Next Article in Journal
Application of Life Cycle Assessment in Beer Production: Systematic Review
Previous Article in Journal
Chemometric Approach Application in Modern Wine Studies
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Beverages
Volume 10
Issue 3
10.3390/beverages10030085
beverages-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Perceptions of Young People Regarding the Tax on Sweetened Drinks in Poland and an Assessment of Changes in Their Consumption in Terms of Taxation

by
Regina Ewa Wierzejska
1,*,
Agnieszka Wiosetek-Reske
2 and
Barbara Wojda
1
1
Department of Nutrition and Nutritional Value of Food, National Institute of Public Health NIH—National Research Institute, Chocimska St. 24, 00-791 Warsaw, Poland
2
The Institute of Health Sciences, Stefan Batory State University, Batorego St. 64C, 96-100 Skierniewice, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Beverages 2024, 10(3), 85; https://doi.org/10.3390/beverages10030085
Submission received: 1 August 2024 / Revised: 4 September 2024 / Accepted: 5 September 2024 / Published: 10 September 2024
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
In 2021, the tax on sweetened beverages was introduced in Poland. It is worth knowing how consumers, especially young people, perceive the tax and whether there are any changes in the consumption of such drinks. This cross-sectional study was conducted in 2022 and analyzed a convenience sample of young people’s attitudes towards the effectiveness of the tax as well as beverage consumption in the second year of the tax’s implementation. This study was conducted using a questionnaire method among 334 young people (167 school students and 167 university students). The vast majority of the study participants (84%) had heard about the introduction of the tax (there was no statistically significant difference between the school students’ and the university students’ knowledge). Of these, 90% knew that beverages with added sugar are taxed, but only 43% were conscious that beverages with sweeteners are also subject to the tax. Forty percent of those surveyed believed that the introduction of the tax could reduce beverage consumption, while 35% denied this possibility. The view that the tax would have a beneficial effect on reducing drink consumption was statistically significantly more frequently expressed by school students compared to university students (55% vs. 25%; p < 0.05). Of those who were aware of the tax, 31% declared they drank fewer beverages following its introduction, while 58% reported that they had not changed the amount they drank. About 33% of the respondents said they drank sweetened beverages several times a week. According to the study, as a result of the tax, almost one-third of surveyed young Poles reported drinking less beverages than before the tax.

1. Introduction

Sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are the largest source of sugars delivered to the body through sweetened foods [1,2,3]. In the USA, as much as 41% of the total intake of so-called added sugars comes from soft drinks and fruit drinks [4]. Due to the suggested strong link between the consumption of SSBs and obesity and type 2 diabetes [2,5,6], many countries have decided to tax such products. The introduction of the tax, by increasing the price of the beverages, aims to reduce their consumption or to reformulate them in a health-promoting direction. The tax is already in place in more than 50 countries across various continents: in Europe (including the UK and France), in North America (Mexico and some US states or large cities), in South America (Chile), in Asia (Saudi Arabia and Thailand), and in Africa (Morocco) [5,7,8]. As of January 2021, the tax has also been introduced in Poland, but unlike in other countries, it applies not only to beverages with added sugars but also to those with added sweeteners, regardless of whether they are of natural or synthetic origin. One of the factors that determines the amount of tax is the content of sugars and fruit or vegetable juices [9].
The main consumers of SSBs are young people. According to a systematic assessment of SSB consumption conducted between 1990 and 2010 in 187 countries, among people over the age of 20, the highest consumption was among those aged 20–39 (mean consumption of 1 serving/day for men and 0.9 servings/day for women) [10]. In turn, a study conducted between 2008 and 2014 in 13 countries (Europe, Asia, South America) found that the average consumption of soft drinks among young people aged 10–17 years was as high as 346 mL per day for boys and 303 mL for girls [11]. In another age group, according to global data, 33% of students drink soft drinks once or several times a day [5]. However, it should be mentioned that recent analyses of studies from European countries indicate a declining trend in the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages in favor of those without added or with reduced sugar content. However, the diversity of categories and definitions of soft drinks across countries complicates the easy comparison of data [12]. According to aggregate data, sales of SSBs are falling in the wake of the tax [13,14,15,16]. In countries where the tax is in place, the consumption of sweetened beverages is lower compared to countries without the tax [5].
With regard to the reformulation of beverages by manufacturers to pay less tax or avoid it altogether, the best example is the UK, where the average sugar content per 100 mL of beverage fell by 42% after taxation [17]. In Poland, a study by Wierzejska comparing almost 200 of the same range of beverages in the first year of the tax, contrast to the previous year, showed that 62% of beverages had their composition changed, and the median sugar content in carbonated and non-carbonated beverages decreased by 20% and 13%, respectively [18]. There are currently no data on whether there have been further changes to beverage formulations in subsequent years.
The literature emphasizes that the level of consumer acceptance should be taken into account when undertaking government interventions [19,20] and that the effectiveness of taxes may depend on consumer awareness [21,22]. According to some experts, tax policy assumes that consumers are aware that the change in prices is due to taxes, and in the case of unhealthy food, it is a consequence of high consumption [22]. With regard to the policy of taxing foods with poor nutritional value, experts also stress the need to analyze social views and attitudes towards the consumption of such products [21,23]. In relation to the introduction of a tax on sweetened beverages in Poland, the aim of this study was to assess the awareness of the tax and its perceived impact on beverage consumption habits among young people.

