Search

Objective: Food deliveries to consumers using autonomous vehicles are forecast to become commonplace in Australia and globally. The aims of this study were to (i) explore the anticipated nature of AV food delivery services in Australia and (ii) identify available policy options to optimise positive outcomes and minimise any negative consequences for health and well-being., Methods: In total, 36 interviews were conducted with 40 expert stakeholders across a range of relevant sectors including transport, urban planning, health and telecommunications. Interviewees discussed the ways in which automated food deliveries are likely to be implemented and the potential implications for lifestyles and health., Results: The interviewees expected automated food deliveries to constitute an extension of current trends towards online food ordering and rapid home deliveries, with potential adverse implications for diet quality at the population level., Conclusions: Effective regulation of automated food and beverage delivery services will be needed to anticipate and address this emerging phenomenon., Implications for Public Health: There is the opportunity to optimise the public health outcomes associated with automated food deliveries while minimising potential negative consequences through proactive anticipatory action. Delays could result in undesirable and irreversible changes to the food environment., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background Food policy is important to promote healthy and sustainable diets. However, who is responsible for developing and implementing food policy remains contentious. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate how the public attributes responsibility for food policy to governments, individuals and the private sector. Methods A total of 7559 respondents from seven countries [Australia (n  = 1033), Canada (n  = 1079), China (n  = 1099), India (n  = 1086), New Zealand (n  = 1090), the UK (n  = 1079) and the USA (n  = 1093)] completed an online survey assessing perceived responsibility for 11 recommended food policies. Results Overall, preferred responsibility for the assessed food policies was primarily attributed to governments (62%), followed by the private sector (49%) and individuals (31%). Respondents from New Zealand expressed the highest support for government responsibility (70%) and those from the USA the lowest (50%). Respondents from the USA and India were most likely to nominate individuals as responsible (both 37%), while those from China were least likely (23%). The private sector had the highest attributed responsibility in New Zealand (55%) and the lowest in China and the USA (both 47%). Support for government responsibility declined with age and was higher among those on higher incomes, with a university degree, and who perceived themselves to consume a healthy diet or be in poor health. Conclusions Across seven diverse countries, results indicate the public considers government should take primary responsibility for the assessed food policies, with modest contribution from the private sector and minority support for individual responsibility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]