Abstract
Purpose: On November 8, 2016, Oakland, California, voters passed a sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) tax, which included language to support programs affecting communities and residents most affected by SSB-related health disparities. The purpose of this study was to qualitatively assess the extent to which those communities most affected by SSB-related health disparities were included in implementation decisions and were recipients of funding to support their needs.Methods: A longitudinal case study from 2016 to 2019 in Oakland, CA, explored equity implementation themes through key informant interview transcripts (n=15) triangulated with media (n=90) and archived documents (n=43). Using principals of constant comparative analysis, all documents (n=148) were coded and thematically analyzed in Atlas.ti.Results: SSB taxes—designed to support communities disproportionately impacted by SSB consumption—can be implemented with inclusivity and community representation. The Oakland ordinance established a Community Advisory Board (CAB) that partnered with community organizations throughout implementation to ensure inclusivity and recommend funding for programs to address health inequities, described as the “spirit” of the ordinance. These activities countered the beverage industry's tactics to target lower income communities of color with misinformation campaigns and hinder implementation.Conclusion: A clearly written ordinance provides guidance, which affords an intentional and legal foundation for implementation processes. Establishing a CAB can mitigate inequities as members are invested in the community and initiatives to support residents. Advisory boards are able to liaise between city and local partners, which is a powerful tool for countering opposition campaigns, reaching lower income and communities of color, and ensuring adherence to funding mandates.
Highlights
Structural inequities in the United States influence access and exposure to foods and beverages associated with chronic diseases and other adverse health risks, such as sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs)
The Community Advisory Board (CAB) was a critical structure that preserved this intention and their dedication to implementation activities promoting inclusivity and partnerships countered the ongoing attacks by the beverage industry to target lower income communities of color
One community advocate described the CAB: So we knew from the start that this was a very receptive board [CAB].meaning that they wanted to see that the funds were
Summary
Structural inequities in the United States influence access and exposure to foods and beverages associated with chronic diseases and other adverse health risks, such as sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs). Longstanding predatory marketing by the beverage industry has targeted minority communities, increasing SSB desirability, and potentially consumption in these communities.[1,2,3,4,5,6] Lower income and non-Hispanic.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