2. Material and Methods

This cross-sectional study was conducted in 2022 using a questionnaire method among 334 people, aged 17–35 years. The understanding of the questionnaire developed by the authors was previously tested on a group of several young people. The English version of the questionnaire is attached as Supplementary Material (Table S1). The survey was anonymous; participants expressed their consent, and no one refused to participate in the study. The questionnaire was completed by students on their own during their time at the school or university in the presence of the study authors. The participants included 167 school students from the Secondary School Complex in Skierniewice (50% of the group) and 167 full-time and part-time university students from the Stefan Batory Academy of Applied Sciences in Skierniewice (50% of the group). Fifty-eight percent of the respondents were women. Most of the respondents (55.7%) were residents of rural areas, while the remaining respondents were urban residents. The questionnaire covered knowledge of the existence of the tax, views on the impact of the tax on beverage consumption, and frequency of sweetened beverage drinking before and after the introduction of the tax and included socio-demographic data. In our survey, we asked about the consumption of beverages not only with added sugars but also with added sweeteners, because in Poland, the tax also applies to beverages with sweeteners. Sweetened beverages were defined as sodas, fruit drinks, sports/energy drinks, and pre-sweetened iced tea, excluding juices. A non-parametric Chi-square test was used in the statistical analysis, with a significance level of p < 0.05.

3. Results

A total of 84.1% of people had heard about the introduction of a tax on sweetened beverages, including 87.4% of the school students and 80.8% of the university students (p > 0.05). Of those who knew about the existence of the tax, when asked what types of beverages are taxed (multiple answer option), the most indications (90.4%) were for carbonated and non-carbonated beverages with added sugar. Significantly fewer people (42.7%) knew that drinks with sweeteners were also taxed. A total of 22.1% of respondents believed that the tax applied solely to sweetened non-juice drinks, while 16.4% thought it only covered sweetened caffeinated beverages. Additionally, 13.2% were unaware of which drinks were taxed. There was no statistically significant difference between the school students‘ and the university students’ knowledge (p > 0.05).
In response to the question of whether a tax on beverages, and the resulting price increase, could reduce beverage consumption, 40.1% of respondents answered affirmatively. This view was statistically more common among school students compared to university students (55.1% vs. 25.1%, p < 0.05). A smaller proportion of respondents (35.0%) disagreed with this assumption, while 24.9% stated that it was difficult to assess.
With regard to the amount of sweetened beverage consumption after the introduction of the tax, compared to before the tax, of those people who were aware of the tax (281 students), the largest proportion (58.0%) reported drinking the same amount of beverages. In total, 31.4% of people declared that they drank less, of which 15.7% said they drank a little less, and another 15.7% said they drank far less (Figure 1). There was no statistically significant difference, between the student and undergraduate groups (p > 0.05). However, differences were found in the answers of boys and girls. More girls than boys from schools declared that they did not drink sweet beverages at all, while in the case of university, more women than men stated that they drank a little less or far less than before the introduction of the tax (Table 1).
When the entire group of respondents (334 students) was asked about the frequency of drinking sweet beverages, the largest number of people (25.4%) answered that they drank such beverages 2–3 times a week. Daily drinking was declared by 17.1% of subjects (Figure 2). There was no statistically significant difference in the frequency of drinking between students and schoolchildren (p > 0.05). Significant differences were again found between boys and girls. Fewer girls than boys from schools declared that they drank sweet beverages every day or 4–5 times a week, and more girls than boys reported drinking such beverages less often than 2–3 times a month. As for university students, fewer women than men stated that they drank beverages 2–3 times a week and more women than men drank them only 2–3 times a month (Table 2).
In terms of the age of respondents, the frequency of consuming sweetened drinks is presented in Table 3. In most cases, the consumption in the younger and older groups was not statistically different.

