Search

There is an existing literature on how food companies, including the unhealthy food commodity industries, influence policy through a number of approaches. Direct approaches include lobbying and funding of research. Backdoor or indirect tactics used by food companies to demonstrate engagement include funding community groups, tactics previously used by the tobacco industry. Food industry support for food charities engaged in food donations is an area that has not received attention. This is another backdoor approach and one which may compromise more general public health policy. It is no surprise that the companies that engage in this can be largely fall under the rubric of unhealthy food commodity industries. This link is sometimes referred to as the “hunger industrial complex” and is based on the argument that an alliance exists between the food industry and the food banking movement. With rising levels of food insecurity there is pressure on the food system to donate food to charitable enterprises such as food banks and soups kitchens, which is often encouraged by government policy such as “Good Samaritan legislation”. Food businesses contribute surplus food and often promote it as part of their corporate social responsibility agenda. The argument presented here is not an anti-food charity one but one which challenges the development of charitable food aid as a system and a replacement for public policy. The reasons for this can be summarized under three headings: (1) such donation systems compromise the wider application of public food welfare and give the impression that food poverty is being addressed; (2) the links with food corporations provide a backdoor for influence on wider food policies; and (3) researchers taking money from food charities may be compromised by the direct and indirect relationships with companies. The focus in this paper is on the latter two issues; the first will be established as a context with work we have published elsewhere. This article draws on examples from the UK of how charities have linked with chocolate and soft drink companies. Examples include: “For every Easter egg bought on the Cadbury Worldwide Hide, Cadbury will donate an Easter egg to a food bank in our network”; a Coca-Cola initiative in December 2021 “Win a meal, give a meal on-pack competition across Coca-Cola Original Taste and Coca-Cola Zero Sugar consumption packs, giving consumers the chance to win food-related vouchers, while donating to FareShare”; and an October 2021 initiative where “McDonald's joins forces with FareShare to fund 1 million meals for UK families”. These relationships go beyond companies donating surplus food to food charities such as food banks and pantries to encouraging consumers to buy their products with the promise that the company will contribute products to such charities or provide cash donations in return for the purchase of their product.

This commentary sets Caplan’s arguments about food banks and food poverty in the broader context of changes to the welfare state, the ‘charitization’ of state welfare and the need to address food poverty within a framework of dignity rather than charity.

This case study-based research was influenced by the growing movement of UK municipalities joining the Sustainable Food Cities (SFC) Network and developing food policies. This comes at a time of “growing tensions between global and local dynamics of food”. The national devolution of power to UK municipalities has resulted in Local Authorities (LAs) joining forces with Civil Society (CS) groups out of mutual need at a time of over £700 million in cuts to local public health funding and social services over the last decade [1,2]. Recognition of diverse skillsets, networks, access to funding as well as formal power for policy change highlight these mutually beneficial partnership arrangement at a time where cities are being seen as drivers of change for social policy [3].\ud \ud As an examination of local food policy development, this work examined five cases from within the SFC network (Bath and Northeast Somerset (BNES), the cities of Bristol, Belfast, and the counties of Durham and Devon). These cases represent three different coalition structures, ranging from council/public authority-led to civil society-led and a hybrid partnership. This research examined how the concept of sustainability and local food production were understood and linked to one another by Civil Society (CS) and Local Authority (LA) actors to achieve local objectives. Based on the idea that policies and programs reflect the “translated beliefs” of those actors involved in the policy development process [4], this research compared interview material and the content of the local food strategy as a process output. Acknowledging the role of power as one that is central to policy research [5], the cases were examined according to their governance structures, to illustrate how power was concentrated and exercised within these partnerships. Ultimately, this had significant bearing on how sustainability and local food production content were presented in the documents and framed for the audience.

