↓ Skip to main content

Uneven dietary development: linking the policies and processes of globalization with the nutrition transition, obesity and diet-related chronic diseases

Overview of attention for article published in Globalization and Health, March 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#29 of 1,245)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
13 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
policy
5 policy sources
twitter
20 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
599 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1087 Mendeley
citeulike
5 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Uneven dietary development: linking the policies and processes of globalization with the nutrition transition, obesity and diet-related chronic diseases
Published in
Globalization and Health, March 2006
DOI 10.1186/1744-8603-2-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Corinna Hawkes

Abstract

In a "nutrition transition", the consumption of foods high in fats and sweeteners is increasing throughout the developing world. The transition, implicated in the rapid rise of obesity and diet-related chronic diseases worldwide, is rooted in the processes of globalization. Globalization affects the nature of agri-food systems, thereby altering the quantity, type, cost and desirability of foods available for consumption. Understanding the links between globalization and the nutrition transition is therefore necessary to help policy makers develop policies, including food policies, for addressing the global burden of chronic disease. While the subject has been much discussed, tracing the specific pathways between globalization and dietary change remains a challenge. To help address this challenge, this paper explores how one of the central mechanisms of globalization, the integration of the global marketplace, is affecting the specific diet patterns. Focusing on middle-income countries, it highlights the importance of three major processes of market integration: (I) production and trade of agricultural goods; (II) foreign direct investment in food processing and retailing; and (III) global food advertising and promotion. The paper reveals how specific policies implemented to advance the globalization agenda account in part for some recent trends in the global diet. Agricultural production and trade policies have enabled more vegetable oil consumption; policies on foreign direct investment have facilitated higher consumption of highly-processed foods, as has global food marketing. These dietary outcomes also reflect the socioeconomic and cultural context in which these policies are operating. An important finding is that the dynamic, competitive forces unleashed as a result of global market integration facilitates not only convergence in consumption habits (as is commonly assumed in the "Coca-Colonization" hypothesis), but adaptation to products targeted at different niche markets. This convergence-divergence duality raises the policy concern that globalization will exacerbate uneven dietary development between rich and poor. As high-income groups in developing countries accrue the benefits of a more dynamic marketplace, lower-income groups may well experience convergence towards poor quality obseogenic diets, as observed in western countries. Global economic policies concerning agriculture, trade, investment and marketing affect what the world eats. They are therefore also global food and health policies. Health policy makers should pay greater attention to these policies in order to address some of the structural causes of obesity and diet-related chronic diseases worldwide, especially among the groups of low socioeconomic status.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,087 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 7 <1%
United States 6 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Cameroon 1 <1%
Hong Kong 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Other 9 <1%
Unknown 1058 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 241 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 146 13%
Student > Bachelor 144 13%
Researcher 108 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 60 6%
Other 177 16%
Unknown 211 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 188 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 180 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 134 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 82 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 55 5%
Other 197 18%
Unknown 251 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 146. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 March 2023.
All research outputs
#289,040
of 25,758,695 outputs
Outputs from Globalization and Health
#29
of 1,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#363
of 85,909 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Globalization and Health
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,758,695 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,245 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 85,909 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them