The Role of Policy Actors' Belief Systems and Interests in Framing Public Health Nutrition Problems: A Case Study of Obesity in Australia.

Abstract

Objective: This study investigated how the belief systems and interests of policy actors shaped their framing of the causes and solutions to obesity and how this influenced policy recommendations.

Design: Submissions to the Select Committee into Obesity Epidemic in Australia (SCOEA) were collected, and actors were classified according to their interests in commercial and non-commercial groups. A framework grounded in social constructionism was used to code frames and underlying belief systems. The SCOEA report was analysed to identify the representative distribution of belief systems in recommendations.

Setting: Australia.

Participants: None.

Results: 150 submissions were collected and analysed. 120 submitters were actors with non-commercial interests, including governments (n=13), non-government organisations (n=49), civil society groups and citizens (n=24), and academia (n=34). 30 submitters were actors with commercial interests including food industry representatives (n=23) and health enterprises (n=7). Conflicting belief systems in the framing of obesity were identified among policy actors, particularly between commercial and non-commercial groups. Non-commercial actors framed obesity in biomedical, lifestyle and socioecological terms, whereas commercial actors exclusively framed obesity as an issue of individual choices and proposed behavioural change interventions. A broad range of belief systems expressed by the submitters was represented in the SCOEA final report.

Conclusion: These findings illustrate how policy actors' beliefs and interests shaped their frames and influenced the development of a key policy report. Policymakers seeking to advance obesity prevention policy must critically evaluate strategic framing by various actors and ensure that policy decisions are evidence-based and aligned with health, equity and ecological perspectives.