Healthy Food Environment Policy Research Articles

Generating the best available science and data to inform healthy food environment policy

Generating the best available science and data to inform healthy food environment policy

Food Environment in Burkina Faso: Review of Public Policies and Government Actions Using the Food-EPI Tool.

Governments have a central role to play in creating a food environment that will enable people to have and maintain healthy eating practices. This study analyzes public policies and government actions related to creating healthy food environments in Burkina Faso. The Healthy Food Environment Policy Index tool used for this study has 2 components, 13 domains, and 56 indicators of good practice adapted to the Burkina Faso context. Official policy documents collected from data sources such as government and nongovernment websites, and through interviews with government and nongovernment resource persons, provided evidence of considerations of food environment in public policy documents in Burkina Faso. Policies documents show a lack of revision of old texts and administrative processes for new policies and government practices are very slow. Added to this is the absence of a regulatory document for some implemented actions. The analysis of the documents collected in relation to the indicators of Food-Epi tool shows that there is no evidence of consideration of food environments for the indicators concerning the regulation of nutrition and health claims, labeling, taxes on healthy and unhealthy foods, support systems for training for private structures on healthy diets, implementation of food guidelines, and food trade and investment. This study permits a review of public policies that take into account food environments through the various indicators and constitutes a starting point from which improvements can be made by the government.

Benchmarking Policy Goals and Actions for Healthy Food Environments in Benin to Prevent Malnutrition

Background and aim: Lifestyle and dietary shifts contribute to widespread or specific micronutrient deficiencies, leading to health issues such as obesity, hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and certain cancers. These problems are linked to unhealthy food environments, yet little is known about Benin policy responses. This study aims to assess how different aspects of the food environment are addressed in Benin's policy documents and their alignment with international best practices. Methods: The study analyzed intentions and actions to ensure a healthy food environment in Benin using various policy documents, including laws, decrees, sectoral policies, strategic and operational plans, regulations, directives, action plans, and program/project documents. It followed the Food-EPI tool (Healthy Food Environment Policy Index) of the INFORMAS network (International Network for Food and Obesity/NCDs, Research, Monitoring and Action Support) focusing on the “Policy and Infrastructure Support” components, with steps like contextual analysis, document collection, and evidence extraction. Results: Of the 98 documents collected, 61 were analyzed and classified into frameworks: 54.09% in the policy framework, 29.50% in the strategic framework, and 16.39% in the operational framework. While nine food environment domains were addressed to some extent, disparities with international best practices were noted, especially in food composition, labeling, pricing, governance, and funding/resources. Evidence gaps were identified in retail food sales, food trade and investments, and health integration in policies. Conclusions: The study reveals diverse approaches and gaps in Benin policies for healthy food environments. Despite progress in some areas, like leadership and monitoring, others, including food composition and governance, need more attention.

Evaluating Childhood Overweight- and Obesity-Related Food Marketing Policies in China Using the Food-Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI).

Addressing the increasing global health issue of childhood obesity, exacerbated by pervasive food marketing, this study critically evaluated China's food marketing policies in comparison with international best practices, aiming to uncover policy content and implementation gaps and inform policy enhancement strategies. Three key indicators were utilized from the Healthy Food-Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI)'s food promotion domain. A panel of experts (n = 13) from academic institutions, China Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the food industry assessed the Chinese government's policy scores and implementation levels concerning food marketing. Benchmarked against international best practices using the Food-EPI process, this evaluation encompassed context analysis, data collection, evidence-based policy action, government validation, policy rating, scoring, and results translation for government and stakeholders. The three chosen indicators specifically addressed childhood overweight- and obesity-related food marketing in broadcast media (Indicator 1), non-broadcast media (Indicator 2), and child gathering settings (Indicator 3). Specifically, Indicator 1, the Single Food Marketing Indicator Score was measured at 2.31 ± 0.38, with an accompanying Food Marketing Policy Implementation Percentage of 46.2%, and Low Implementation Level. For non-broadcast mediums (Indicator 2), these metrics were gauged at 1.77 ± 0.27, 35.4%, and Low Implementation Level, respectively. In child gathering settings (Indicator 3), for efforts curbing unhealthy food promotion, a score of 2.77 ± 0.27, an implementation percentage of 55.4%, and Medium Implementation Level was obtained. Cumulatively, the overarching efficacy of food marketing policy enforcement was determined to be suboptimal, with the consolidated figures being Total Food Marketing Score as 2.28 ± 0.97, Total Food Marketing Policy Implementation Percentage as 45.6%, and Total Food Marketing Policy Implementation Level as Low. Like many countries, China's food marketing policies and implementation have room for improvement when compared to international best practices. Recommendations include emphasizing nutritional legislation, fostering stakeholder collaboration, bolstering public health campaigns, and leveraging technology for stringent enforcement.

