Available online 31 July 2012

In Press, Corrected ProofNote to users

Research report

Evolutions in food marketing, quantifying the impact, and policy implications

  • Institute for Social Marketing, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, United Kingdom

Abstract

A case study on interactive digital marketing examined the adequacy of extant policy controls and their underpinning paradigms to constrain the effects of this rapidly emerging practice.

Findings were interactive digital marketing is expanding the strategies available to promote products, brands and consumer behaviours. It facilitates relational marketing; the collection of personal data for marketing; integration of the marketing mix, and provides a platform for consumers to engage in the co-creation of marketing communications. The paradigmatic logic of current policies to constrain youth-oriented food marketing does not address the interactive nature of digital marketing. The evidence base on the effects of HFSS marketing and policy interventions is based on conceptualizations of marketing as a force promoting transactions rather than interactions. Digital technologies are generating rich consumer data. Interactive digital technologies increase the complexity of the task of quantifying the impact of marketing. The rapidity of its uptake also increases urgency of need to identify appropriate effects measures. Independent analysis of commercial consumer data (appropriately transformed to protect commercial confidentiality and personal privacy) would provide evidence sources for policy on the impacts of commercial food and beverage marketing and policy controls.


Highlights

► Case study on digital food marketing to children, control policies and underpinning paradigms. ► Digital marketing facilitates co-creational marketing and interactive relational marketing. ► Current policies do not address the impact of collaborative marketing practices. ► Digital technologies offer new sources of data on marketing practice and consumer response. ► Independent analysis of commercial sector data to inform policy development is recommended.

Keywords

  • Interactive digital marketing;
  • Food marketing;
  • Children;
  • Monitoring and evaluation;
  • Measuring effects;
  • Marketing policy;
  • Marketing co-creation;
  • Marketing data

Introduction

Historically marketing theory and marketing control policy paradigms have cast marketers as the producers of marketing communications and consumers as the recipients of these communications (Wilkie & Moore, 2003). The emergence of interactive digital technologies is driving a rapid evolution from marketer-driven promotions aimed at consumers to interactive co-creational and user-generated marketing communications (Precourt, 2009).

This paper reports on a case study that examined the adequacy of current food marketing to children policies to control digitally mediated, interactive marketing of high fat, salt, sugar (HFSS) foods to children.

Interactive digital marketing

Interactive digital marketing (IDM) describes a broad range of communication platforms and tools, including mobile phone text and visual media messaging, social networking sites, product review websites, wikis, blogs, chat rooms, online gaming sites and websites hosting user generated content such as video, photos and consumer reviews. Digital technologies collect and process marketing-relevant personal data. This data can be aggregated to inform mass marketing activities or processed at a micro-level to support highly targeted marketing such as online behavioural advertising, personalised purchase incentives and to encourage consumer engagement in brand-based promotional activities.

Digitally mediated communications are enabling a shift from traditional, centrally produced and distributed marketing to more ‘conversational’, collaborative marketing relationships. Conversations comprise a mix of spontaneous commentary and dialogue and commercially initiated brand-based content. The commercial sector is well aware of the significant potential benefits and risks of such conversation. A 2007 global survey by the Nielsen market research company found more than seventy five per cent of respondents rated peer to peer recommendations as the most trustworthy form of advertising (cited in IAB, 2008). Conversely, digitally mediated sharing and dissemination of information and opinion exposes brands and corporations to public scrutiny and comment. Negative reactions can quickly develop into reputational damage which is difficult to reverse and companies seek to minimise risk, but must simultaneously avoid being perceived to be manipulating interactions (Kozinets et al., 2010 and Laczniak, 2006). Unsurprising therefore, that expertise and technology to monitor and evaluate user generated content and secondary social responses independent of confidential commercial strategy has already been developed (see for example http://www.liveworld.com/).

Co-creation

‘Connect, collect, and co-create’ are a bundle of unique IDM functions which can be employed independently of other marketing strategies and activities or integrated to enhance synergies.

