Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014 Apr 14;11(4):4007-4025.

Economics of Obesity - Learning from the Past to Contribute to a Better Future.

Ananthapavan J1, Sacks G2, Moodie M3, Carter R4.

Author information

• 1Deakin Health Economics, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria 3125, Australia. jaithri.ananthapavan@deakin.edu.au.
• 2WHO Collaborating Centre for Obesity Prevention, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria 3125, Australia. gary.sacks@deakin.edu.au.
• 3Deakin Health Economics, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria 3125, Australia. marj.moodie@deakin.edu.au.
• 4Deakin Health Economics, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria 3125, Australia. rob.carter@deakin.edu.au.

Abstract

The discipline of economics plays a varied role in informing the understanding of the problem of obesity and the impact of different interventions aimed at addressing it. This paper discusses the causes of the obesity epidemic from an economics perspective, and outlines various justifications for government intervention in this area. The paper then focuses on the potential contribution of health economics in supporting resource allocation decision making for obesity prevention/treatment. Although economic evaluations of single interventions provide useful information, evaluations undertaken as part of a priority setting exercise provide the greatest scope for influencing decision making. A review of several priority setting examples in obesity prevention/treatment indicates that policy (as compared with program-based) interventions, targeted at prevention (as compared with treatment) and focused "upstream" on the food environment, are likely to be the most cost-effective options for change. However, in order to further support decision makers, several methodological advances are required. These include the incorporation of intervention costs/benefits outside the health sector, the addressing of equity impacts, and the increased engagement of decision makers in the priority setting process.