Development of the Local Food Systems Policy Index (Local Food-EPI+) tool and assessment process to benchmark the implementation of local government policies for creating healthy, equitable and environmentally sustainable food systems.

Local governments have an important role to play in creating healthy, equitable and environmentally sustainable food systems. This study aimed to develop and pilot a tool and process for local governments in Australia to benchmark their policies for creating healthy, equitable and environmentally sustainable food systems. The Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI), developed in 2013 for national governments, was tailored to develop the Local Food Systems Policy Index (Local Food-EPI+) tool for local governments. To incorporate environmental sustainability and the local government context, this process involved a literature review and collaboration with an international and domestic expert advisory committee (n 35) and local government officials. Local governments. The tool consists of sixty-one indicators across ten food policy domains (weighted based on relative importance): leadership; governance; funding and resources; monitoring and intelligence; food production and supply chain; food promotion; food provision and retail in public facilities and spaces; supermarkets and food sources in the community; food waste reuse, redistribution and reduction; and support for communities. Pilot implementation of the tool in one local government demonstrated that the assessment process was feasible and likely to be helpful in guiding policy implementation. The Local Food-EPI+ tool and assessment process offer a comprehensive mechanism to assist local governments in benchmarking their actions to improve the healthiness, equity and environmental sustainability of food systems and prioritise action areas. Broad use of this tool will identify and promote leading practices, increase accountability for action and build capacity and collaborations.

The INFORMAS healthy food environment policy index in Brazil: Benchmarking, current policies, and determining priorities for the future.

Obesity and non-communicable diseases are the most important cause of death and inability in Brazil and worldwide. Public policies are an important strategy to prevent obesity. This study analysed the scope of Brazilian public policies for preventing and controlling obesity using the INFORMAS/Food-EPI protocol. The public policies evaluation was conducted based on the INFORMAS/Food-EPI protocol. Experts from academia, civil society, and government assessed the level of implementation of food policies compared with international best practices and proposed new actions to be developed nationally. The protocol consisted of five phases: (1) A comprehensive review of the implementation of food environment-related public policies; (2) validation with experts; (3) comparison of the national actions with the international best practice and due to the level of implementation; (4) list a set of actions to improve the current policies; and (5) evaluation of the actions due to their importance and achievability. Brazilian actions were focused on monitoring, leadership, governance, and resources and financing domains. The results will provide elements to support and improve the national policies that aim at the promotion of a healthy food environment and obesity prevention.

5.C. Skills building seminar: Leveraging local government policies to improve food systems for public and planetary health

Abstract Changing food systems is one of the most promising and impactful ways to address nutrition and health, climate change and environmental degradation. The International Network for Food and Obesity/NCDs Research Monitoring and Action Support (INFORMAS) developed the Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI) to measure the extent of implementation of healthy food environment policies by governments compared to international best practice. The Food-EPI provides a mechanism to assess government policies and infrastructure support to create healthy food environments. The Food-EPI tool covers seven food policy areas, including composition, labelling, promotion, prices, provision, retail and trade, and six measures of infrastructure, including leadership, governance, funding, monitoring, platforms and health-in-all-policies. The Food-EPI process includes the drafting of a comprehensive evidence document on the implementation of policies, verified by government stakeholders and the assessment of those policies, as well as identification of priority policy actions by an expert panel at the national level. The tool and process were pilot tested and implemented in New Zealand in 2014 and then again in 2017 and 2020. Since 2014, about 50 countries have implemented Food-EPI at the national level, including more than 10 European countries. There is increasing demand for a similar monitoring tool and process which can be used at the municipal/city government level to assess government actions addressing food systems for both public and planetary health. Local governments can often make more rapid progress than national governments, but on the other hand may not have jurisdiction in all critical policy areas. INFORMAS recently developed a new Food Systems Policy Index, based on a compilation of international recommendations for good practice government policies to address food systems and a scoping review on the potential effectiveness of the recommended good practice policies and interventions to improve nutrition and environmental sustainability outcomes. The new index covers policies addressing food supply chains and food environments, and is being implemented in a range of West and East African and European countries and cities. The purpose of the workshop is to discuss the role and potential of local level government (cities and municipalities) policies in addressing food systems to improve both public and planetary. The workshop will have several key presentations, some with a more global perspective and some with a very practical local perspective. Together with the panelists and the audience, the key opportunities and challenges will be discussed for European cities and municipalities to address food systems, as well as the role of monitoring and benchmarking policy implementation to increase local actions on food systems. Key messages • Monitoring and benchmarking the policy implementation to address food systems to improve public and planetary health by governments is key to increase accountability for action. • A better understanding on the role and potential of local government policies in addressing food systems can be beneficial to accelerate and innovate policy implementation.

