMS OF USE: This story is protected by copyright. When reproducing any material, including interview excerpts, attribution to the Health Behavior News Service, part of the Center for Advancing Health, is required. While the information provided in this news story is from the latest peer-reviewed research, it is not intended to provide medical advice or treatment recommendations. For medical questions or concerns, please consult a health care provider.

###

American Journal of Health Promotion: Call (248) 682-0707 or visit www.healthpromotionjournal.com.

Howlett A, et al. The Positive Influence of State Agricultural Marketing Programs on Adults’ Fruit and Vegetable Consumption. September/October 2012, American Journal of Health Promotion.


Comment/Share