4. Discussion

The research indicates that among government interventions to reduce SSB consumption, tax is not well perceived by the public. In the UK and the US, out of various interventions such as imposing a tax, changing the size of packaging, the location of drinks on shop shelves, or public education, tax had the least supporters, whereas education had the most [24]. Similarly, a Swiss study found that taxes were the least accepted measure to reduce sugar consumption, while appropriate product labelling and educational campaigns were the most accepted [20]. In Poland, a survey on the implementation of a sugar tax, conducted among stakeholders (including representatives of government offices, producer organizations, and consumer organizations), revealed that most stakeholders—except representatives of the food industry—supported fiscal solutions to reduce the consumption of SSBs. However, all stakeholders emphasized the need to raise consumer awareness, which could translate into greater public acceptance of the tax. The authors of this study also note that the implementation of the tax in Poland coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic, which diverted public attention and paradoxically facilitated these measures, reducing the risk of social discontent [25].
Regarding knowledge of the existence of the tax, our survey showed widespread awareness among young people in its second year (84% of surveyed). This is highly positive, as mere awareness of the tax may also translate into increased awareness of the negative health effects of SSBs. The high awareness of the tax on such beverages is supported by a survey conducted among Poles six months before the tax came into force, where 70% of respondents had knowledge of the planned tax. For young people, the primary source of this information was the Internet [26].
In Mexico, where SSB consumption is among the highest in the world, a survey of young people two years after the tax was introduced showed that only 41% were aware of the tax, despite extensive media coverage [22]. Some Mexican youth noticed an increase in SSB prices but attributed this more to inflation than to the tax. Similarly, in several US cities, quite low public awareness was found one year after the tax was introduced. On average, only 45% of people acknowledged the SSB tax, despite numerous campaigns during its introduction, led by both supporters and opponents of the tax [21]. However, it should be noted that, unlike our study, the US study was conducted on a sample of adults of varying ages, less than half of whom were young, generally more interested in current events. In South Africa, in the first year after the SSB tax was introduced, the majority of participants (aged 18–55) were unaware of the tax [27]. However, as research shows, knowledge of the issue can change over the years. In Berkeley, the first city in the US to tax SSBs, 52% of those surveyed knew about the tax in the first year after it was instituted, and this figure rose to 70% a year later [21]. In France, almost 10 years after the introduction of the tax on SSBs, 63% of respondents were aware of its existence, although many more people knew about the taxes on cigarettes and alcohol [28]. Some authors suggest that information about the tax on beverage price tags in shops (e.g., ‘plus tax’, ‘includes tax on sweetened beverages’), as carried out in Seattle, USA, may help increase public awareness [23].
Knowing which types of beverages are taxed is not only knowledge in itself but can also influence the purchase of beverages, not only through the prism of price but also through greater awareness of the low nutritional quality of such products. In the only French study known to the authors in this regard, the highest percentage of people (almost 76%) indicated that the tax applies to sugar-sweetened carbonated beverages [28]. In our study, the highest percentage of respondents (90%) believed that the tax applied to both sugar-sweetened carbonated and non-carbonated drinks. Unfortunately, less than half of our respondents (around 43%) knew that beverages with sweeteners are also taxed, which is not encouraging in light of the World Health Organization (WHO) report stating that using sugar substitutes is not an effective method for weight control and reducing the risk of non-communicable diseases [29]. Adolescents may therefore believe that choosing drinks with sweeteners is a good alternative to sugary drinks, thus perpetuating the habit of needing a sweet taste. However, this result may not be surprising since sweeteners have long been considered health-promoting sugar substitutes [30,31], and the current WHO position is causing controversy among experts [32]. A better understanding of this issue was demonstrated by the French, where 61% of surveyed French respondents knew about the taxation of artificially sweetened sodas, although it is worth noting that some also pointed to fruit juices, which are not subject to the tax [28].
The result of our study concerning opinions on the impact of the tax on sweetened beverages consumption is optimistic. The percentage of people who believed that the tax could reduce their consumption (40%) was higher than those who denied such an assumption (35%). A similar result was obtained in the Netherlands, where 43% of respondents agreed that the tax could limit SSB consumption, while 33% were opposed [33]. In the previously mentioned Mexican study, as many as 66% of young people expressed doubts about the effectiveness of the tax in changing beverage consumption [22]. A skeptical approach was also found among Americans in Michigan [1] and South Africans [27], who believed the tax would be ineffective in reducing consumption, particularly among regular consumers.
Although most respondents (58%) did not change their consumption of sweetened drinks after the tax was introduced, nearly one-third reported drinking less which should be considered satisfactory. This trend was more pronounced among women from university. In another study among Poles, based on predictions, almost 60% of respondents declared that they would buy fewer drinks after the tax came into effect [26], and residents of Australia had a similar attitude (53%) if the tax were introduced there [34]. However, it is crucial to note that it is difficult to predict price increases before taxation. In Mexico, almost 59% of young people stated that the tax did not change their consumption of sugary drinks, primarily due to the small, approximately 10%, price increase [22]. Other studies also indicate that a more significant price change is necessary, and young people would buy fewer SSBs if the increase reached 20% [35]. In Poland, it can be assumed that the average consumer would have difficulty determining how much beverage prices had increased due to the tax, as the early years of its implementation coincided with a period of high inflation. It should also be remembered that the change in beverage consumption after the introduction of the tax may result not only from their price, but also from an increase in awareness of their health effects. However, at the time the tax was introduced in Poland, no educational campaigns were undertaken regarding the health risks of drinking sweetened beverages.
Comparing the results of studies on the frequency of sweetened beverage consumption is challenging due to the different categories of beverages and age groups of participants included in research. In our study, over 17% of people declared drinking sweetened beverages daily, and about 33% several times a week. A lower frequency of consumption was found in a nationwide study from 2019 to 2020, in which around 7% of people drank carbonated sugary drinks daily, and about 24% several times a week [36]. However, this was a group of participants aged 18–64, and it is known that the consumption of such products decreases with age. In an American study, 20% of adults drank SSBs daily, and 56% several times a week [1]. In another Polish study, conducted only among teenagers aged 13–16, 21% of youths drank sugary carbonated drinks daily, and 26% several times a week [37]. A significant barrier to reducing SSB consumption among young people is the taste and the habit, described by respondents as “addiction” to the drinks [22].

