Australia's Obesity Crisis: The Case for a Fat Tax
This paper examines Australia's escalating obesity epidemic and the Australian Medical Association's (AMA) position in support of a government-proposed commodity tax on high-fat foods. It defines obesity using WHO standards, outlines Australia's ranking as the fourth most obese nation globally, and reviews the financial and health costs associated with rising obesity rates. The paper surveys existing anti-obesity initiatives — including the star rating system, the recognition of obesity as a chronic disease, and Queensland's collaborative public health campaigns — before presenting the AMA's recommended two-way approach of taxing fat foods while subsidizing healthier alternatives. Both supporting evidence and counterarguments are assessed.
- Introduction: Defining Obesity and the Australian Context: WHO definition, BMI measures, Australia's obesity ranking
- AMA's Background and Advocacy: AMA mission and obesity prevention campaigns
- The Problem: Rising Obesity Rates and Their Costs: Financial and health costs of rising obesity in Australia
- Developments in the Fight Against Obesity: Star rating system, disease recognition, organizational efforts
- The Proposed Fat Tax Solution: Government fat tax proposal and AMA's two-way approach
- Arguments For and Against the Fat Tax: Evidence supporting the tax and key objections raised
- Conclusion: Long-term policy scope and compensation recommendations
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper grounds its policy argument in authoritative data from the WHO, OECD, and AMA, lending credibility to its advocacy position.
- It balances a clear pro-tax stance with an honest acknowledgment of counterarguments, including economic harm to small businesses and long-run ineffectiveness, demonstrating intellectual fairness.
- The use of concrete statistics — such as Australia's 28.3% adult obesity rate and the $21 billion in direct health costs — makes abstract policy claims tangible and persuasive.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper uses an organizational advocacy framework effectively: it establishes the problem with evidence, surveys prior responses, then argues for a specific new policy. The comparison to tobacco taxation — citing a 25% tax producing a 10.2% drop in consumption — is a strong analogical argument that grounds the fat tax proposal in documented precedent.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a definitional introduction that contextualizes the problem globally before narrowing to Australia. It then establishes the AMA's credentials and mission, documents the scale of the obesity problem financially and medically, surveys existing policy developments, presents the proposed solution with supporting evidence, weighs objections, and closes with a forward-looking conclusion. This problem–context–solution–evaluation structure is well-suited to a health policy argument.
Introduction: Defining Obesity and the Australian Context
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), obesity refers to the accumulation of an excessive amount of fat in the body. Obesity and overweight are both measured using the Body Mass Index (BMI), which compares a person's weight to the square of their height, expressed as kg/m². A BMI between 25 and 29 indicates overweight, while a BMI that equals or exceeds 30 indicates obesity. Essentially, obesity arises when the energy calories consumed fail to balance with those expended — an imbalance driven by increased consumption of high-fat diets and inadequate levels of physical activity. Obesity raises the risk of non-communicable ailments such as diabetes, heart failure, and cancer. Effective obesity prevention would therefore go a long way in reducing the prevalence of these conditions.
The rates of obesity in Australia have been rising notably. Australia, with an adult obesity rate of 28.3%, ranks fourth in the world — after the United States, Mexico, and New Zealand. This trend is particularly worrying because the associated costs are also rising. The Australian Medical Association (AMA) has been at the forefront of supporting and implementing campaigns aimed at reducing obesity rates and ensuring a healthy population. The AMA therefore fully supports the government's proposal to impose additional commodity taxes on high-fat foods.
AMA's Background and Advocacy
The AMA is an association of doctors that seeks to ensure the well-being of its members and their patients through the advancement of community health. The AMA works by either devising its own initiatives or facilitating the implementation of federal campaigns aimed at addressing serious health concerns (Australian Medical Association, 2013). It has been vocal on the issue of obesity and overweight. The increasing rates of obesity in the country continue to be a significant challenge for all stakeholders, including the AMA.
Through its 'Shrinking the Nation's Waistline' agenda, the AMA has advocated for a reduction in the intake of fatty diets and an increase in physical activity levels (Australian Medical Association, 2013). The star food rating system and a physical-activity-facilitating plan for urban development are among the AMA's most significant obesity-prevention campaigns (Australian Medical Association, 2013). Obesity is, to a large extent, a barrier to good health — and it is because of this, "and its effect as a driver of health care spending," that it must be prevented. Such prevention strategies will always receive the AMA's support (Australian Medical Association, 2013).
