UK Research and Innovation – Written evidence (FPO0039)


    UK Research and Innovation works in partnership with universities, research organisations, businesses, charities, and government to create the best possible environment for research and innovation to flourish. We aim to maximise the contribution of each of our component parts, working individually and collectively. We work with our many partners to benefit everyone through knowledge, talent and ideas. Operating across the whole of the UK with a combined budget of more than £7 billion, UK Research and Innovation brings together the seven research councils, Innovate UK and Research England.




  1. What are the key causes of food insecurity in the UK? Can you outline any significant trends in food insecurity in the UK? To what extent (and why) have these challenges persisted over a number of years?

UK food insecurity is caused by a complex network of factors, including the types of food being produced and manufactured, local food infrastructure, physical access to food outlets (e.g. transport), the purchasing power of individual consumers (the portion of disposable income available to spend on food after housing, childcare, and so on), and socially acceptable consumption norms, however, poverty is the key driver which impacts the other factors. Taylor and Loopstra’s analysis of data from the 2014 Gallup World Poll, which included questions from the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES), estimated that 10.1% of UK adults had been at risk of going hungry at least once in the previous twelve months because of a lack of money or other resources to obtain food.[1]

A food systems approach is essential for considering the inter-relationship between these factors, identifying win-wins, managing trade-offs and helping to mitigate less desirable outcomes. UK Research and Innovation is adopting this approach in a new £47.5M interdisciplinary research initiative led by the Global Food Security programme to transform the UK food system for health and sustainability.[2] A food systems approach encompasses the activities, outcomes and actors involved in agriculture, storage, processing and manufacture, distribution, retail and consumption, alongside the various pressures and drivers. It is important to frame issues in this way because the food system is highly interconnected and this approach avoids unintended consequences from interventions in one part of the system adversely affecting another.

There is a need for stronger coordination and integration to transform the UK food system for health and sustainability, to understand some of the key drivers of food insecurity (primarily poverty), and to take account of the experiences of different demographic groups. More coordination is needed both within and across academia — bringing together different disciplines to conduct systems-based research; across government — providing evidence for coherent cross-government policies and more effective public policies; and across industry — bringing together businesses working on healthy consumption and sustainable food production to address market failures in the food supply chain.[3]

Changing climates, weather patterns and the severity of pests and disease are long-standing challenges that impact on food production, and therefore have the potential to cause future food insecurity in the UK. As half of the food consumed in the UK is imported, changes to trade agreements also impact on the cost of bringing food into the UK, which would lead to changing price levels and a reallocation of resources. UK Research and Innovation supports a focus on research and business-led innovation into sustainable agricultural systems with the aim of improving the resilience of agriculturally important species to these multiple stresses. In addition, the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC), part of UK Research and Innovation, has a strategic focus on research into developing novel approaches to farmed animal health and crop protection, which also impacts on productivity and food insecurity.[4]


2. What are some of the key ways in which diet (including food insecurity) impacts on public health? Has sufficient progress been made on tackling childhood obesity and, if not, why not?

Diet is a major determinant for good physical and mental development, health and longevity, and in the prevention, treatment and management of disease. Access to a sustainable and healthy diet is a key requirement across the life course and nutritional status has been shown to play a key role in gastrointestinal, musculoskeletal, cognitive and immune system function. Nutritional status can also affect resilience, susceptibility and response to therapy. For example, body mass/obesity can affect the body’s response to antiviral drugs.

Britain has the unhealthiest diet in Europe, significantly increasing the risk of obesity, cancer, diabetes, heart attack and stroke.[5] In the UK, 58% of women and 68% of men were classified as overweight or obese in 2015,[6] with almost 1 in 6 deaths attributable to an unhealthy diet.[7] Human biology is struggling to cope with the increasingly obesogenic food environment, with ultra-processed foods high in fat, sugar, and salt making up just over half of all meals consumed in the average UK household. The health effects of food insecurity are most pronounced in children, with data from 11-year olds showing 25% of children in the most deprived areas to be obese, compared with just 11.5% of children in the least deprived areas.[8] More research is needed into the relationships between poverty and food intake.