5. Limitations of the Study

The main limitation of this study is the group of people among whom the study was conducted. These were young people studying in one city but living both in the town and in the rural area. Therefore, when interpreting the results of the study, it should be remembered that this is not a representative study for the entire population of young people in Poland. In addition, when planning the study, there was no calculation regarding the sample size, which may have affected the results of the statistical analysis. Another limitation is the lack of analysis of other factors that may affect changes in consumer behavior, such as economic status. When it comes to comparing the consumption of beverages, another limitation of this study is the reference to the memory of consumption from several years ago. The value of this study is that it is the first study after the introduction of taxation on sweetened drinks in Poland that looked at students’ attitudes towards the tax and beverage consumption.

6. Conclusions

Most of the young people surveyed were aware that a tax on sweetened drinks had been introduced in Poland, indicating that the topic was sufficiently covered in the media. A substantial number of respondents thought the tax could decrease beverage consumption, although this view was more often expressed by school students than by university students. Nearly one-third of people reported that they now drink less beverages than they did prior to the tax. This suggests a potential impact of the tax on the consumption of sweetened beverages in the second year of the tax.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/beverages10030085/s1, Table S1. English version of the questionnaire.

Author Contributions

R.E.W. conceived the idea for the study. A.W.-R. and B.W. collected the data. R.E.W. analyzed the data and wrote the paper. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding (Statutory Research No. FŻ-5/2023).

Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Bombak, A.E.; Colotti, T.E.; Raji, D.; Riediger, N.D. Exploring attitudes toward taxation of sugar-sweetened beverages in rural Michigan. J. Health Popul. Nutr. 2021, 40, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. de Castro, T.G.; Eyles, H.; Ni Mhurchu, C.; Young, L.; Mackay, S. Seven-year trends in the availability, sugar content and serve size of single-serve non-alcoholic beverages in New Zealand: 2013–2019. Public Health Nutr. 2021, 24, 1595–1607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Malik, V.S.; Li, Y.; Pan, A.; Koning, L.D.; Schernhammer, E.; Willett, W.C.; Hu, F.B. Long-term consumption of sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages and risk of mortality in US adults. Circulation 2019, 139, 2113–2125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Steele, E.M.; Baraldi, L.G.; da Costa Louzada, M.L.; Moubarac, J.C.; Mozaffarian, D.; Monteiro, C.A. Ultra-processed foods and added sugars in the US diet: Evidence from a nationally representative cross-sectional study. BMJ Open 2016, 6, e009892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Hu, H.; Song, J.; MacGregor, G.A.; Feng, J.; He, F.J. Consumption of soft drinks and overweight and obesity among adolescents in 107 countries and regions. JAMA Netw. Open 2023, 6, e2325158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Qin, P.; Li, Q.; Zhao, Y.; Chen, Q.; Sun, X.; Liu, Y.; Li, H.; Wang, T.; Chen, X.; Zhou, Q.; et al. Sugar and artificially sweetened beverages and risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and all-cause mortality: A dose–response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 2020, 35, 655–671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Global Food Research Program UNC. Sugary Drink Taxes Around the World. Available online: https://globalfoodresearchprogram.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/SugaryDrink_tax_maps_2020_August_REV.pdf (accessed on 5 May 2024).
  8. Powell, L.M.; Andreyeva, T.; Isgor, Z. Distribution of sugar-sweetened beverage sales volume by content in the United States: Implications for tiered taxation and tax revenue. J. Public Health Policy 2020, 41, 125–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Act of 11 October 2015 on Public Health. Dz. U. 2015, 1916. Available online: https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/download.xsp/WDU20150001916/O/D20151916.pdf (accessed on 5 May 2024).
  10. Singh, G.M.; Micha, R.; Khatibzadeh, S.; Shi, P.; Lim, S.; Andrews, K.G.; Engell, R.E.; Ezzati, M.; Mozaffarian, D. Global Burden of Diseases Nutrition and Chronic Diseases Expert Group (NutriCoDE). Global, regional, and national consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages, fruit juices, and milk: A systematic assessment of beverage intake in 187 countries. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0124845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Guelinckx, I.I.; Iglesia, I.I.; Bottin, J.H.; De Miguel-Etayo, P.P.; Gil, E.M.G.; Salas-Salvadó, J.; Kavouras, S.; Gandy, J.J.; Martinez, H.; Bardosono, S.; et al. Intake of water and beverages of children and adolescents in 13 countries. Eur. J. Nutr. 2015, 54, 69–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Walton, J.; Wittekind, A. Soft drink intake in Europe—A review of data from nationally representative food consumption surveys. Nutrients 2023, 15, 1368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Andreyeva, T.; Marple, K.; Marinello, S.; Moore, T.E.; Powell, L.M. Outcomes following taxation of sugar-sweetened beverages: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Netw. Open 2022, 5, e2215276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Hagenaars, L.L.; Jeurissen, P.P.T.; Klazinga, N.S.; Listl, S.; Jevdjevic, M. Effectiveness and policy determinants of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes. J. Dent. Res. 2021, 100, 1444–1451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Shen, J.; Wang, J.; Yang, F.; An, R. Impact of soda tax on beverage price, sale, purchase, and consumption in the US: A systematic review and meta-analysis of natural experiments. Front. Public Health 2023, 22, 1126569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Teng, A.M.; Jones, A.C.; Mizdrak, A.; Signal, L.; Genç, M.; Wilson, N. Impact of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes on purchases and dietary intake: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes. Rev. 2019, 20, 1187–1204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Hashem, K.M.; He, F.J.; MacGregor, G.A. Labelling changes in response to a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Bull. World Health Organ. 