Connecting consumer and producer is a prerequisite for marketing relationship. Codes on packaging or in television advertisement entered into a website or as a text to an SMS (short messaging service) for example can be used to initiate a new relationship, reinforce an existing one, or introduce an individual to a virtual community built around a brand or package of consumer interests, such as music and food. IDM and particularly social media have proven to be particularly efficient platforms through which to collect personal data. It has been suggested that the user data associated with the social networking site, MySpace, was the primary reason that the Murdoch News Corporation paid nearly US$600 million to own it (Chester & Montgomery, 2007). Social networking, blogging and micro-blogging sites, even photo and video sharing sites for example are a rich source of data about personal preferences, behaviours and opinions.

Perhaps the most fundamentally game changing aspect of IDM is its capacity to support and promote co-creation: Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2000) were the first to describe the shift from marketing as a centrally controlled management function to one driven by relationships with its customers. They argue that understanding consumption and production as separate economic activities is superseded by a convergence of producer and consumer roles. User generated virally disseminated promotion of price-discounted offers; special interest forums such as Procter and Gamble’s (P&G) social network site, Vocalpoint (previously named Tremor) where consumers are engaged in marketing and brand development are two examples of this shift ( Sheth and Uslay, 2007, Vargo and Lusch, 2008 and Zwass, 2010).

Vargo and Lusch, 2004 and Vargo and Lusch, 2008 propose ‘service dominant logic’ (SDL) as a more informative model of the nature and effect of co-creational marketing, than that provided by traditional ‘goods dominant logic’. Vargo and Lusch describe ten paradigmatic features of the SDL marketing model which they call the ‘foundational premises’. The foundational premises reflect SDL recognition of the consumer as an active agent, playing multiple roles in production as well as consumption of social as well as commercial outputs. Changes in consumer behaviours and values in response to interactive collaborative marketing are therefore important commercial indicators as much as financial measures (Ballantyne and Varey, 2008, Sheth and Uslay, 2007 and Vargo and Lusch, 2004).

Policy interventions to control the promotion of foods and beverages to children and youth

Food is one the most heavily marketed product categories to children and youth. It is estimated that fifty to eighty per cent of food marketing to children expenditure promotes HFSS foods. Marketing increases preference, purchase and consumption of HFSS foods in general as well as brand choices (Cairns et al., 2009 and McGinnis et al., 2006). Frequent consumption of HFSS foods is a recognised risk factor for chronic degenerative diseases including obesity, heart disease, stroke and some cancers (WHO, 2004). The evidence that the marketing of HFSS foods is contributing to the prevalence of overweight, obesity and associated non-communicable disease, such as stroke, heart disease and cancer is therefore convincing, although its contribution relative to other recognised influences is less clear (Harris et al., 2009, WHO, 2004 and WHO, 2010).

In response to this evidence, a plethora of self-regulatory, co-regulatory and statutory controls on food marketing of HFSS foods have been set up all around the world in the last decade (Hawkes & Lobstein, 2011).

Methods

Desk research that drew on a recently completed mapping exercise (Hawkes & Lobstein, 2011) as well as other sources was used to collate policy approaches and interventions aimed at constraining the effects of HFSS food marketing. Vargo and Lusch’s 10 foundational premises were used to provide a comparative paradigmatic framework. The framework provided the basis for a qualitative assessment of the paradigmatic assumptions underpinning prevailing policies and their capacity to control interactive digital marketing and its co-creational effects.

The study also collected publicly available market research data on marketing activities, and promotional strategies, providing a snapshot of current food and beverage IDM and children’s responses. A literature review examined the evaluative evidence on the effectiveness of current policy to constrain the effects of HFSS food and beverage marketing.