The Problem: Rising Obesity Rates and Their Costs
Since 1980, obesity rates worldwide have nearly doubled (WHO, 2013). This can be attributed to the increased use of low-cost, high-fat diets and declining physical activity levels — the latter resulting largely from the sedentary nature of most modern jobs (WHO, 2013). Obesity rates are, however, higher in some countries than in others. Australia has one of the highest rates of adult obesity growth (OECD, 2001, p. 54). Obese adults constituted only 11% of the total population in 1989, but by 2012 this figure had risen drastically to 28% (ESSA, 2013). The country currently occupies the fourth position worldwide, with 28.3% of the population classified as obese and a further 40% as overweight (Australian Medical Association, 2013). According to the OECD, Australia is among those countries in which "one out of five people (men and women combined) aged 15 years and over are defined as obese" (2001, p. 54).
These increasing obesity rates translate directly into rising associated costs. In 2005, Australia's health system incurred direct costs of approximately $21 billion from obesity and weight-related complications alone (Australian Medical Association, 2013). Given that obesity rates have continued to climb since then, these costs will undoubtedly be even higher today. Furthermore, individuals battling obesity and overweight incur additional healthcare costs of approximately 30% in treatment and weight-management programs (ESSA, 2013). These finances could otherwise be directed toward other revenue-generating or beneficial projects.
Beyond the financial burden, obesity imposes serious health complications. It has been found to increase the risk of non-communicable diseases such as cardiovascular heart disease, type 2 diabetes, and certain forms of cancer. Obesity accounts for 44% of the diabetes burden, between 7% and 41% of the cancer burden, and 23% of the cardiovascular disease burden (WHO, 2013). These complications rank among the greatest causes of death, not only in Australia but globally (WHO, 2013). In Queensland alone, approximately 22,000 obesity-related deaths are reported each year (Nutrition Australia, 2012).
Additionally, obesity imposes serious self-esteem challenges. Those affected frequently turn to "inspiration limited to unrealistic shows like 'The Biggest Loser', encouraging them to tame serious health risks to make a change" (ESSA, 2013).
Conclusion
A fat tax would go a long way in the fight against obesity and its related complications. In the long run, the strategy's scope could be broadened so that unhealthy foods are taxed on the basis of their vegetable, fruit, and fiber content rather than solely on fat content. Suitable compensation policies, such as cash transfers, need to be established to mitigate significant financial losses for affected businesses and individuals. In this way, both those directly and indirectly affected by the imposition of the tax can stand to benefit from its outcomes.
References
ASH Australia. (2013). ASH Action: Taxation and Funding the Fight against Tobacco. ASH Australia. Retrieved from http://www.ashaust.org.au/lv3/action_funding.htm
Australian Medical Association. (2013). Govts, Urban Planners Need to Get Involved to Shrink the Nation's Waistline. Australian Medicine. Retrieved from
Eriksen, M. & Whitney, C. (2013). Risk Factors: Tobacco. In McQueen, D.V. (Ed.), Global Handbook on Non-Communicable Diseases and Health Promotion (pp. 115–136). New York, NY: Springer Science and Business.
ESSA. (2013). Obesity Figures Climb with No End in Sight. Exercise and Sport Science Australia. Retrieved from
FOE. (2013). Food Labeling. Fight the Obesity Epidemic. Retrieved from http://foe.org.nz/issues/food-labelling-2/
Nutrition Australia. (2013). Health Groups Throw down Challenge to Coca Cola: Stop Weight-Washing and Start Taking Meaningful Action on Obesity. Nutrition Australia. Retrieved from
Nutrition Australia. (2012). Health Groups Unite to Tackle Obesity. Nutrition Australia. Retrieved from
OECD. (2001). Health at a Glance. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Sacks, G. (2011). Is a 'Fat Tax' the Answer to Australia's Obesity Crisis? The Conversation. Retrieved from http://theconversation.com/is-a-fat-tax-the-answer-to-australias-obesity-crisis-3712
WHO. (2013). Obesity and Overweight. World Health Organization. Retrieved from
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.