Important successes have been seen since the publication of the 2016 childhood obesity plan, including fiscal measures: half of all drinks in the scope of the Soft Drinks Industry Levy (SDIL) were reformulated, removing the equivalent of 45 million kg of sugar every year. This also resulted in significant investment in schools to promote physical activity and healthy eating. SDIL is an example of a positive intervention to tackle obesity, but it needs to form part of a host of systemic interventions that will change business as usual across government, industry and wider society. The SDIL evaluation (2017–2020) is studying the impacts of the SDIL. It will be interesting to see how these findings differ to studies of sugar taxes in other countries, where sugar taxes have had mixed results.

Research conducted at the MRC Epidemiology Unit at Cambridge University includes the identification of trajectories of childhood growth and the development and testing of early life interventions to avoid over feeding and excessive weight gain in infancy. Research is also underway to investigate how diet, physical activity and sedentary behaviour affects the health of adults and young people across their lifespan, and how best to target interventions to improve health.

The National Prevention Research Initiative (NPRI) was established by 16 research funders — including government departments, research councils and medical charities — and supported four funding calls. One of the funded studies provided independent evidence to support the use of repeated taste exposure together with small non-food rewards to increase vegetable acceptance in children.[9] ‘Tiny Tastes’ has been influential in providing evidence to support and endorse a common practice.

As part of its first funding round, the UK Prevention Research Partnership (UKPRP)[10] has recently funded the GENIUS (Generating Excellent Nutrition in UK Schools) network, which aims to build a multidisciplinary community that considers the food system across the preschool, primary and secondary school settings in the UK. The network seeks to improve understanding of the current UK school food landscape and explore opportunities for population and system-level interventions that could improve diet quality and inequalities.


3. How accessible is healthy food? What factors or barriers affect people’s ability to consume a healthy diet? Do these factors affect populations living in rural and urban areas differently?

10.2 million British individuals are estimated to live in areas that can be described as food deserts, which are areas with poor access to affordable healthy food (possibly due to inadequate access to public or private transport methods to supermarkets, or limited flexibility in shopping and eating patterns).[11] The majority of food deserts are in urban areas, however rural areas are ‘more likely to have more restricted choice of food stores than urban areas.’[12] Over the past decade the cost of living has increased, affecting the average UK household’s disposable income and making healthy food less affordable. The UK’s poorest households have been shown to have cut back by 20% on fruit and 12% on vegetables.[13] Even when healthy options are accessible, consumer preference is often for unhealthy alternatives because these products are inexpensive, convenient and flavourful. In urban areas a higher concentration of fast food outlets can be found in comparison to rural areas, making unhealthy food easily accessible.


5. What can be learnt from food banks and other charitable responses to hunger? What role should they play?

Although food banks and charitable donations can provide a temporary relief to hunger, they do not offer a long-term, sustainable solution to food insecurity in the UK. Research funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), part of UK Research and Innovation, found that ‘the pattern of households using food banks reflects groups identified to have been particularly impacted by changing welfare entitlements. Thus, their over-representation in food banks supports arguments and earlier evidence that welfare reforms and reductions in entitlements targeting single parents, people with disabilities, and large families have meant they do not always have sufficient financial resources to afford enough food’. It is unclear how effectively food banks meet users’ needs, and ‘food bank use does not provide a complete picture of who is struggling to afford sufficient amounts of food in the UK’ as there are groups experiencing hunger who are invisible in the data.[14]

It will not be enough to assume that simply lifting people out of absolute poverty will improve dietary health. Whilst doing so would stop people going hungry, and this would be a significant achievement, it would not necessarily result in people eating diets that maximised their long-term health. As Dibsdall et al. found, in research with low-income consumers in eastern England, people often regard themselves as eating a healthy diet when an analysis of their food consumption reveals that they do not.[15] This suggests that we should be cautious about defining people, either explicitly or implicitly, as food insecure because they are not eating a healthy diet.


