Although medical research has proven that breastfeeding is unparalleled in providing the ideal nutrition for infants, “the demarketing of breastmilk substitutes” is a little-known concept. This empirical study tackled the origin and definition of demarketing, examined the different factors affecting the demarketing of breastmilk substitutes in Palestine from the breastfeeding woman's point of view, and developed an appropriate model for the demarketing of breastmilk substitutes. The article subsequently concludes with recommendations for areas of further academic research in the World Health Assembly, for policy makers in Palestine, and for the breastfeeding women themselves.
Subjects and Methods:
An empirical study was conducted to collect the primary data using a questionnaire as a tool in order to test the hypotheses. The questionnaire was distributed to 400 breastfeeding women who were randomly selected from the population.
Results:
The findings proved that there is a relationship between independent variables (i.e., product, price, place, and promotion) and the dependent variable (i.e., demarketing of breastmilk substitutes) based on several reasons discussed thoroughly in this article.
Conclusions:
Product, price, place, and promotion affect the demarketing of breastmilk substitutes in Palestine.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
DuaS, PiseA, SreedharDet al.Demarketing in healthcare: Concept and approaches. Pharma Rev, 2007Aug-Sept 212–204.
2.
do PaçoA, Gouveia RodriguesR, DuartePet al.The role of marketing in the promotion of breastfeeding. J Med Market, 2010; 10,July:199–212.
3.
GilesM, ConnorS, McClenahanCet al.Measuring young people's attitudes to breastfeeding using the Theory of Planned Behaviour. J Public Health (Oxf), 2007; 29:17–26.
4.
NelsonE, ChanCW, YuCM. Breast milk substitutes in Hong Kong. J Paediatr Child Health, 2004; 40:350–352.
World Health Organization. The International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes: A Common Review and Evaluation Framework. World Health Organization: Geneva, 1996.
13.
World Health Organization. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Guidelines for the Safe Preparation, Storage and Handling of Powdered Infant Formula. World Health Organization: Geneva, 2007.
FridingerF, AlfonsoM, HussainAet al.A multi-year profile of public beliefs and attitudes regarding breastfeeding practices. Soc Market Q, 2003; 9,4:32–82.
21.
OglethorpeJ. Infant feeding as a social marketing issue: A review. J Consumer Policy, 1995; 18:293–314.
22.
International Baby Food Action Network. State of the Code by Country. A Survey of Measures Taken by Governments to Implement the Provisions of the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes. 2011. http://www.ibfan.org/code-publications.html. 2012 January 2.
23.
Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics. Child Statistics Series, Number 13: Annual Report: Children of Palestine—Issues and Statistics. Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics: Ramallah, Palestine, 2010.
24.
AguayoVM, RossJS, KanonSet al.Monitoring compliance with the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes in West Africa: Multisite cross sectional survey in Togo and Burkina Faso. BMJ, 2003; 326:113–114.
25.
WilmothT, ElderJ. An assessment of research on breastfeeding promotion strategies in developing countries. Soc Sci Med, 1995; 41:579–594.
KotlerP, LevyS. Demarketing, yes, demarketing. Harvard Business Rev, 1971; 49,6:74–80.
28.
ShiuE, HassanLM, WalshG. Demarketing tobacco through governmental policies—The 4Ps revisited. J Business Res, 2008; 62:269–278.
29.
GuptaR. Demarketing—Tool for Social Good. 2007. www.indiamba.com. 2012 February 7.
30.
SchiffL. Essays in public health and preventive medicine. Breastfeeding makes for better health. Mt Sinai J Med, 2006; 73:571–572.
31.
HaslamC, LawrenceW, HaefeliK. Intention to breastfeed and other important related health behaviors and beliefs during pregnancy. Fam Pract, 2003; 20:528–530.
32.
LindenbergerJ, BryantC. Promoting breastfeeding in the WIC program: A social marketing case study. Am J Health Behav, 2000; 24:53–61.
33.
LabbokM. Maternal and newborn care breastfeeding: A woman's reproductive right. Int J Gynecol Obstet, 2006; 94:277–286.
34.
World Health Organization. Evidence on the Long-Term Effects of Breastfeeding: Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. World Health Organization: Geneva, 2007.
35.
LuMC, LangeL, SlusserWet al.Provider encouragement of breastfeeding: Evidence from a national survey. Obstet Gynecol, 2001; 97:290–295.
TaylorA. Violations of the international code of marketing of breast milk substitutes: Prevalence in four countries. BMJ, 1998; 316:1117–1122.
38.
World Health Organization. The World Health Organization 2008. 2008. www.who.int. 2012 February 18.
39.
RosenbergKD, EasthamCA, KasehagenLJet al.Marketing infant formula through hospitals: The impact of commercial hospital discharge packs on breastfeeding. Am J Public Health, 2008; 98:290–295.
40.
RhodesKL, HellerstedtWL, DaveyCSet al.American Indian breastfeeding attitudes and practices in Minnesota. Matern Child Health J, 2008; 12,Suppl 1:S46–S54.
41.
LawtherS, HastingsG, LowryR. Demarketing: Putting Kotler and Levy's ideas into practice. J Market Manage, 1997; 13:315–325.
42.
SaundersM, LewisP, ThornhillA. Research Methods for Business Students. 3rd. Pearson Education: London, 2003.
43.
Al RefaaiA. Research Methodology: Economic and Managerial Application. Dar Wael Amman: Jordan, 1998.