Diet related chronic diseases are a key public health challenge. As employees spend a significant amount of their waking hours at work, it is an important place to convey health promotion messages and improve the workers’ eating behaviour. The Fighting Obesity through Offer and Demand (FOOD) programme contributes to this objective by promoting healthy eating habits during the working day. There are two complementary target groups: workers and restaurant owners. The FOOD programme is a public private consortium in nine European countries involving representatives of public health authorities, nutritionists and universities around the lead partner and coordinator the private company Edenred. Here we present the results from a 2018 survey with 25,428 employees and 1,411 restaurants supported by 910 semi-structured interviews (260 face to face and 650 telephone interviews).\ud \ud Key findings include an increase in demand for healthy foods since 2012. There is a tension with the demands for healthy food being accompanied by expectations of a ‘cheap’ and convenient service. The proportion of people taking a mid-day break is approximately 50% across the sample. Lunchtime at work remains an important point for promoting healthy eating among employees. While nutrition is important the promotion of social eating is also important as it introduces other benefits including increased productivity and promotes mental health.\ud \ud For the future restaurant owners and their employees need more support to deliver healthy eating options and to provide more nudges toward healthy eating.

The idea of universal human rights is a powerful one. Every person, wherever they are born and regardless of their social status, is entitled to the enjoyment of certain inalienable basic rights. Human rights are indivisible: the denial of one right affects the enjoyment of others; hence the intrinsic link between the basic rights to housing, food, and health

In this article, we start with a history of Home Economics followed by a discussion of Home Economics in the Irish curriculum, the development of the profession and its pedagogical base; finally, we make a case drawing on the existing literature for home economists as key catalysts in any ‘whole of school’ programme around food and health.

The idea of universal human rights is a powerful one. It says that every person, whe rever they are born and regardless of their background, income, race, gender or any other social status, is entitled to the enjoyment of certain inalienable and fundamental rights. In this paper we describe the international context that enshrines the human right to adequate food and then explore whether and how this is fulfilled in contemporary Australia, in light of ongoing food insecurity. A case study of an emerging non-government organ isation called the Right to Food Coalition is provided to illustrate how members of civil society are attempting to use international law and human rights frameworks to improve accountability and action on food insecurity in Australia. We then discuss how teachers may wish to address some of the issues raised in this paper via the new Victorian Food Studies curriculum.

Food co-ops are highlighted in UK policy as one way of improving food provisioning systems when formal state and commercial services fail to deliver. This research takes a case study approach to food retail co-ops in England funded under a community outreach programme. The co-ops surveyed had different priorities, some ranking health and food prices as more important than those associated with sustainability. In the majority of cases there were no formal membership structures and no involvement of members in decisionmaking. All operated on a part-time basis, few had business plans for future development, and many were reliant on voluntary labour or inputs from other organisations for their survival. Many food initiatives using the title food co-op were not formally constituted as cooperatives, losing both the potential power and advantages that formal incorporation can provide and opportunities to engage in processes associated with “democracy”. There is potential for a “co-op of co-operatives”, with local food initiatives being members of the larger co-op. This would enable leverage in areas of lobbying and food purchasing and provide additional leverage in terms of changing the food supply system to be more sustainable.

Cooking has long been a topic of discussion and concern among those arguing for a healthy diet. Chadwick, the great public health reformer, in 1842 called for cooking education.\ud \ud The Obama administration has heartedly endorsed cooking, mainly through the First Lady and a program called Cooking Matters, to address the obesity problem in the United States (http://cookingmatters.org/). \ud \ud Changing practices in cooking and food preparation and the way we eat some argue are driven by a loss of skills. Others argue that there is not a loss of skills but a changing set of skills driven by the changing nature of food provision and demands on our time. Our research in 1999 showed the United Kingdom population with low levels of skills, with the rich having higher levels of a skills deficit.

The global world we live in is made to seem smaller by technology but also by the realisation that the way we live and behave has consequences elsewhere, news is instantaneous with food and humanitarian crises being reported as they happen. For food this requires us to behave as global citizens and be cognisant of how our behaviours impact on others but also how our governments and private companies conduct trade with emerging economies. The Australian Government and the Australian food industry are planning encroachments into the growing SE Asia food market. Australia sees itself as the food bowl of SE Asia in the Asian Century (Gillard. 2012; The Australian, 2013). The Australian National Food Plan (Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, 2013) envisages the production of more meat, fat, salt and sugary products for export, thus exporting chronic diseases via dietary intake. While at the same time the proposal is to cut aid to some of these same developing economies that it is proposed to export food to. Australia is no different from most developed economies with food plans based on export and trade and not linked or tied to sustainability or healthy eating policies (Australian Food Sovereignty Alliance, 2013; Friel, 2010; Friel, Barosh and Lawrence, 2013: Caraher, 2013).\ud \ud This article explores the place of developed economies in the global food economy and attempts to ground this by relating some of the issues to the Australian context and the changing food climate.