6. What impact do food production processes (including product formulation, portion size, packaging and labelling) have on consumers’ dietary choices and does this differ across income groups?

Food production processes directly and indirectly impact consumers’ dietary choices. For most people the food system and food supply chains are abstract and opaque concepts. Choosing and buying food is an everyday routine practice and any overt concerns with food production processes that affect safety or other food supply chain issues compete with other concerns, such as price and convenience. The global food system produces more grains, sugars and fats than we need for health, but not enough fruits and vegetables. These grains, sugars and fats are highly subsidised, and when refined and combined in manufacturing, lead to cheap and unhealthy products that permeate our food environments, resulting in over-consumption, poor nutrition and health.

The effects related to food production extend across income groups, with some impacted more than others. As the exact foods purchased and consumed by each income group differ, the specific foods that are affected also differ.[16] For instance, lower income groups are more likely to purchase and eat processed meat, so they are more likely to be affected by reformulation and packaging alterations to these products. Production effects can, however, be positive: improving packaging or portion sizes to extend shelf life can lead to greater food availability and reduced food waste. This can lead to monetary savings due to effective food consumption.

Since 2008, UK Research and Innovation’s research councils have worked with a consortium of leading food and drink companies to invest £22 million in the Diet and Health Research Industry Club (DRINC).[17] DRINC has supported 43 projects that address research challenges, including the relationship between food processing and nutrition, food choice and eating behaviour. Key relevant outcomes from DRINC projects include: flavour intensity enhancement to improve the acceptability of reducing portion size; the manipulation of food sensory characteristics to reduce overall calorie intake; and the use of social media and digital technologies to share social norms of smaller snack portion sizes.[18]


7. What impact do food outlets (including supermarkets, delivery services, or fast food outlets) have on the average UK diet? How important are factors such as advertising, packaging, or product placement in influencing consumer choice, particularly for those in lower income groups?

Food advertising has a significant influence on the UK diet, and the advertisement of unhealthy foods has been linked to increased consumption of foods high in fat, salt and sugar, especially in children.[19] In 2017 the UK government’s flagship Healthy Eating Campaign spent £5 million on advertising healthy foods, but this amount is dwarfed by the £256 million that the UK food industry spent on advertising unhealthy foods in 2014 alone.[20]

Local food infrastructure (including food shops, restaurants, fast food outlets and facilities at schools or workplaces) also influences the average UK diet, for example through the placement of certain foods nearer to checkouts. Price offers and bulk buying deals, bigger portion sizes and the available range in size of individual food packs also influence the UK diet.

Optimal product labelling is being researched by the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC), part of UK Research and Innovation. It appears that labelling may currently be ineffective at conveying the maximum information to consumers. The ‘Virtual Food Labels and Retail: Promoting healthy and sustainable food choices’ research project uses STFC advanced visualisation systems to look at which aspects of labelling consumers pay attention to, with the aim of revealing the best product labelling to enable consumers to make healthier choices.[21]


8. Do you have any comment to make on how the food industry might be encouraged to do more to support or promote healthy and sustainable diets? Is government regulation an effective driver of change in this respect?

Creating a food system that supports human and environmental health is not an issue for the food industry to address in silo. Government, industry, civil society and the research community need to come together to build a strategy to deliver healthy and sustainable diets through multi-pronged and simultaneous action, e.g. research, policy, regulation, marketing, provision and education. More research is needed to fully understand the roles of these different actors and the collective action required to effect change.

