We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
A comprehensive nutrition policy containing a broad package of cross-sector and synergistic policy actions is required to attenuate the systemic drivers of poor nutrition. The current study aims to critically analyse trends in the scope of federal nutrition policy actions in Australia between 2007 and 2018 by: (1) describing the changes in nutrition policy actions, benchmarked against an international best-practice policy framework and (2) investigating how and why the scope of these policy actions have changed over time by examining the decision-making processes that led to the establishment of Australia’s Healthy Food Partnership (the Partnership).
Design:
Qualitative case study involving documentary analysis and key-informant interviews. Australian federal government documents (n 10) were analysed against the NOURISHING framework. Key informants (n 6) were interviewed and asked about the Partnership’s decision-making and establishment processes.
Setting:
Australia.
Participants:
Executive Committee (the Partnership’s governing body) and working group members.
Results:
From 2007 to 2018, the scope of Australian national nutrition policy has fluctuated from evidence-informed recommendations for a comprehensive policy to the mostly discrete policy actions of the Partnership. Themes of ‘pragmatism and compromise’, ‘actor relationships and lobbying’ and ‘political context’ were critical drivers for establishing the Partnership.
Conclusion:
The narrowing of Australian nutrition policy reflects a response to political expediency and compromise. This political dynamic highlights a dilemma facing nutrition policy advocates: should (and if so, how) a balance be sought between the aspirational but possibly unrealistic goals, and the limited but likely deliverable outcomes during policy-making processes? These findings have relevance for developing a future comprehensive national nutrition policy.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.