Results

Policy paradigms

Self regulatory and co-regulatory codes of good practice, such as the Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative (CFBAI) in the US, and the European Union Pledge Programme (EU Pledge) were found to be typical of the policy instruments that have been implemented in developed and developing countries. Codes were found to address similar parameters although there was much variation in specific standards such as the age ranges protected and the nutritional criteria applied. Some codes stated they were intended to cover interactive, digital marketing, as well as broadcast and other more traditional marketing methods and channels. None of the voluntary codes or statutory recognised the potential of the consumer as an active agent in the creative marketing process. Policies focused on the content of commercially generated communications and the consumer was cast as a passive recipient of marketing messages.

The role of the consumer-producer relationship in the evolution of food culture was not addressed. Indeed, Fitzpatrick, MacMillan, Hawkes, Anderson, and Dowler (2010) has noted that food culture is currently rarely addressed in food policy. Other research has also found that research-relevant policy does not capture the magnitude of the indirect social and cultural effects of food marketing. For example, the effects on children’s food behaviours of their cumulative exposure to marketing and the effects of marketing promotions on parents and other moderators of children’s food behaviours (Cairns et al., 2009 and Harris et al., 2009).

An overview of findings from the qualitative analysis of food marketing policies paradigmatic assumptions and their capacity to address co-creational marketing is presented in Table 1, Comparison of Service-Dominant Logic and Food Marketing Policy Underlying Paradigms.

Table 1. Comparison of service-dominant logic and food marketing policy underlying paradigms.

SDL foundational premisesSimilarities and differences between prevailing policy and SDL paradigms
Service is the fundamental basis of exchangePartial paradigmatic overlap: Policies do not address service-mediated exchange such as brand-based activities but statements such as ‘assist consumers to make appropriate choices’ indicate some recognition
Indirect exchange masks the fundamental basis of exchangeNo paradigmatic overlap: All policies exclusively address marketing of consumer products and not the value creation/addition processes leading to the final product choices available for exchange
Goods are a distribution mechanism for service provisionPartial paradigmatic overlap: Policy aims to ‘rebalance’ nutritional content of foods in the market and marketing landscape reflect an understanding of distribution and communication as marketing-based services but absence of thresholds or standards indicates not perceived as priority policy objective
Knowledge and skills are the fundamental source of competitive advantagePartial paradigmatic overlap: Policy preference for non-statutory market self-correction indicate policy perceptions of corporate knowledge and skills as protean and responsive, rather than fundamental to core business strategy
All economies are service economiesVery limited paradigmatic overlap: Absence of policy on relationship marketing for example indicate little weight given to influential role of service-based relationships in marketing effects
The customer is always a co-creator of valueNo paradigmatic overlap: Policies restrict controls to direct corporate communications only, not co-creational process such as brand-based social networks or and outputs such as user-generated content
The enterprise cannot deliver value, but only offer value propositionsVery limited paradigmatic overlap: Policies focus on consumer as information recipient, not active interpreter and implementer of value proposition
A service-centred view is inherently customer oriented and relationalVery limited paradigmatic overlap: All policies demonstrate strong focus on mass promotion of goods, and absence of controls on relational marketing
All social and economic actors are resource integratorsVery limited paradigmatic overlap: Policies positions do not recognise children as integral to household food provisioning decisions, protection of children restricted to their role as direct purchasers or ‘pesters’
Value is always uniquely and phenomenologically determined by the beneficiaryVery limited paradigmatic overlap: Restrictions on licensed characters, use of celebrities are one of few examples of policy concerned with control of more holistic customer experience than simple consumption of goods

Adapted from Vargo and Lusch (2008).

Full-size table

Promotion of HFSS foods to children and youth

The promotion of HFSS foods to children is a major economic activity in its own right. A US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) review of expenditure, activities, and self-regulation of food marketing found US$ 1.6 billion out of a total 9.6 billion of food marketing expenditure targeted children and youth. Sixty three per cent of targeted spend was for carbonated non-alcoholic beverages, fast foods and breakfast cereals. The FTC survey found that the proportion of marketing expenditure on digital media was small (five per cent) but also noted that the digital media costs are proportionately lower than for consumable marketing activities because of its (economically defined) non-rival nature (FTC, 2008). A follow up 2010 study by the FTC will in due course provide additional information on trends, which are likely to show further shifts from traditional to digital platforms and channels.

