Search

The internet is drastically changing how U.S. consumers shop for groceries, order food from restaurants, and interact with food marketing. There is an urgent need for new policies to help ensure that the internet is a force for good when it comes to food access, transparency, and nutrition. This article outlines actions that federal agencies—like the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and Federal Trade Commission (FTC)—and state and local governments can take to improve the online food environment. We recommend policies in three settings: online grocery retail, online restaurant ordering, and marketing on social media and other online platforms. For example, USDA could finalize regulations increasing access to online WIC and remove barriers to accessing online SNAP by requiring large retailers to waive online delivery and service fees for SNAP purchases. FDA could improve access to nutrition information by issuing guidance describing what product information should be available at the online point of selection. FTC could give better guidance on appropriate tactics when marketing to children and collect better data on how companies are marketing food to children online. Finally, state governments could pass laws like New York’s recently introduced Predatory Marketing Prevention Act to address false and misleading advertising of unhealthy foods aimed at children and other vulnerable groups.

Background: Food environments, where people directly engage with broader food systems, may be an important contributor to the environmental sustainability of food systems. Objectives: The primary objectives of this study were to establish a new food environment framework that considers environmental indicators and to assess data availability and gaps using data previously collected as part of a food systems survey in 4 South Asian cities. Methods: The framework was developed by conducting a structured literature review of previous food environment frameworks and in-depth interviews with content experts (n = 6). The framework and indicators were then mapped to data collected by consumer and vendor surveys using the Urban Food Systems Assessment Tool (UFSAT) in Ahmedabad (India), Pune (India), Kathmandu (Nepal), and Pokhara (Nepal). Results: We have expanded the sustainability domain within food environments to include consumer travel to food vendors, the presence of food delivery services, policies related to sustainability, vendor food waste, vendor plastic use, vendor utility usage, vendor recycling and waste management practices, and food packaging. Mapping the framework to existing data from 4 cities in South Asia, we found variations in food environment sustainability indicators, particularly regarding consumer transportation to food vendors, the presence of delivery services, and food waste. Conclusions: Although the majority of food environment research focuses on the availability and affordability of healthy foods, there is an urgent need to understand better how aspects of food environments contribute to environmental goals. When mapping the framework to existing food systems data, we found gaps in data on environmental sustainability in food environments and variation in indicators across settings.

Abstract Objective: Our objectives were to describe sociodemographic characteristics associated with the purchase of (1) any fruit drinks and (2) fruit drinks with specific front-of-package (FOP) nutrition claims. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: USA Participants: We merged fruit drink purchasing data from 60 712 household-months from 5233 households with children 0–5 years participating in Nielsen Homescan in 2017 with nutrition claims data. We examined differences in predicted probabilities of purchasing any fruit drinks by race/ethnicity, income and education. We constructed inverse probability (IP) weights based on likelihood of purchasing any fruit drinks. We used IP-weighted multivariable logistic regression models to examine predicted probabilities of purchasing fruit drinks with specific FOP claims. Results: One-third of households with young children purchased any fruit drinks. Non-Hispanic (NH) Black (51·6 %), Hispanic (36·3 %), lower-income (39·3 %) and lower-educated households (40·9 %) were more likely to purchase any fruit drinks than NH White (31·3 %), higher-income (25·8 %) and higher-educated households (30·3 %) (all P < 0·001). In IP-weighted analyses, NH Black households were more likely to purchase fruit drinks with ‘Natural’ and fruit or fruit flavour claims (6·8 % and 3·7 %) than NH White households (4·5 % and 2·7 %) (both P < 0·01). Lower- and middle-income (15·0 % and 13·8 %) and lower- and middle-educated households (15·4 % and 14·5 %) were more likely to purchase fruit drinks with ‘100 % Vitamin C’ claims than higher-income (10·8 %) and higher-educated households (12·9 %) (all P < 0·025). Conclusions: We found a higher likelihood of fruit drink purchases in lower-income, lower-educated, NH Black and Hispanic households. Experimental studies should determine if nutrition claims may be contributing to disparities in fruit drink consumption.