Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-s22k5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-05T05:01:56.550Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
Accepted manuscript

Concordance of Australian state and territory government guidelines for classifying the healthiness of foods in public settings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2025

Bettina Backman*
Affiliation:
Deakin University, Geelong, Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, VIC 3220, Australia
Meg Adam
Affiliation:
Deakin University, Geelong, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, VIC 3220, Australia
Jasmine Chan
Affiliation:
Deakin University, Geelong, Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, VIC 3220, Australia
Josephine Marshall
Affiliation:
Deakin University, Geelong, Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, VIC 3220, Australia
Emalie Rosewarne
Affiliation:
The George Institute for Global Health, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
Gary Sacks
Affiliation:
Deakin University, Geelong, Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, VIC 3220, Australia
Adrian J Cameron
Affiliation:
Deakin University, Geelong, Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, VIC 3220, Australia
Miranda R Blake
Affiliation:
Deakin University, Geelong, Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, VIC 3220, Australia
*
*Corresponding author: bettina.backman@deakin.edu.au
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objective:

To investigate the concordance between Australian government guidelines for classifying the healthiness of foods across various public settings.

Design:

Commonly available products in Australian food service settings across 8 food categories were classified according to each of the 17 Australian state and territory food classification guidelines applying to public schools, workplaces, and healthcare settings. Product nutrition information was retrieved from online sources. The level of concordance between each pair of guidelines was determined by the proportion of products rated at the same level of healthiness.

Setting:

Australia

Participants:

No human participants.

Results:

Approximately half (56%) of the 967 food and drink products assessed were classified as the same level of healthiness across all 15 ‘traffic light’-based systems. Within each setting type (e.g., schools), pairwise concordance in product classifications between guidelines ranged from 74% to 100%. ‘Vegetables’ (100%) and ‘sweet snacks and desserts’ (78%) had the highest concordance across guidelines while ‘cold ready-to-eat foods’ (0%) and ‘savoury snacks’ (23%) had the lowest concordance. In addition to differences in classification criteria, discrepancies between guidelines arose from different approaches to grouping of products. The largest proportion of discrepancies (58%) were attributed to whether products were classified as ‘Red’ (least healthy) or ‘Amber’ (moderately healthy).

Conclusions:

Results indicate only moderate concordance between all guidelines. National coordination to create evidence-based consistency between guidelines would help provide clarity for food businesses, which are often national, on how to better support community health through product development and reformulation.

Type
Research Paper
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Nutrition Society