2019, 97, 818–827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Wierzejska, R.E. The impact of the sweetened beverages tax on their reformulation in Poland—The analysis of the composition of commercially available beverages before and after the introduction of the tax (2020 vs. 2021). Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 14464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Bos, C.; Van der Lans, I.A.; Van Rijnsoever, F.J.; Van Trijp, H.C. Understanding consumer acceptance of intervention strategies for healthy food choices: A qualitative study. BMC Public Health 2013, 3, 1073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Hagmann, D.; Siegrist, M.; Hartmann, C. Taxes, labels, or nudges? Public acceptance of various interventions designed to reduce sugar intake. Food Policy 2018, 79, 156–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Altman, E.A.; Madsen, K.A.; Schmidt, L.A. Missed Opportunities: The need to promote public knowledge and awareness of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 4607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ortega-Avila, A.G.; Papadaki, A.; Jago, R. Exploring perceptions of the Mexican sugar-sweetened beverage tax among adolescents in north-west Mexico: A qualitative study. Public Health Nutr. 2018, 21, 618–626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Oddo, V.M.; Knox, M.A.; Pinero Walkinshaw, L.; Saelens, B.E.; Chan, N.; Jones-Smith, J.C. Evaluation of Seattle’s sweetened beverage tax on tax support and perceived economic and health impacts. Prev. Med. Rep. 2022, 30, 101809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Petrescu, D.C.; Hollands, G.J.; Couturier, D.-L.; Ng, Y.-L.; Marteau, T.M. Public acceptability in the UK and USA of nudging to reduce obesity: The example of reducing sugar-sweetened beverages consumption. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0155995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Brukało, K.; Kaczmarek, K.; Kowalski, O.; Romaniuk, P. Implementation of sugar-sweetened beverages tax and its perception among public health stakeholders. A study from Poland. Front. Nutr. 2022, 29, 957256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Piekara, A. Sugar tax or what? The perspective and preferences of consumers. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 12536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Bosire, E.N.; Stacey, N.; Mukoma, G.; Tugendhaft, A.; Hofman, K.; Norris, S.A. Attitudes and perceptions among urban South Africans towards sugar-sweetened beverages and taxation. Public Health Nutr. 2020, 23, 374–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Sarda, B.; Debras, C.; Chazelas, E.; Péneau, S.; Le Bodo, Y.; Hercberg, S.; Touvier, M.; Julia, C. Public perception of the tax on sweetened beverages in France. Public Health Nutr. 2022, 25, 3240–3251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. World Health Organization. Use of Non-Sugar Sweeteners: WHO Guideline. World Health Organization, 2023. Available online: https://www.who.int/publications-detail-redirect/9789240073616 (accessed on 8 May 2024).
  30. American Dietetic Association. Position of the American Dietetic Association: Use of nutritive and nonnutritive sweeteners. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 2004, 104, 255–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Iizuka, K. Is the use of artificial sweeteners beneficial for patients with diabetes mellitus? The advantages and disadvantages of artificial sweeteners. Nutrients 2022, 14, 4446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Khan, T.A.; Lee, J.J.; Ayoub-Charette, S.; Noronha, J.C.; McGlynn, N.; Chiavaroli, L.; Sievenpiper, J.L. WHO guideline on the use of non-sugar sweeteners: A need for reconsideration. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 2023, 77, 1009–1013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Eykelenboom, M.; van Stralen, M.M.; Olthof, M.R.; Renders, C.M.; Steenhuis, I.H. PEN Consortium. Public acceptability of a sugar-sweetened beverage tax and its associated factors in the Netherlands. Public Health Nutr. 2021, 24, 2354–2364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Richardson, T.E.; Yanada, B.A.; Watters, D.; Stupart, D.; Lamichhane, P.; Bel, C. What young Australians think about a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages. Aust. NZ J. Public Health 2019, 43, 63–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Krukowski, C.N.; Conley, K.M.; Sterling, M.; Rainville, A.J. A qualitative study of adolescent views of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes, Michigan, 2014. Prev. Chronic. Dis. 2016, 5, E60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Stoś, K.; Rychlik, E.; Woźniak, A.; Ołtarzewski, M.; Wojda, B.; Przygoda, B.; Matczuk, E.; Pietraś, E.; Kłys, W. Krajowe badanie Sposobu Żywienia i Stanu Odżywienia Populacji Polskiej. Narodowy Instytut Zdrowia Publicznego PZH—Państwowy Instytut Badawczy. Warszawa 2021. Available online: https://ncez.pzh.gov.pl/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Raport-z-projektu-EFSA-18.10.pdf (accessed on 2 June 2024).