This paper reports the findings from a systematic review of the impact of practical cooking initiatives in schools. We draw out recommendations that could inform home economics interventions in schools and evaluations thereof. A systematic search was undertaken for articles published between 1995 and January 2008; this was supplemented by hand searches. Studies were reviewed and classified on a scale of 1 to 4 (1 = highest quality) according to reported methodological quality of evidence provided.\ud \ud Four papers were found that met the criteria for inclusion as evidence. The only intervention to be ranked as level 1 was one that delivered a mix of food and environment lessons (theory-based), practical cooking sessions, parental involvement and provision of plant-based foods at school lunch. Three studies met the level 2 standard of the review. One of these, based in the United States of America (USA), was a randomised control trial of an intervention over 6–8 weeks for low-income youth consisting of food tasting, fruit and vegetable preparation as well as other activities. The second was a one-group cohort, ‘before and after’ intervention that targeted ‘gypsy’ children in Bilbao, Spain. This involved school teachers, nutritionists and catering staff. Following intervention, 95% had increased knowledge scores, 60% reported preparing dishes made in the sessions at home, and increases in cooking confidence and consumption of fruit, vegetables, dairy and fish were also reported. The final study was an interactive computer-based intervention where pupils virtually prepared a fruit juice or vegetable recipe on a computer program and then prepared recipes for homework in their home kitchen. The results demonstrated an increase in post-test consumption, although this was associated with baseline consumption.\ud \ud All the studies were short-term and none included long-term follow up so outcomes are not known. There is some evidence for an association between teaching cooking skills and improved nutrition knowledge, changing food preferences, increased confidence in cooking skills and healthier eating habits. However, while cooking lessons per se may positively affect consumption and attitude in the short-term, there was no long-term follow up and the review found very limited evidence on which to base policy.

In the United Kingdom (UK), under successive governments, there have been many changes over the years on ‘cooking in schools’ policy, ranging from the removal of cooking from the curriculum to a promise from the current government to make cooking compulsory for all 11–14 year olds by 2011. This paper reports on the current activity around cooking in schools policy in the UK. It also looks at how previous approaches led to these activities and to changes in the school environment, and the problems associated with an un-coordinated approach to the introduction of cooking in schools.

Food and sustainability have received much public attention in the last couple of years. Much of this has been driven by the world oil crises (peak oil); changes in climate and natural disasters and related economic global dilemmas (see Lang and Heasman, 2004; Public Health Association of Australia 2009: SIGNAL 2000). Australia has of course been a net importer of food, producing more than enough for its needs and exporting some. It is important to realise that the food system is driven by oil, oil to produce fertilizers, oil to work on the farm, oil to transport food around the country. This has led to an increase in costs at all levels and parts of the food system. In 2008 when the price of wheat had increased threefold for Australian farmers they were still having to factor in the higher costs of oil at all these stages not to mention the next year’s increases. So should Australians be worried? A country that still (even with the igures in decline) produces a surplus of food is obviously still in a strong position. But there is a crisis emerging and now is the time to tackle that crisis.

The need for a common theoretical framework and underpinning with regards to the use of the term ‘sustainability’ in connection with food is important. Its current use covers a number of different meanings, ranging through economics and food supply systems to agri-food systems. This paper explores the issue of sustainability using a model developed for WHO. Using this as a tool, the impacts of food security and the global food system can be analysed and audited. Key to this are a critique of the global food system and its emphasis on free trade and consumers, the argument is put forward that global trade needs to be regulated to ensure human and environmental health. \ud \ud Conclusions are drawn for home economic teachers in terms of the role they play in food advocacy. This moves beyond teaching about the food system ‘as-it-is’, to education concerning the background to the food system and how we, as both consumers and citizens, can act and exercise power. The model can be used to both inform teaching practice about sustainability and to frame a response at a school/community level to wider influences in the food system. Education on its own is judged not to be sufficient.

Objective: To evaluate households' diet-quality trends and regional disparities, as well as to identify the influence of its socioeconomic determinants. Methods/Subjects: Two dietary indexes were applied: a revised Healthy Diet Indicator version (HDIr) and the Mediterranean Adequacy Index (MAI). The socioeconomic differences between households with low-diet quality (if their scoring in HDIr or MAI was below the national median) and the remaining ones were analysed by means of logistic regression. Representative samples of households among each region were analysed. Results: Adherence to a Mediterranean diet was poor in all Portuguese regions; the proportion of households adhering to it has diminished in the North, Centre, Lisbon and Tejo valley. The proportion of households with high HDIr decreased in the North, Centre, Lisbon and Tejo valley and Algarve. In multivariate analysis, households whose head had secondary or higher education, living in semi-urban or urban areas, from the Azores region, within the higher income or outside home food expenditures groups were more likely to be in low-quality diet. Conclusions: The decreasing adherence to a Mediterranean food pattern and the diminishing compliance with World Health Organization dietary goals show that Portuguese households have reduced their diet quality. The observed influence of urbanization and region on diet quality highlights the importance of considering regional nutrition strategies.

This chapter highlights the need for an understanding of the views of children and the way they view food and nutrition knowledge and behaviour. We argue that this is necessary to help understand behaviour, to inform practice and to devise realistic research and evaluation strategies. Many existing approaches to research adopt a positivist approach and tend to exclude qualitative work because of the lack of control groups and validated measures.\ud \ud We set out how, by using qualitative research techniques and examples from our own work, the views of young people can be used to inform underlying behaviour. What we know about the behaviour of a community or group of individuals is often added to by qualitative data and this is not always so in experimental studies. For example attempts to change the behaviour of young people in eating in fast food restaurants is tempered by the fact that the reasons they do this are influenced by issues other than knowledge about the food on offer; or in the case of fruit and vegetable schemes it is necessary to understand the mindset of children to consuming fruit and vegetables. These raise the classic contradiction between knowledge and behaviour and the translation of research findings into practice and shaping what works. Determining audience needs, wants and perceptions is one of the key principles of good quality public health nutrition prevention work and is in-keeping with the need to create supportive environments for health and strengthening community action for health. We set out the need for understanding the mindset of young people, along with the links between research and action. We explore the use of existing evidence and gaps in the evidence base which includes an argument for research to have utility and be linked to programme interventions; indicating a shift from traditional evidence-based practice and a plea for evaluation and research on the use of evidence in practice. Such an approach will enable health practitioners to gain a better understanding of how to implement strategies associated with childhood nutrition and healthy eating in their working environment.

The need for a common theoretical framework with regards to the use of the term ‘sustainability’ in connection with food is important. Its current use covers a number of different meanings, ranging through economics and food supply systems to agrifood systems. This article explores the issue of sustainability, using the five-capital-assets model (natural capital; social capital; physical capital; human/political capital; and financial capital). Using this as a tool, the impacts of food security and the global food system are audited. This analysis is taken from a paper presented at the national conference of the Home Economics Institute of Australia in 2005 and is framed by the discussions that took place in the workshops. Conclusions are drawn for home economic teachers in terms of the role they play in food advocacy. This moves beyond teaching about the food system ‘as-it-is’, to education concerning the background to the food system and how we, as both consumers and citizens, can act and exercise power. The model can be used to both inform teaching practice about sustainability and to frame a response at a school/community level to wider influences in the food system. Education on its own is judged not to be sufficient and the need for action at a school level is explored.

Introduction: What is the approach of health promotion to food and food policy? We can perhaps best\ud demonstrate his by a recent experience of two of the current authors (JC and MC), on submission\ud of an article on food policy and health promotion to a well renowned health promotion journal,\ud the feedback was that the authors were ‘against regulatory authorities, science and technology\ud and the food industry’ and that we needed to include more examples of partnerships with the food\ud industry of which one referee assured us there were many! On revision of the article and\ud submission and acceptance by a public health journal we were told we were being too soft on the\ud food industry and the corporate power of transnational companies. This illustrates for us the\ud battleground for food policy and health promotion. Our experience is that health promotion\ud practice has a tendency to engage with the food industry as partners and focus downstream on the\ud solutions (Labonte, 1998, Labonte, 2003). This misses the bigger picture of who controls and\ud distributes the food we eat and limiting our choices to one of selection as opposed to true choice.