The case study reviewed commercial websites and market research reports and found many examples foods and non-alcoholic beverage IDM to children and youth. IDM and non-digital media marketing targeted activities were increasingly integrated. Commercial practice was found to have embraced all aspects of co-creational marketing rapidly and wholeheartedly.

Evaluation of policy control effectiveness

The impact of policy intended to control child-oriented food marketing in the last decade has been limited. Independent evaluations of food marketing find the nature and content of promotional activity continues to primarily promote HFSS foods and beverages and children’s exposure is still unacceptably high (Boyland et al., 2011, Kunkel and McKinley, 2009, Harris et al., 2009 and Kraak et al., 2011).

Discussion

Digital technologies enable market places to also be social spaces. Children and youth are some of the most active contributors to user generated content (BMRB, 2008 and EC, 2011). They are the ‘digital natives’ of the electronic ecosystems of MP3 players, Web 2.0 mobile devices, broadband, virtual worlds, networks, SMS, and MMS which support communicative relationships and creative interaction.

Digital technologies are changing commercial practices. As an Executive Vice President of McDonald’s at the American Marketing Associations’ MPlanet 2009 conference observed: “we don’t have a magic wand we can wave to make sales happen. The days of command and control are gone. Today, consumers are our partners in how brands are conceived and sold.” User generated content affirms and further develop brands, seeds and nurtures brand-based communities and has become a critical resource in commercial marketing (Precourt, 2009).

Commercial operators have strong incentives to monitor, influence and understand the dynamics and outcomes of the interactions occurring in digitally facilitated social spaces. Marketing strength is rooted in the quantity and quality of consumer and market research data. Contemporary marketing intelligence is now drawing on even greater volumes of detailed data and processing power as a result of interactive digital technologies. The implications of commercial ownership of large volume of personal data, the protection of children’s personal privacy, and their exposure to targeted promotions are matters of public interest in their own right (Youn, 2009). Notwithstanding concerns about the protection of children online, the current availability of large volumes of real-time, real-life data and data processing power also represents a new source of policy-relevant data that could be independently analysed to monitor policy progress and inform future policy development.

The contribution of commercially owned data to evidence-informed future policy development would be a meaningful and socially responsible action (Flyvberg, 2001 and Laczniak, 2006): Walt, Shiffman, Schneider, Murray, and Brugha (2008) has described the temporal limitations of policy analysis, suggesting it can take more than 10 years to understand and evaluate the effects of policy interventions. Practice-based evidence has been recommended to achieve faster public health strategy responses to the obesity crisis in the UK’s Foresight Report on Obesity (Government Office of Science, 2008). The Foresight report almost certainly envisaged intervention practice as the primary source of such evidence. However, consumer and market research data, appropriately anonymised to preserve individual as well as commercial confidentiality could similarly contribute valuable insight on marketing practice and how it indirectly as well as directly influences food behaviours; quantitative measures of its effects; as well as faster evidence-based mechanisms to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of food and beverage marketing control policies. Making available data for independent monitoring and evaluation of good marketing practice and consumer response is recommended as a critical prerequisite for best practice in self-regulation (EC 2006). Commercial operators have repeatedly expressed commitment to supporting diet-related health policy. The recent uptake of interactive digital technologies for commercial marketing purposes, which is generating both new sources of detailed consumer data and new mechanisms to process this data, provides a timely and unique opportunity for commercial operators to do so.