Evaluation and prioritization of food environment policies in Norway using the Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI)

Background: Government policies promoting healthier food environments can contribute to healthier diets and prevent obesity and diet-related non-communicable diseases.
 Objective: To assess the level of implementation of internationally recommended food environment policies in Norway and establish prioritised actions to create healthier food environments.
 Design: The Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI) was adapted to the Norwegian context. It comprised 45 good practice indicators of government food environment policy and infrastructure support. Systematically compiled evidence of relevant policies was verified by government officials and formed the basis for assessing the level of implementation of these policies compared against international best practice benchmarks. The assessment was done by a national non-government expert panel (n = 35). The experts thereafter proposed and prioritized policy actions for government implementation.
 Results: Most indicators were rated at a medium or high degree of implementation in both the policy action (69%) and the infrastructure support (77%) components. No indicators were rated as having ‘none or very little implementation’. Among the 14 recommended policy actions, active use of price regulation to increase the price of unhealthy foods and decrease the price of healthy foods was the highest priority. Other top priorities were ensuring healthy food environments in public settings and introducing free school meals. Demonstrating knowledge-based and coherent political leadership in public health nutrition policies was the highest priority among the 11 recommended infrastructure support actions.
 Conclusion: The overall policies in Norway to promote a healthy diet show a medium to high level of implementation. This study highlights that there is still room for additional improvements in Norwegian policies and infrastructure support to promote healthy food environments.

Policy implementation and priorities to create healthy food environments using the Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI): A pooled level analysis across eleven European countries.

Food environments have been recognised as highly influential on population diets. Government policies have great potential to create healthy food environments to promote healthy diets. This study aimed to evaluate food environment policy implementation in European countries and identify priority actions for governments to create healthy food environments. The Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI) was used to evaluate the level of food environment policy and infrastructure support implementation in Estonia, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, and Spain in 2019-2021. Evidence of implementation of food environment policies was compiled in each country and validated by government officials. National experts evaluated the implementation of policies and identified priority recommendations. Finland had the highest proportion (32%, n=7/22) of policies shaping food environments with a "high" level of implementation. Slovenia and Poland had the highest proportion of policies rated at very low implementation (42%, n=10/24 and 36%, n=9/25 respectively). Policies regarding food provision, promotion, retail, funding, monitoring, and health in all policies were identified as the most important gaps across the European countries. Experts recommended immediate action on setting standards for nutrients of concern in processed foods, improvement of school food environments, fruit and vegetable subsidies, unhealthy food and beverage taxation, and restrictions on unhealthy food marketing to children. Immediate implementation of policies and infrastructure support that prioritize action towards healthy food environments is urgently required to tackle the burden of obesity and diet-related non-communicable diseases in Europe. This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 774548 and from the Joint Programming Initiative "A Healthy Diet for a Healthy Life".

Benchmarking public policies to create healthy food environments compared to best practice: the Healthy Food Environment Policy Index in Guatemala

BackgroundBenchmarking the implementation of healthy food environment public policies against international best practices may accelerate the government response to prevent obesity and non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in the countries. The aim of the study was to determine the extent of food environment policy implementation in Guatemala and to identify and prioritize actions for the government to accelerate their implementation.MethodsThe INFORMAS Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI from the International Network for Food and Obesity/NCDs Research, Monitoring and Action Support) was used. Evidence of implementation for 50 good practice indicators within the seven food policies and six infrastructure support domains was compiled, and subsequently validated by Guatemalan government officials. A national civil society expert panel on public health and nutrition performed an online assessment of the implementation of healthy food environment policies against best international practices. The level of agreement among evaluators was measured using the Gwet second order agreement coefficient (AC2). The expert panel recommended actions for each indicator during on-site workshops and those actions were prioritized by importance and achievability.ResultsThe expert panel rated implementation at zero for 26% of the indicators, very low for 28% of indicators, low for 42%, and medium for 4% of indicators (none were rated high). Indicators at medium implementation were related to the use of evidence for developing policies and ingredient list/nutrition information panels on packaged foods. Seventy-seven actions were recommended prioritizing the top 10 for immediate action. The Gwet AC2 was 0.73 (95% CI 0.67–0.80), indicating a good concordance among experts.ConclusionsIn the Food-EPI of Guatemala, almost all indicators of good practice had a low or less level of implementation. The expert panel proposed 12 priority actions to accelerate policy implementation to tackle obesity and NCDs in the country.