To advance healthy and sustainable diets, the food industry should form partnerships with the UK research and innovation base. UK Research and Innovation has several mechanisms to support this, including Collaborative Training Partnerships (CTP)[22] and the Industry Clubs that bring together a consortia of leading companies with researchers to address challenges that include diet and health (DRINC) and sustainable agriculture.[23] Businesses within the food industry can also partner with UK researchers through the Industrial Partnership Awards (IPA)[24] and ‘stand-alone’ LINK.[25] An IPA award was used by University of Nottingham and Yara International to develop bio-fortified broccoli that promotes health.[26]


9. To what extent is it possible for the UK to be self-sufficient in producing healthy, affordable food that supports good population health, in a way that is also environmentally sustainable?

The UK imports around half of all its food. However, the UK’s ‘self-sufficiency ratio’ varies with the type of food: we typically eat home-grown eggs, meat and dairy products (over 80% comes from the UK), and mainly eat home-grown cereals (62%), but only 23% of our fruit and vegetables come from the UK. If the food we exported were consumed in the UK, our self-sufficiency ratio would increase to 61% for food in general, and 76% if we considered only the sorts of food we would typically be able to grow here (e.g. wheat, meat, dairy and root vegetables).[27] Complete or near-complete self-sufficiency would therefore be challenging even with considerable dietary change. In addition, we import most of the pesticides and fuel used in agriculture, and as an island nation, we are limited by land and other resources.[28]

New innovations in how we produce food, combined with an increase in the range of foods that can be produced domestically, could increase our self-sufficiency ratio in the longer term. However complete self-sufficiency comes with risks — if a shock were to occur in the UK, for example from extreme weather or a pest and disease outbreak, we would lack the resilience that comes with a diversity of supply routes.

The Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), part of UK Research and Innovation, and BBSRC jointly support the £11M 5-year Achieving Sustainable Agricultural Systems (ASSIST) National Capability programme, which is examining the environmental effects of the sustainable intensification of agriculture.[29] It combines multidisciplinary expertise from BBSRC and NERC supported research centres, with links to policy makers and the farming industry. By bringing together expertise in management of natural resources and crop production, the programme will examine the impacts of intensification on the wider environment, and develop synergistic farming systems that contribute towards environmental sustainability.


10. Can efforts to improve food production sustainability simultaneously offer solutions to improving food insecurity and dietary health in the UK?

The food we currently produce is having a profound effect on the environment as well as human health and wider food security. Global agriculture accounts for 70% of all fresh water withdrawals, produces around a third of all greenhouse gas emissions, and contributes to biodiversity loss and soil degradation. However, focussing solely on sustainability will not necessarily deliver dietary health or food security, and vice versa. This demonstrates the importance of UKRI’s new £47.5M research programme, which takes a food systems approach to delivering health and sustainability (described in paragraph 3).

BBSRC wishes to support research and innovation which focuses on: integrating novel crop and nutritional research as part of broader advances in the sustainability of food production; improving crop and farmed animal health, which could contribute to improvements in nutritional quality; and developing precision farming systems, such as controlled environment agriculture, which have the potential to generate products with improved nutritional content quickly and cheaply in more urban areas.

The UK Research and Innovation £90 million Transforming Food Production programme, part of the Government’s Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund, has been designed to set food production systems on a trajectory to achieving net-zero emissions by 2040. The programme is focused on accelerating the development and adoption of integrated data-driven approaches to improve productivity in agricultural systems and enable food to be produced in ways that is more efficient, resilient and sustainable. One of the funding streams focuses on Future Food Production Systems, designed to stimulate the establishment of novel high value production systems capable of providing nutrient dense foods to mainstream consumers, while reducing resource use and moving towards net-zero emissions.


11. How effective are any current measures operated or assisted by government, local authorities, or others to minimise food waste? What further action is required to minimise food waste?

Tackling the issue of food losses and waste will be essential to improving the productivity and resilience of the UK food system. BBSRC supports research and innovation with a focus on: a greater understanding of crop harvesting windows; optimising uniformity and physical traits of crops by exploiting crop genetics; reducing the risk of spoilage; and understanding what influences the shelf life of foods. BBSRC places particular emphasis on horticultural crops and potatoes because of the particularly high levels of wastage and the high-value nature of the produce. BBSRC is in the process of creating a Quality and Food Loss Network for the research community, with a focus on horticulture.[30] The network aims to improve capacity and capability in the UK for tackling issues relating to quality and food loss in horticultural crops.

Work funded by NERC and carried out in collaboration with WRAP (the Waste & Resources Action Programme), has shown that portion size as well as packaging options can have impacts on calories consumed as well as the amount of food wasted.[31] Some foods are currently sold only in pack and portion sizes that cannot be eaten by a single person before the foods pass their best before or use-by dates (single householders are a large and growing demographic of both the young and old). ESRC-funded research from the University of Manchester also suggests that ‘the more socially significant a meal is — such as a dinner party with family and friends (as compared to a ready meal eaten alone) — the more likely it is that there will be leftovers that are at risk of going to waste… the likelihood of leftovers being wasted (rather than eaten) is explained almost exclusively by a single variable: how much food is left over.’[32]


12. A Public Health England report has concluded that “considerable and largely unprecedented” dietary shifts are required to meet government guidance on healthy diets. What policy approaches (for example, fiscal or regulatory measures, voluntary guidelines, or attempts to change individual or population behaviour through information and education) would most effectively enable this? What role could public procurement play in improving dietary behaviours?

A healthy, sustainable and affordable diet for all income groups in the UK is possible. Indeed it is possible to keep the consumption of all current foods, but this also requires the increased consumption of certain foods by up to 200% (such as fruits and vegetables) and the reduction of other foods (such as animal products) to 30% of their current amounts.[33] Dietary shifts will require behaviour change across the whole food system, with simultaneous action from government, industry and civil society. In terms of public procurement, government intervention can positively impact on the private sector, for example in setting minimum standards on produce for health and sustainability.[34]

There is also a need to bring researchers and stakeholders working in different parts of the food system together to form interdisciplinary consortia, addressing health, environmental and social challenges simultaneously through systems-based approaches. Achieving this dietary shift will require changes that disrupt business as usual, so taking a whole system approach will prevent unintended consequences in one part of the system from adversely affecting other parts of the food system. UK Research and Innovation is working to increase research capability in behavioural science to better understand the design and delivery of successful policy interventions.

In England, Yau et al.’s cross-sectional analysis of adherence to dietary recommendations demonstrates the persistent and long-established role of socio-demographic inequalities (not just income) in accounting for different levels of adherence. This confirms that the most socio-economically disadvantaged people tend to suffer the additional disadvantage of having an unhealthy diet; and an unhealthy diet is in turn the biggest behavioural risk factor for morbidity and mortality.[35]


13. Has sufficient research been conducted to provide a robust analysis of the links between poverty, food insecurity, health inequalities and the sustainability of food production? How well is existing research on the impact of existing food policy used to inform decision making?

UK-wide monitoring of food insecurity, which permits detailed analysis, would be welcome as a means of generating robust data on its ongoing prevalence and burden. Such data would help to put recent high-profile reports on the growth and severity of food insecurity in the UK into context.[36]

There is also a need for robust evidence on the links between food insecurity and poverty in the UK. At the moment there is no robust estimate of how many food banks there are in the UK, nor of how many food parcels they distribute over the course of a year. Robust data on these matters is important for improving our understanding of the relationship between reported levels of food insecurity and actual food bank use (which could be a proxy for hunger). If the proportion of food insecure people (as distinct from those who report themselves as such and those who use food banks) is found to be approximately equivalent to the proportion of the population living in poverty, that would suggest that poverty in the UK is moving from being relative towards being absolute (not having enough to eat being a form of absolute poverty).