In contrast to the rapid recognition by the private sector of the commercial consequences and implications of IDM, there is very little independent published research to date on the social impact of IDM. There is however, a substantial body of literature on social networks and how network members interact and engage in shared behaviours, generating new behavioural norms and collective intelligence (Holland, 1995 and Surowiecki, 2004, cited in Zwass, 2010). Furthermore, there is a substantial literature demonstrating that social networks have significant effects on physical and social well being (Centola, 2010, Christakis and Fowler, 2007 and Cohen-Cole and Fletcher, 2008). Research tracking the clustering of health-related traits within social networks for example, has demonstrated social ties are strongly associated with obesity and other health outcomes. The evidence indicates that the capacity of network relationships to spread social norms, behaviours and epidemiological trends is mediated through social interaction and shared community culture, not physical proximity (Centola, 2010 and Christakis and Fowler, 2007). This literature is clearly potentially relevant to IDM in general and social media marketing particularly. A further benefit of the sharing of commercial consumer data collected involving co-creational platforms and supported by digital technologies could be the opportunity for secondary analysis specifically examining culturally and socially mediated impacts of marketing on behaviours.

Conclusions

The study found no evidence to suggest that current prevailing policies have the capacity to constrain the effects of the interactive collaborative marketing of HFSS foods and beverages.

Recommendations for future policy developments are to modify policy to better address the interactive nature of food marketing and to secure agreements on the sharing of commercial data for the purposes of monitoring and evaluation of marketing activity and policy actions to constrain its effects. Independent secondary analysis of this data to further knowledge and understanding on the interaction and influence of marketing on food culture is also recommended.

References

    • Ballantyne and Varey, 2008
    • D. Ballantyne, R. Varey
    • The service-dominant logic and the future of marketing

    • Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36 (1) (2008), pp. 11–14

    • Boyland et al., 2011
    • E. Boyland, J. Harrold, T. Kirkham, J. Halford
    • The extent of food advertising to children on U.K. television in 2008

    • International Journal of Pediatric Obesity, 6 (5) (2011), pp. 455–461

    • Cairns et al., 2009
    • G. Cairns, K. Angus, Hastings
    • The extent, nature and effects of food promotion to children. A review of the evidence to December 2008

    • World Health Organization, Geneva (2009)

    • Centola, 2010
    • D. Centola
    • The spread of behaviour in an online social network experiment

    • Science, 329 (2010), pp. 1194–1197

    • Chester and Montgomery, 2007
    • Chester, J., & Montgomery, K. (2007). Interactive food and beverage marketing, targeting children and youth in the digital age. A report from the Berkeley Media Studies Group, May 2007.
    • Christakis and Fowler, 2007
    • N. Christakis, J. Fowler
    • The spread of obesity in a large social network over 32 years

    • New England Journal of Medicine, 357 (2007), pp. 370–379

    • Cohen-Cole and Fletcher, 2008
    • E. Cohen-Cole, J. Fletcher
    • Is obesity contagious? Social networks vs environmental factors in the obesity epidemic

    • Journal of Health Economics, 27 (2008), pp. 1382–1387

    • Fitzpatrick et al., 2010
    • I. Fitzpatrick, T. MacMillan, C. Hawkes, A. Anderson, E. Dowler
    • Understanding food culture in Scotland and its comparison in an international context. Implications for policy development

    • NHS Health Scotland, Edinburgh (2010)

    • Flyvberg, 2001
    • B. Flyvberg
    • Making social science matter. Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again

    • Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2001)

    • FTC, 2008
    • FTC (2008). Marketing food to children and adolescents: A review of industry expenditure, activities and self-regulation. Federal Trade Commission Report to Congress, July 2008.
    • Government Office of Science, 2008
    • Government Office of Science
    • Foresight tackling obesities. Future choices

    • (2nd ed.)Department of Innovation, Universities and Skills (2008)

    • Harris et al., 2009
    • J. Harris, J. Pomeranz, T. Lobstein, K. Brownell
    • A crisis in the marketplace. How food marketing contributes to childhood obesity and what can be done

    • Annual Review of Public Health, 30 (2009), pp. 211–225

    • Hawkes and Lobstein, 2011
    • C. Hawkes, T. Lobstein
    • Regulating the commercial promotion of food to children. A survey of actions worldwide