The Healthy Food Environment Policy Index in Poland: Implementation Gaps and Actions for Improvement.

Background: Poland is facing the growing problem of overweight and obesity in the population, which makes it necessary to conduct a thorough assessment of the existing food environment policies. The aims of the study were: (1) to depict the strength of healthy food environment policies in Poland and identify implementation policies and infrastructure support gaps; (2) to identify and prioritise improvement policies, taking into account their importance, achievability and equity. Methods: We used the Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI). An experts’ panel rated Polish policies and infrastructure compared to international best practices and developed a list of recommended improvement actions addressing both components. Results: eight of the twenty-two policy and four of the twenty-two infrastructure indicators achieved the “no/very weak policy” result. Another four policy and five infrastructure indicators were considered “weak”. Another seven and eight indicators, respectively, were assessed as “moderate”. Among the identified actions, the highest priority was given to a food labelling system and training for persons involved in nutrition in schools. Conclusions: The Polish healthy food environment has been assessed as very weak or weak in most aspects. The infrastructure was assessed as slightly better compared to the policies domain, with more indicators receiving the “moderate” score.

Evaluation and prioritization of actions on food environments to address the double burden of malnutrition in Senegal: perspectives from a national expert panel.

To evaluate the extent of implementation of public policies aimed at creating healthy eating environments in Senegal compared to international best practice and identity priority actions to address the double burden of malnutrition. The Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI) was used by a local expert panel to assess the level of implementation of 43 good practice policy and infrastructure support indicators against international best practices using a Likert scale and identify priority actions to address the double burden of malnutrition in Senegal. Senegal, West Africa. A national group of independent experts from academia, civil society, non-governmental organizations and United Nations bodies (n =15) and a group of government experts from various ministries (n =16) participated in the study. Implementation of most indicators aimed at creating healthy eating environments were rated as "low" compared to best practice (31 on 43, or 72%). The Gwet AC2 inter-rater reliability was good at 0.75 (CI 0.70 - 0.80). In a prioritization workshop, experts identified forty-five actions, prioritizing ten as relatively most feasible and important and relatively most effective to reduce the double burden of malnutrition in Senegal (example: Develop and implement regional school menus based on local products (expand to 14 regions) and measure the extent of the promotion of unhealthy foods to children). Significant efforts remain to be made by Senegal to improve food environments. This project allowed to establish an agenda of priority actions for the government to transform food environments in Senegal to tackle the double burden of malnutrition.

Strength of EU-level food environment policies and priority recommendations to create healthy food environments

BackgroundFood environments impact on diets, obesity and non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Government policies are essential to create healthy food environments. This study aimed to assess the strength of European Union (EU)-level policies, and identify and prioritize actions for the EU to create healthy food environments.MethodsThe Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI) was applied. The Food-EPI included 26 policy and 24 infrastructure support indicators. Independent experts (n = 31) rated the strength of EU-level policies and infrastructure support for each of these indicators (on a 5-point scale, from very weak to very strong) and identified and prioritized actions to improve food environments.ResultsFor 65% of the 26 policy indicators, EU-level policies were rated as weak and for 23% as very weak. For 63% of the 24 infrastructure support indicators, EU-level policies were rated as moderate and for 33% as weak. The experts recommended 18 policy and 19 infrastructure support actions to the EU. The Top 5 prioritized policy actions included three actions in the food composition domain (e.g. setting mandatory food composition targets), one action in the food prices domain and one action in the food promotion domain. The Top 5 prioritized infrastructure support actions included three actions in the leadership domain (e.g. developing a high-level NCDs Prevention Strategy) and two actions in the monitoring domain.ConclusionsThere is large potential for the EU to strengthen its policies and infrastructure support in order to improve food environments. This study specifies priority actions for the EU to create healthy food environments.

How can National Government Policies Improve Food Environments in the Netherlands?

Objectives: Government policies are essential to create food environments that support healthy diets. The aims of this study were 1) to benchmark the implementation of Dutch government policies influencing food environments, and 2) to identify and prioritize actions to improve food environments in the Netherlands. Methods: The Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI) was applied. The Food-EPI includes 46 indicators of food environment policy and infrastructure support. Independent experts (n = 28) rated the extent of implementation on these indicators against international best practices, and formulated and prioritized policy and infrastructure support actions to improve food environments. Results: Most policy indicators were rated as having a low (50%) or very low (41%) level of implementation. Most infrastructure support indicators were rated as having a fair (42%) or medium (42%) level of implementation. 18 policy and 11 infrastructure support actions were recommended by experts to improve food environments in the Netherlands. Conclusion: There is large potential for the Dutch national government to strengthen its policy action and infrastructure support in order to improve the healthiness of food environments in the Netherlands.

The potential of food environment policies to reduce socioeconomic inequalities in diets and to improve healthy diets among lower socioeconomic groups: an umbrella review

Socioeconomic inequalities in diets need to be tackled to improve population diets and prevent obesity and diet-related non-communicable diseases. The potential of food environment policies to reduce such inequalities has to date however not been appraised. The objective of this umbrella review was to assess the impact of food environment policies on socioeconomic inequalities in diets and to identify knowledge gaps in the existing literature, using the Healthy Food Environment Policy Index as a conceptual framework. The policies considered in the umbrella review are within six domains: 1) food composition 2) food labelling 3) food promotion 4) food provision 5) food retail 6) food pricing. A systematic search for systematic literature reviews on the effect of food environment policies on dietary-related outcomes across socioeconomic groups and published in English between 2004 and 2019 was conducted. Sixteen systematic literature reviews encompassing 159 primary studies were included, covering food composition (n = 2), food labelling (n = 3), food provision (n = 2), food prices (n = 13) and food in retail (n = 4). Quality assessment using the “Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews” quality rating scale showed that review quality was mainly low or critically low. Results suggest that food taxation may reduce socioeconomic inequalities in diets. For all other policy areas, the evidence base was poor. Current research largely fails to provide good quality evidence on impacts of food environment policies on socioeconomic inequalities in diets. Research to fill this knowledge gap is urgently needed.

Implementation level of best practice policies by Italian Government for healthier food environments: Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI).

This work aims to identify policies implemented for healthy food environments in Italy within The Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI) project. Food-EPI tool, which includes two components, thirteen domains and fifty good practice indicators, was adapted for the Italian context. Evidence for implementation was gathered and summarized for all fifty indicators from data sources such as governmental websites, non-government organizations publications and websites and via direct contact with Government officials. The highest level of evidence was found within five domains: food composition (2/2 indicators), labelling (3/4), promotion (4/5), provision (4/5) and leadership (5/5). The domains with less identified evidence were food prices (1/4), food in retail (0/4), trade and investment (0/2) and platforms and interaction (1/4). The evidence summarization and the upcoming stakeholders' meeting to rate the level of implementation for each indicator in Italy have the potential to improve Government commitment to shape healthier food environments.

Implementing healthy food environment policies in New Zealand: nine years of inaction

BackgroundThe INFORMAS [International Network for Food and Obesity/Non-communicable Diseases (NCDs) Research, Monitoring and Action Support] Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI) was developed to evaluate the degree of implementation of widely recommended food environment policies by national governments against international best practice, and has been applied in New Zealand in 2014, 2017 and 2020. This paper outlines the 2020 Food-EPI process and compares policy implementation and recommendations with the 2014 and 2017 Food-EPI.MethodsIn March–April 2020, a national panel of over 50 public health experts participated in Food-EPI. Experts rated the extent of implementation of 47 “good practice” policy and infrastructure support indicators compared to international best practice, using an extensive evidence document verified by government officials. Experts then proposed and prioritized concrete actions needed to address the critical implementation gaps identified. Progress on policy implementation and recommendations made over the three Food-EPIs was compared.ResultsIn 2020, 60% of the indicators were rated as having “low” or “very little, if any” implementation compared to international benchmarks: less progress than 2017 (47%) and similar to 2014 (61%). Of the nine priority actions proposed in 2014, there was only noticeable action on one (Health Star Ratings). The majority of actions were therefore proposed again in 2017 and 2020. In 2020 the proposed actions were broader, reflecting the need for multisectoral action to improve the food environment, and the need for a mandatory approach in all policy areas.ConclusionsThere has been little to no progress in the past three terms of government (9 years) on the implementation of policies and infrastructure support for healthy food environments, with implementation overall regressing between 2017 and 2020. The proposed actions in 2020 have reflected a growing movement to locate nutrition within the wider context of planetary health and with recognition of the social determinants of health and nutrition, resulting in recommendations that will require the involvement of many government entities to overcome the existing policy inertia. The increase in food insecurity due to COVID-19 lockdowns may provide the impetus to stimulate action on food polices.