  37. Wlazło, M.; Zięba, N.; Mąkosza, K.; Janota, B.; Szczepańska, E. Consumption of snacks and sweetened beverages and physical activity of schoolchildren aged 10–16 years. Med. Ogólna I Nauk. O Zdrowiu 2023, 3, 240–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Beverages 10 00085 g001
Figure 1. The approach to beverage consumption after the introduction of the tax.
Figure 1. The approach to beverage consumption after the introduction of the tax.
Beverages 10 00085 g001
Beverages 10 00085 g002
Figure 2. The usual frequency of drinking sweet beverages.
Figure 2. The usual frequency of drinking sweet beverages.
Beverages 10 00085 g002
Table 1. Changes in sweetened beverage consumption by school students and university students.
Table 1. Changes in sweetened beverage consumption by school students and university students.
The Approach to Beverage Consumption after the Introduction of the TaxSchool Students (n = 146)
Girls
(n; %)		Boys
(n; %)		p-ValueTotal
(n; %)
I drink the same amount as before the tax47; 55.334; 55.7 81; 55.5
I drink a little less14; 16.512; 19.7 26; 17.8
I drink far less13; 15.311; 18.0 24; 16.4
I drink more2; 2.31; 1.6 3; 2.1
I don’t drink at all9; 10.63; 5.0p < 0.0512; 8.2
Hard to say0; 0.00; 0.0 0; 0
University Students (n = 135)
Women
(n; %)		Men
(n; %)		p-ValueTotal
(n; %)
I drink the same amount as before the tax42; 54.540; 69.0 82; 60.8
I drink a little less14; 18.24; 6.9p < 0.0518; 13.4
I drink far less13; 16.97; 12.1p < 0.0520; 14.8
I drink more0; 0.01; 1.7 1; 0.7
I don’t drink at all7; 9.16; 10.3 13; 9.6
Hard to say1; 1.30; 0.0 1; 0.7
Table 2. Frequency of drinking sweetened beverages by school students and university students.
Table 2. Frequency of drinking sweetened beverages by school students and university students.
The Usual Frequency of Drinking Sweetened BeveragesSchool Students (n = 167)
Girls
(n; %)		Boys
(n; %)		p-ValueTotal
(n; %)
Every day15; 15.315; 21.7p < 0.0530; 17.9
4–5 times per week5; 5.19; 13.1p < 0.0514; 8.4
2–3 times per week25; 25.517; 24.6 42; 25.1
Once a week21; 21.412; 17.4 33; 19.8
2–3 times a month10; 10.28; 11.6 18; 10.8
Even less frequently13; 13.34; 5.8p < 0.0517; 10.2
Not at all9; 9.24; 5.8 13; 7.8
University Students (n = 167)
Women
(n; %)		Men
(n; %)		p-ValueTotal
(n; %)
Every day16; 16.511; 15.7 27; 16.2
4–5 times per week7; 7.25; 7.1 12; 7.2
2–3 times per week22; 22.721; 30.0p < 0.0543; 25.7
Once a week13; 13.412; 17.2 26; 15.6
2–3 times a month19; 19.69; 12.8p < 0.0527; 16.2
Even less frequently11; 11.36; 8.6 17; 10.2
Not at all9; 9.36; 8.6 15; 8.9
Table 3. Frequency of drinking sweetened beverages by age of respondents.
Table 3. Frequency of drinking sweetened beverages by age of respondents.
The Test Group
(n = 334)		The Usual Frequency of Drinking Sweetened Beverages
Every Day
(n; %)		4–5 Times per Week
(n; %)		2–3 Times per Week
(n; %)		Once a Week
(n; %)		2–3 Times a Month
(n; %)		Even Less Frequently
(n; %)		Not at All
(n; %)
people aged ≤ 23 years
(n = 299)		52; 17.425; 8.478; 26.154; 18.038; 12.728; 9.424; 8.0
people aged > 23 years
(n = 35)		5; 14.31; 2.97; 20.04; 11.48; 22.86; 17.24; 11.4
p-value p < 0.05
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wierzejska, R.E.; Wiosetek-Reske, A.; Wojda, B. Perceptions of Young People Regarding the Tax on Sweetened Drinks in Poland and an Assessment of Changes in Their Consumption in Terms of Taxation. Beverages 2024, 10, 85. https://doi.org/10.3390/beverages10030085

AMA Style

Wierzejska RE, Wiosetek-Reske A, Wojda B. Perceptions of Young People Regarding the Tax on Sweetened Drinks in Poland and an Assessment of Changes in Their Consumption in Terms of Taxation. Beverages. 2024; 10(3):85. https://doi.org/10.3390/beverages10030085

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wierzejska, Regina Ewa, Agnieszka Wiosetek-Reske, and Barbara Wojda. 2024. "Perceptions of Young People Regarding the Tax on Sweetened Drinks in Poland and an Assessment of Changes in Their Consumption in Terms of Taxation" Beverages 10, no. 3: 85. https://doi.org/10.3390/beverages10030085

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop