An analysis of the transformative potential of Australia's national food policies and policy actions to promote healthy and sustainable food systems.

OBJECTIVE: Despite commitment by many countries to promote food system transformation, Australia has yet to adopt a national food policy. This study aimed to evaluate Australian Federal Government's (AFG) food policies and policy actions potential to promote healthy and sustainable food systems. DESIGN: This study is a desk-based policy mapping followed by a theoretically guided evaluation of policy actions. This involved three steps: (1) identification of government departments and agencies that could influence Australia's food system; (2) identification of food policies and policy actions within these departments and (3) use of a conceptual framework to evaluate policy actions' potential of changing the food system as adjust (first-order change), reform (second-order change) or transform (third-order change). SETTING: Australia. PARTICIPANTS: None. RESULTS: Twenty-four food policies and sixty-two policy actions were identified across eight AFG departments and the Food Regulation System and evaluated based on the order of change they represented. Most policies were led by individual departments, reflecting the absence of a joined-up approach to food policy in Australia. Most policy actions (n 25/ 56·5 %) were evaluated as having adjust potential, whereas no transformative policy action was identified. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that Australia is likely to proceed incrementally towards achieving food system change through adjustments and reforms but lacking transformative impact. To promote transformative change, all three orders of change must be strategically implemented in a coherent and coordinated matter. A comprehensive national food policy and a national coordinating body are needed to ensure a cohesive approach to policy.

From harmful nutrients to ultra-processed foods: exploring shifts in 'foods to limit' terminology used in national food-based dietary guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: The choice of terms used to describe 'foods to limit' (FTL) in food-based dietary guidelines (FBDG) can impact public understanding, policy translation and research applicability. The choice of terms in FBDG has been influenced by available science, values, beliefs and historical events. This study aimed to analyse the terms used and definitions given to FTL in FBDG around the world, including changes over time and regional differences. DESIGN: A review of terms used to describe FTL and their definitions in all current and past FBDG for adults was conducted, using a search strategy informed by the FAO FBDG website. Data from 148 guidelines (96 countries) were extracted into a pre-defined table and terms were organised by the categories 'nutrient-based', 'food examples' or 'processing-related'. SETTING: National FBDG from all world regions. PARTICIPANTS: None. RESULTS: Nutrient-based terms (e.g. high-fat foods) were the most frequently used type of term in both current and past dietary guidelines (91 %, 85 %, respectively). However, food examples (e.g. cakes) and processing-related terms (e.g. ultra-processed foods) have increased in use over the past 20 years and are now often used in conjunction with nutrient-based terms. Regional differences were only observed for processing-related terms. CONCLUSION: Diverse, and often poorly defined, terms are used to describe FTL in FBDG. Policymakers should ensure that FTL terms have clear definitions and can be integrated with other disciplines and understood by consumers. This may facilitate the inclusion of the most contemporary and potentially impactful terminology in nutrition research and policies.