ArticlePloS one2022
The Economics of a "portion size reduction" policy.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study develops novel models of heterogeneous consumer preferences for different dining options and imperfect competition among food suppliers to analyze the market and welfare effects of portion size reduction (PSR) for food away from home. Different scenarios on the nature of differentiation of the dining options, the information available to consumers, and their response to links between portion size and obesity, food waste, and climate change are considered within this framework. The market and welfare effects of the policy are quantified using a simulation analysis. The analysis shows that the market and welfare effects of the policy are case-specific and dependent on the relative magnitude of the cost and utility effects of PSR, the strength of the consumer preference for dining out, and the food suppliers' initial costs and degree of market power in the relevant markets. The policy can create winners and losers among consumers and accounting for consumer heterogeneity, as done in this study, is essential for capturing the asymmetric welfare effects of PSR. Intriguingly, consumers and suppliers can benefit from PSR even without accounting for any health or/and environmental benefits of reduced portion sizes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.