An assessment of implementation gaps and priority recommendations on food environment policies: the Healthy Food Environment Policy Index in Japan.

The current study aimed to evaluate policies and actions for food environments by the Japanese Government using the Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI). Public health experts rated the extent of implementation of food environment-related Policy and the Infrastructure-support components, compared with international best practices. Subsequently, the experts proposed and prioritised future actions to address implementation gaps in an online workshop. Japan. A total of sixty-six experts rated policy implementation by the Japanese Government and twenty-three participated in the workshop on future actions. The implementations of regulations on unhealthy foods and non-alcoholic beverages were rated low in the domains of Food composition, Food labelling and Food promotion, Food prices and Food retail in the Policy component. The implementations of several domains in the Infrastructure-support component were, overall, rated at a higher level, specifically for monitoring and intelligence systems. Based on the rating, reducing health inequalities by supporting people, both economically and physically, was the highest priority for future actions in both components. The current study found that Japan has a robust system for long-term monitoring of population health but lacks regulations on unhealthy foods and non-alcoholic beverages compared with international best practices. The current study confirmed the importance of continuous accumulation of evidence through national monitoring systems. Developing comprehensive regulations to restrict food marketing, sales and accessibility of unhealthy foods and non-alcoholic beverages is needed to improve the health of food environments in Japan.

Benchmarking for accountability on obesity prevention: evaluation of the Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI) in Australia (2016-2020).

Despite broad agreement on the need for comprehensive policy action to improve the healthiness of food environments, implementation of recommended policies has been slow and fragmented. Benchmarking is increasingly being used to strengthen accountability for action. However, there have been few evaluations of benchmarking and accountability initiatives to understand their contribution to policy change. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI) Australia initiative (2016-2020) that assessed Australian governments on their progress in implementing recommended policies for improving food environments. A convergent mixed methods approach was employed incorporating data from online surveys (conducted in 2017 and 2020) and in-depth semi-structured interviews (conducted in 2020). Data were analysed against a pre-defined logic model. Australia. Interviews: twenty stakeholders (sixteen government, four non-government). Online surveys: fifty-three non-government stakeholders (52 % response rate) in 2017; thirty-four non-government stakeholders (36 % response rate) in 2020. The Food-EPI process involved extensive engagement with government officials and the broader public health community across Australia. Food-EPI Australia was found to support policy processes, including as a tool to increase knowledge of good practice, as a process for collaboration and as an authoritative reference to support policy decisions and advocacy strategies. Key stakeholders involved in the Food-EPI Australia process viewed it as a valuable initiative that should be repeated to maximise its value as an accountability mechanism. The highly collaborative nature of the initiative was seen as a key strength that could inform design of other benchmarking processes.

To dine in or not to dine in: A comparison of food selection and preparation behaviours in those with and without food security.

Issue addressedVulnerable populations are disproportionately affected by food insecurity, resulting in heightened risk of suboptimal dietary intake. Food insecure people appear to implement several coping strategies and dietary compromises to avoid hunger. Less explored in the literature is how these strategies impact consumption of food inside and outside of the home.MethodsAn online survey was completed by adults (n = 1292) residing in one of five Australian states. The questionnaire comprised of the six‐item US Household Food Security Survey Module, 12 socio‐demographic variables and 32 questions related to elements of food literacy.ResultsFood insecure respondents were more likely to frequent fast food vs (P = .002), takeaway (P < .001) and food courts (P < .001) than their food secure counterparts. Food secure respondents reported greater use of raw (P = .043) and fresh, pre‐prepared produce (P = .002) when cooking, whereas food insecure respondents were more likely to prepare food using only frozen, pre‐packaged products (P < .001). No significant differences were found between food security status and the enjoyment and social bonding derived from cooking.ConclusionsFood insecure respondents appeared to be accessing a poorer quality of food through greater consumption of takeaway and fast food. These dietary compromises are most likely related to perceived financial, time or cooking facility constraints and to a lesser extent food literacy skills.So what?This study highlights some of the health and social inequities apparent within food insecure populations. Food insecure households should be supported to access healthy fresh food and in‐home cooking practices. While a multi strategy approach is required, healthy food environment policy, particularly in disadvantaged areas, should be considered to guarantee that all Australians have dignified access to nutritious food.