Oral Presentation Australian and New Zealand Obesity Society Annual Scientific Conference 2026

Browsing for bargains: characterising price promotions on meal delivery apps in Australia (144445)

Jess Morrison 1 2 , Caroline Miller 1 2 , Rebecca Bennett 3 , Simone Pettigrew 4 , Joanne Dono 2 5
  1. School of Public Health, Adelaide University, Adelaide, SA, Australia
  2. Health Policy Centre, South Australian Health & Medical Research Institute (SAHMRI), North Tce, Adelaide, SA, Australia
  3. Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, Institute of Health and Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia
  4. The George Institute for Global Health, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  5. School of Psychology, Adelaide University, Adelaide, SA, Australia

Background: Price promotions can influence consumers’ food choices, including on meal delivery apps (MDAs), yet evidence about such promotions on MDAs remains limited. This study examined the prevalence and types of price promotions displayed on MDAs in Australia.

Methods: Australia’s three market leading MDA websites were audited twice weekly over four weeks. Three delivery address locations were selected (central business district (CBD); low socio-economic status (SES) area; high SES area), per state for three Australian states. The top 60 outlets on each MDA homepage were audited for price promotions. Promotions were classified as volume incentives, discounts, or multi-offers. Outlets were classified as chain or independent. Outlet healthiness was assessed using the DIGIASSESS food environment scoring index.

Results: Overall, 25% of outlets had a promotion on the homepage, ranging from 15% on DoorDash to 44% on Uber Eats. Overall, 63% of price promotions were for ‘unhealthy’/’moderately unhealthy’ outlets and 37% for ‘moderately healthy’/’healthy’ outlets, while 75% of promotions were for independent outlets and 25% were for chains. The promotions were distributed broadly in line with the underlying mix of outlets. Types of price promotions varied between MDAs, although volume incentives accounted for half of all promotions. Minimum-spend requirements were attached to 27% of all promotions, averaging AUD38 per promotion (± AUD17).

Conclusions/Policy Implications: Prevalence of promotions varied across examined MDAs, and most were attached to less healthy and independently operated outlets, reflecting their greater representation in the underlying sample. Findings highlight the need for public health policy to target price promotions on MDAs.