There are several research gaps to creating a resilient, healthy and sustainable food system. Many of the research programmes to date have been on agricultural productivity, but there is a need to consider this in the context of the wider food system, in particular connecting agriculture to both health and the environment. This requires bringing together expertise from across the food system (e.g. nutritionists to work with soil scientists to improve health). There is also a need to identify potential tipping points in the natural and man-made systems that we rely on for life (e.g. the food system) and the measures to avoid or mitigate these. UK Research and Innovation is funding programmes that address these gaps, for example ASSIST (described in paragraph 25) and BBSRC’s Soil to Nutrition Institute Strategic Programme at Rothamsted Research, which is looking at the efficient flows of nutrients in a farming system, from soil through plants and animals to food products (grains and meat).[37]

There is need for more integrative research between the biological (basic and medical) and social sciences to build a better understanding of the multiple, interrelated factors contributing to human nutrition, health and behaviour, and to develop effective policy responses to the complex relationship between poverty, food insecurity and health.[38] Important research gaps remain concerning precisely how nutritional (and physical activity) requirements differ between individuals, population groups, social groups and across the life course. Further research is also needed to understand the factors which drive dietary decisions.

Interventions must be underpinned by a strong evidence base and must work at scale and in the settings for which they are intended. This necessitates a more social-ecological model of dietary behaviour and physical activity. Indeed, context is important and complex systems require the investigation of multiple levels of interacting factors (biological, behavioural, social, cultural and socio-economic and environmental) to fully understand their effects on population health outcomes. High quality research is therefore crucial to generating the robust evidence base to support development of effective intervention strategies.

The MRC Epidemiology Unit in Cambridge is applying a range of mixed-methods approaches to explore important research questions relating to the systems, environments and policies that influence the dietary and physical activity behaviours of the broader population. The Unit has contributed to evidence regarding the health impact of sugar sweetened beverages and the need for action.[39]


14. What can the UK learn from food policy in other countries? Are there examples of strategies which have improved access and affordability of healthy, sustainable food across income groups?

Amsterdam’s Healthy Weight Programme, which has a budget of £5.3m per annum, has successfully reduced obesity in children through implementing systemic interventions in schools, neighbourhoods, cities and other food environments.[40] Canada is also taking a food systems approach to promoting health and sustainability through the grassroots initiative ‘A People’s Food Policy for Canada’.[41]


15. Are there any additional changes at a national policy level that would help to ensure efforts to improve food insecurity and poor diet, and its impact on public health and the environment, are effectively coordinated, implemented and monitored?

There is an urgent need to transform our food system so it can deliver public health and environmental sustainability.[42] In practice, this means introducing national policies that, for example, financially enable farmers to adopt sustainable practices that promote biodiversity and reduce soil erosion (even if it lowers their yield), or shift the measure of food production from ‘yield per unit input’ towards ‘healthy people fed per unit input’.

End-to-end data approaches and the use of smart labels that provide information on health and sustainability of products could empower citizens to make healthier and more sustainable choices, and allow them to have a greater say in the kind of food system that they want.


This submission does not answer question 4*

UK Research and Innovation


12 September 2019


[1] A. Taylor and R. Loopstra, Too Poor to Eat. Food insecurity in the UK (London: Food Foundation, 2016)


[3] Global Food Security, A Food Systems Approach to Policy for Health and Sustainability (2018).

[4] BBSRC, Research in Agriculture and Food Security: Strategic Framework (2017).

[5] C. Monteiro et al., ‘Household availability of ultra-processed foods and obesity in nineteen European countries’, Public Health Nutrition vol. 21, no 1 (2018), 18–26.

[6] NHS Statistics on Obesity, Physical Activity and Diet (2017).

[7] GBD 2017 Diet Collaborators, ‘Health effects of dietary risks in 195 countries, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017’, The Lancet vol. 393, no. 10184 (2019), 1958–1972.

