Advertisement

University Pouring Rights Contracts: Provisions That May Protect Companies From Beverage Policies

Published:January 19, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2021.11.019
      Consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) is associated with chronic diseases across the lifespan.
      • Malik VS
      • Hu FB.
      Sugar-sweetened beverages and cardiometabolic health: an update of the evidence.
      Despite the recent modest decreases in consumption,
      • Kit BK
      • Fakhouri TH
      • Park S
      • Nielsen SJ
      • Ogden CL.
      Trends in sugar-sweetened beverage consumption among youth and adults in the United States: 1999-2010.
      SSBs remain the single largest source of added sugars and calories in the U.S. diet,
      • Bleich SN
      • Wolfson JA.U.
      S. adults and child snacking patterns among sugar-sweetened beverage drinkers and non-drinkers.
      and increases in consumption among children and adolescents highlight priorities for public health intervention.
      • Han E
      • Powell LM.
      Consumption patterns of sugar-sweetened beverages in the United States.
      Beverage companies further drive this increase in consumption by entering into legal agreements (i.e., pouring rights contracts) with schools to be the sole provider of SSBs in return for payments and promotions worth millions of dollars.
      • Nestle M.
      Soft drink “pouring rights”: marketing empty calories to children.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Preventive Medicine
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      REFERENCES

        • Malik VS
        • Hu FB.
        Sugar-sweetened beverages and cardiometabolic health: an update of the evidence.
        Nutrients. 2019; 11: 1840https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11081840
        • Kit BK
        • Fakhouri TH
        • Park S
        • Nielsen SJ
        • Ogden CL.
        Trends in sugar-sweetened beverage consumption among youth and adults in the United States: 1999-2010.
        Am J Clin Nutr. 2013; 98: 180-188https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.112.057943
        • Bleich SN
        • Wolfson JA.U.
        S. adults and child snacking patterns among sugar-sweetened beverage drinkers and non-drinkers.
        Prev Med. 2015; 72: 8-14https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2015.01.003
        • Han E
        • Powell LM.
        Consumption patterns of sugar-sweetened beverages in the United States.
        J Acad Nutr Diet. 2013; 113: 43-53https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2012.09.016
        • Nestle M.
        Soft drink “pouring rights”: marketing empty calories to children.
        Public Health Rep. 2000; 115: 308-319https://doi.org/10.1093/phr/115.4.308
        • Krieger J
        • Bleich SN
        • Scarmo S
        • Ng SW.
        Sugar-sweetened beverage reduction policies: progress and promise.
        Annu Rev Public Health. 2021; 42: 439-461https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-090419-103005
        • Backholer K
        • Baker P.
        Sugar-sweetened beverage taxes: the potential for cardiovascular health.
        Curr Cardiovasc Risk Rep. 2018; 12: 28https://doi.org/10.1007/s12170-018-0593-6
        • Madureira Lima J
        • Galea S
        Corporate practices and health: a framework and mechanisms.
        Global Health. 2018; 14: 21https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-018-0336-y
        • Swinburn B.
        Power dynamics in 21st-century food systems.
        Nutrients. 2019; 11: 2544https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11102544
      1. Almeling DS. The problems of pouring-rights contracts. Duke Law J. 2003;53(3):1111‒1135. Available at: https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/dlj/vol53/iss3/4. Accessed October 3, 2021.

      2. OECD. Education at a glance: educational finance (edition 2018). Paris, France: OECD. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/content/data/500dc1b1-en. Published 2018. Accessed December 15, 2021.

      3. MuckRock. https://www.muckrock.com/. Accessed January 11, 2021.

      4. MAXQDA [computer software.
        VERBI Software], Berlin, Germany2019
        • Paarlberg R
        • Mozaffarian D
        • Micha R
        Can U.S. local soda taxes continue to spread?.
        Food Policy. 2017; 71: 1-7https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2017.05.007
        • George A.
        Not so sweet refrain: sugar-sweetened beverage taxes, industry opposition and harnessing the lessons learned from tobacco control legal challenges.
        Health Econ Policy Law. 2019; 14: 509-535https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744133118000178
        • Maani Hessari N
        • Ruskin G
        • McKEE M
        • Stuckler D
        Public meets private: conversations between Coca-Cola and the CDC.
        Milbank Q. 2019; 97: 74-90https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0009.12368
        • Sacks G
        • Swinburn BA
        • Cameron AJ
        • Ruskin G.
        How food companies influence evidence and opinion–straight from the horse's mouth.
        Crit Public Health. 2018; 28: 253-256https://doi.org/10.1080/09581596.2017.1371844
        • Nestle M.
        Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health.
        University of California Press, Berkeley, CA2013 (Vol 3)
        • Johnston LD
        • Delva J
        • O'Malley PM
        Soft drink availability, contracts, and revenues in American secondary schools.
        Am J Prev Med. 2007; 33 (suppl): S209-S225https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2007.07.006
        • Terry-McElrath YM
        • Turner L
        • Sandoval A
        • Johnston LD
        • Chaloupka FJ.
        Commercialism in U.S. elementary and secondary school nutrition environments: trends from 2007 to 2012.
        JAMA Pediatr. 2014; 168: 234-242https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.4521