    • International Journal of Pediatric Obesity, 6 (2) (2011), pp. 1–12

    • Holland, 1995
    • J. Holland
    • Hidden order: How adaptation builds complexity

    • Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA (1995)

    • Kozinets et al., 2010
    • R. Kozinets, K. de Valck, A. Wojnicki, S. Wilner
    • Networked narratives. Understanding word-of-mouth marketing in online communities

    • Journal of Marketing, 74 (2010), pp. 71–89

    • Kraak et al., 2011
    • V. Kraak, M. Story, E. Wartella, J. Ginter
    • Industry progress to market a healthful diet to American children and adolescents

    • American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 41 (3) (2011), pp. 322–333

    • Laczniak, 2006
    • G. Laczniak
    • Some social and ethical dimensions of the service dominant logic perspective of marketing

    • S. Vargo, R. Lusch (Eds.), The service-dominant logic of marketing. Dialog, debate and directions, M.E. Sharpe Inc., New York (2006), pp. 279–285

    • McGinnis et al., 2006
    • J. McGinnis, J. Appleton Gootman, V. Kraak
    • Institute of Medicine Food Marketing to Children and Youth. Threat or opportunity?

    • National Academies Press, Washington, DC (2006)

    • Sheth and Uslay, 2007
    • J. Sheth, C. Uslay
    • Implications of the revised definition of marketing. From exchange to value creation

    • Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 26 (2) (2007), pp. 302–307

    • Vargo and Lusch, 2004
    • S. Vargo, R. Lusch
    • The four service marketing myths. Remnants of a goods-based, manufacturing model

    • Journal of Service Research, 6 (2004), pp. 324–335

    • Vargo and Lusch, 2008
    • S. Vargo, R. Lusch
    • Service-dominant logic. Continuing the evolution

    • Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36 (2008), pp. 1–10

    • Walt et al., 2008
    • G. Walt, J. Shiffman, H. Schneider, S. Murray, Gilson.L. Brugha
    • ‘Doing’ health policy analysis. Methodological and conceptual reflections and challenges

    • Health Policy and Planning, 23 (2008), pp. 308–317

    • WHO, 2010
    • WHO
    • Set of recommendations on the marketing of foods and non-alcoholic beverages to children

    • World Health Organisation, Geneva (2010)

    • Wilkie and Moore, 2003
    • W. Wilkie, E. Moore
    • Scholarly research in marketing. Exploring the “4 eras” of thought development

    • Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 22 (2) (2003), pp. 116–146

    • Youn, 2009
    • S. Youn
    • Determinants of online privacy concerns and its influence on privacy protection behaviours among young adolescents

    • Journal of Consumer Affairs, 43 (3) (2009), pp. 389–419

    • Zwass, 2010
    • V. Zwass
    • Co-creation. Toward a taxonomy and an integrated research perspective

    • International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 15 (1) (2010), pp. 11–48

Acknowledgements: This work was financially supported by the Scottish Government. I would like to thank the Food & Health Policy Executive of the Scottish Government for their excellent support throughout the course of this project. I would also like to thank my colleagues Kathryn Angus for her help with some of the early literature searching, Gerard Hastings for his constructive comments in the early stages of the research and the first draft report to the Scottish Government and to Diane Dixon for help with many aspects of project coordination. I would also like to thank Tim Lobstein for making available data from the PolMark project in advance of its final publication.

Note to users: Corrected proofs are Articles in Press that contain the authors' corrections. Final citation details, e.g., volume/issue number, publication year and page numbers, still need to be added and the text might change before final publication.

Although corrected proofs do not have all bibliographic details available yet, they can already be cited using the year of online publication and the DOI , as follows: author(s), article title, journal (year), DOI. Please consult the journal's reference style for the exact appearance of these elements, abbreviation of journal names and use of punctuation.

When the final article is assigned to an issue of the journal, the Article in Press version will be removed and the final version will appear in the associated published issue of the journal. The date the article was first made available online will be carried over.