An Institutionalist Perspective on Child Obesity

Child Obesity is high and rising, and represents one of the most significant public health threats of our era. Orthodox economics presents this epidemic as a problem of individual decision-making—essentially that people want their children to become obese, because its convenience, cost and appeal are better than the alternative. Behavioral economics suggests that decision-making is imperfect in a way that is predictable, but unrelated to social power. By contrast, institutional economics argues that money flows through the body toward power. This analysis critically examines three theoretical traditions within economics—neo-classical economics, behavioral economics, and institutional economics—for their value in explaining and contributing solutions to the childhood obesity epidemic. The paper presents examples that demonstrate how neo-classical economics reifies a neo-Spencerist paradigm that is both pervasive and dangerous to health. A behavioral-economics variation is shown to be more realistic, but still firmly rooted in the teleological individualism of Spencerism. Data are then presented showing how diet is the outcome of a socio-culture in ways that cannot be modeled by neo-classical or behavioral economics. The central insight of institutional economics is that this socio-culture system can be manipulated by those who hold the levers of power, which in the US are advertisers and lobbyists, to reinforce norms of diet that are obesogenic. It is shown that it is this power dynamic that is obesogenic, not particular foods or ingredients. Suggestions for policy changes to break the cycle of obesity are offered.