To use the north Queensland banana industry as a case study to examine the extent to which cosmetic standards set by retailers influence the amount of edible waste generated on-farm and the effect of this on the sustainability of the Australian food and nutrition system.

Waste audits were performed on-farm at a banana packing shed to quantify the amount of fruit discarded due to cosmetic imperfections. These data, together with production records provided by the Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries and interviews with growers, were used to inform a nutritional analysis, a life cycle assessment and an economic analysis to quantify nutritional, environmental and economic impacts.

North Queensland, Australia

Banana farms and packing shed.

Between 10 and 30 % of the north Queensland banana crop is discarded on-farm. Of this, 78 % was found to be due to cosmetic imperfections, which equates to an industry total of 37 000 tonnes per annum. This waste represents a loss of 137 billion kilojoules with accompanying macro- and micronutrients. The life cycle assessment indicated that approximately 16 300 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions, 11·2 gigalitres of virtual water as well as other natural resources are embodied in the waste. There is an industry-wide, economic loss of approximately $AU 26·9 million per annum.

The majority of on-farm banana waste is caused by arbitrary cosmetic standards set by retailers, resulting in significant nutritional, environmental and economic losses. Public health nutritionists have a role to play across the entire food chain to minimize the impacts of waste on the food system.

To review research on consumer use and understanding of nutrition labels, as well as the impact of labelling on dietary habits.

A systematic review was conducted by searching electronic databases. Relevant articles were screened by two reviewers and included if they met inclusion criteria, including eight methodological criteria. A total of 120 articles were included in the review, including cross-sectional surveys (n 96), experimental designs (n 17), ‘natural experiments’ (n 7) and longitudinal population-based surveys (n 2).

Articles covered seven jurisdictions: USA (n 88), Europe (n 12), Canada (n 9), Australia and New Zealand (n 4), Norway (n 2), Thailand (n 1) and Trinidad (n 1).

Participants were from a wide range of age groups, socio-economic strata and geographical regions.

Nutrition labels on pre-packaged foods are among the most prominent sources of nutrition information. Nutrition labels are perceived as a highly credible source of information and many consumers use nutrition labels to guide their selection of food products. Evidence also shows a consistent link between the use of nutrition labels and healthier diets. However, the use of labels varies considerably across subgroups, with lower use among children, adolescents and older adults who are obese. Research also highlights challenges in terms of consumer understanding and appropriate use of labelling information.

Nutrition labels on pre-packaged foods are a cost-effective population-level intervention with unparalleled reach. However, to capitalize on their potential, governments will need to explore new formats and different types of information content to ensure that nutrition information is accessible and understandable.

To compare the key differences between school lunches and packed lunches as consumed in a nationally representative sample of primary schools, 6–8 months after the nutrient-based standards for school lunch became mandatory.

Data on 6580 pupils’ school lunches and 3422 pupils’ packed lunches were collected between February and April 2009 from pupils attending primary schools in England. Fieldwork was conducted over five consecutive school days. Fieldworkers randomly selected ten pupils taking a school lunch and five pupils bringing a packed lunch each day at each school, and recorded and weighed all food and drink items consumed, as well as any leftovers.

A nationally representative sample of 136 state-maintained primary schools in England.

A total of 10 002 pupils aged 4–12 years.

Mean intakes of protein, fat, saturated fat and vitamin C from both types of lunch met the nutrient-based standards. Pupils taking school lunches on average consumed significantly more protein, NSP, vitamin A, folate and Zn and less fat, saturated fat, non-milk extrinsic sugars (NMES), Na, Ca, vitamin C and Fe than pupils taking packed lunches. Energy intakes were low in both groups.

Packed lunches were less likely to accord with food-based or nutrient-based standards than school lunches. Higher levels of Na, NMES, fat and percentage energy from saturated fat emphasise the difficulties associated with optimising nutrient intakes from packed lunches.