[8] House of Commons Library, Briefing Paper 3336: Obesity Statistics (2019).


[10] UKPRP funders: British Heart Foundation; Cancer Research UK; Chief Scientist Office; Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council; Economic and Social Research Council; Health and Care Research Wales (Welsh Government); Health and Social Care Public Health Agency, Northern Ireland; Medical Research Council; Natural Environment Research Council; National Institute for Health Research; The Health Foundation; Wellcome.


[11] The Social Market Foundation, What are the barriers to eating healthily in the UK? (London, 2018)

[12] The Social Market Foundation, What are the barriers to eating healthily in the UK? (London, 2018); Global Food Security, Insight, issue five: Overconsumption and influences on diet (2016).

[13] The Centre for Economics and Business Research, Hard to Swallow: The Facts about Food Poverty (2013).

[14] (outcomes); R. Loopstra, ‘Rising food bank use in the UK: Sign of a new public health emergency?’, Nutrition Bulletin vol. 43, no. 1 (2018), 53–60.

[15] L.A. Dibsdall et al., ‘Low-income consumers’ attitudes and behaviour towards access, availability and motivation to eat fruit and vegetables’, Public Health Nutrition vol. 6, no. 2 (2003), 159–68.

[16] C.J. Reynolds et al., ‘Healthy and sustainable diets that meet greenhouse gas emission reduction targets and are affordable for different income groups in the UK’, Public health nutrition vol. 22, no. 8 (2019), 1503–1517.



[19] World Health Organization, Marketing of foods high in fat, salt and sugar to children (2013).,-salt-and-sugar-to-children-update-20122013

[20] RSA, Food, Farming and Countryside Commission: Our Future in the Land (2019).







[27] Morrisons, British Food: What Role Should UK Producers Have in Feeding the UK? (2017).

[28] H. Harwatt and M.N. Hayek, Eating Away at Climate Change with Negative Emissions (2019).



[31] C.J. Reynolds, ‘The role of portion size, pack size, and packaging in sustainable healthy food consumption and food waste reduction’, Manufacturing Food Futures Conference 2018.; C. Kandemir et al., ‘Household food waste simulation model: Investigation of interventions for staple food items waste’ Conference: 26th EurOMA Conference at Helsinki, Finland (2019).

[32] (outcomes)

[33] C.J. Reynolds et al., ‘Healthy and sustainable diets that meet greenhouse gas emission reduction targets and are affordable for different income groups in the UK’, Public health nutrition vol. 22, no. 8 (2019), 1503–1517.

[34] Global Food Security, A Food Systems Approach to Policy for Health and Sustainability (2018).

[35] A. Yau et al., ‘Interventions and public health nutrition. Time trends in adherence to UK dietary recommendations and associated sociodemographic inequalities, 1986-2012: a repeated cross-sectional analysis’, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, vol. 73 (2019), 997–1005.

[36] P. Alston, Statement on Visit to the United Kingdom, by Professor Philip Alston, United Nations Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (2018); K. Raj, Nothing Left in the Cupboards: Austerity, Welfare Cuts, and the Right to Food in the UK (New York: Human Rights Watch, 2018).


[38] RCUK, A Cross-Council Vision for Food, Nutrition and Health Research.

[39] L. O'Connor et al., ‘Prospective associations and population impact of sweet beverage intake and type 2 diabetes, and effects of substitutions with alternative beverages’, Diabetologia vol. 58, no. 7 (2015), 1474–1483.; F. Imamura et al., ‘Consumption of sugar sweetened beverages, artificially sweetened beverages, and fruit juice and incidence of type 2 diabetes: systematic review, meta-analysis, and estimation of population attributable fraction’, British Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 50, no. 8 (2015), 496–504.


[41] Food Policy for Canada: Everyone at the Table (2019).

[42] R. Bhunnoo, ‘The need for a food-systems approach to policy making’, The Lancet vol. 393 (2019), 1097–1098.