4th May 2026
As the cost of living continues to rise, a common assumption emerges. If prices go up enough, people will simply cut back on food, cigarettes, alcohol, and especially unhealthy treats. On the surface, this seems logical. But real-world behaviour tells a more complicated story. Rising prices do change consumption patterns, yet they rarely produce clean, uniform reductions. Instead, they reshape habits in uneven and sometimes unexpected ways.
When it comes to food, households are highly responsive to price increases—but not necessarily by eating less. Food is a basic necessity, so most people adapt rather than cut consumption outright. This often means switching to cheaper brands, shopping at discount supermarkets, or choosing fewer premium items such as meat and ready meals. One clear effect is a reduction in food waste: as groceries become more expensive, throwing food away feels less acceptable. However, there are limits to this adjustment. Many households, particularly those on lower incomes, end up protecting calorie intake by sacrificing quality. Healthier options—fresh fruit, vegetables, and lean proteins are often more expensive, meaning diets can become less nutritious even if overall spending stays high.
This dynamic becomes even clearer when looking at so-called “unhealthy” foods like biscuits, cakes, and sweets. Because these items are not essential, people do tend to cut back on them when prices rise. Purchases may become less frequent, and premium brands are often replaced with cheaper alternatives. But again, reduction is rarely absolute. Instead of eliminating these foods, many consumers trade down buying supermarket own-brand versions, bulk packs, or whatever is on offer. For some households, especially under financial stress, small treats retain their importance as affordable comforts. In certain cases, people may even cut healthier foods before giving up inexpensive indulgences, complicating the idea that higher prices naturally lead to better diets.
A similar pattern appears with alcohol. Moderate drinkers often reduce their consumption when prices rise, but heavy drinkers tend to be less sensitive to cost increases. Rather than quitting, they may switch from pubs to supermarket alcohol or move to cheaper drinks. The result is not necessarily a sharp drop in overall consumption, but a shift in where and how alcohol is purchased. Social habits, routines, and coping mechanisms all influence how much behaviour actually changes.
Tobacco follows yet another variation of the same theme. Higher prices often driven by taxation do lead to long-term declines in smoking. Some people quit, others cut down, and fewer young people take up the habit. However, addiction plays a powerful role. Many smokers do not stop immediately in response to price increases. Instead, they may allocate a larger share of their income to smoking or switch to cheaper alternatives such as rolling tobacco or illicit products. The adjustment is gradual rather than sudden.
Across all these categories, a broader pattern emerges. Rising prices rarely cause people to simply consume less across the board. Instead, they encourage substitution, trade-offs, and behavioural shifts shaped by income, habit, and necessity. Essentials like food see adaptation rather than reduction. Discretionary items like sweets or alcohol are trimmed, but often not eliminated. Addictive goods like tobacco respond slowly and unevenly.
Perhaps most importantly, these changes are not evenly distributed. Higher-income households generally have more flexibility to absorb price increases or make healthier substitutions. Lower-income households, by contrast, face tougher trade-offs—often prioritising affordability, calories, and short-term comfort over long-term health. This means that while rising prices can reduce waste and curb some excess, they can also deepen inequalities in diet and wellbeing.
In the end, the idea that higher prices will simply force better choices is too simplistic. What actually happens is more nuanced in that consumption is reshaped, not erased. People economise, substitute, and adapt—but within the constraints of their income, habits, and daily realities. The result is a shift in how we consume, rather than a straightforward reduction in how much.