Suchergebnisse

This work was supported by the Scottish Government's Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services (RESAS) Division. RESAS had no role in the design, analysis or writing of this article. ; Peer reviewed ; Postprint

This work was supported by funding from the Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services Division (RESAS) programme of the Scottish Government. RESAS had no role in the design, analysis or writing of this article. ; Peer reviewed ; Postprint

Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank Sylvia Stephen for help in creating recipes for lasagnes and the cooks at the Human Nutrition Unit at The Rowett Institute for preparing them. Thanks go to Professor Mandy Ryan for her comments on an early version of the manuscript. The authors have no conflict of interest to disclose. Funding: this study was funded by the Scottish Government's Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services Division (RESAS). ; Peer reviewed ; Postprint

The authors acknowledge the support of Scottish Government ClimateXChange Centre and the Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services Division. ; Peer reviewed ; Publisher PDF

This work was funded by a University of Aberdeen Environment and Food Security Theme PhD studentship, and contributes to the Scottish Food Security Alliance-Crops and the Belmont Forum funded DEVIL project (NERC fund UK contribution: NE/M021327/1). J.I.M. and R.B.M. acknowledge funding from the Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services, Scottish Government. ; Peer reviewed ; Postprint

Objective: To develop a timeline for evaluating public health nutrition policy interventions. Design: Concept mapping, a stakeholder-driven approach for developing an evaluation framework to estimate the 'time to impact' for policy interventions. The Schools (Health Promotion and Nutrition) (Scotland) Act 2007 was used as the model to develop the evaluation timeline as it had typical characteristics of government policy. Concept mapping requires stakeholders to generate a list of the potential outcomes, sort and rate the outcomes. Multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster data analysis were used to develop an anticipated timeline to impact for the policy. Setting: United Kingdom. Subjects: One hundred and eleven stakeholders representing nutrition, public health, medicine, education and catering in a range of sectors: research, policy, local government, National Health Service and schools. Results: Eighty-five possible outcomes were identified and grouped into thirteen clusters describing higher-level themes (e.g. long-term health, food literacy, economics, behaviour, diet, education). Negative and unintended consequences were anticipated relatively soon after implementation of the policy, whereas positive outcomes (e.g. dietary changes, health benefits) were thought likely to take longer to emerge. Stakeholders responsible for implementing the legislation anticipated that it would take longer to observe changes than those from policy or research. Conclusions: Developing an anticipated timeline provides a realistic framework upon which to base an outcome evaluation for policy interventions and identifies positive and negative outcomes as well as considering possible unintended consequences. It offers benefit to both policy makers and researchers in mapping the progress expected towards long-term health goals and outcomes.

This work was supported by a University of Aberdeen Environment and Food Security Theme/the James Hutton Institute PhD studentship, and contributes to the Scottish Food Security Alliance-Crops and the Belmont Forum supported DEVIL project (NERC fund UK contribution: NE/M021327/1). J.M. and R.B.M. acknowledge funding from the Scottish Government's Rural and Environment Science Analytical Services Strategic Research Programme. T.K. acknowledges funding from the European Research Council Grant ERC-263522 (LUISE). ; Peer reviewed ; Postprint

The rise of food security up international political, societal and academic agendas has led to increasing interest in novel means of improving primary food production and reducing waste. There are however, also many 'post-farm gate' activities that are critical to food security, including processing, packaging, distributing, retailing, cooking and consuming. These activities all affect a range of important food security elements, notably availability, affordability and other aspects of access, nutrition and safety. Addressing the challenge of universal food security, in the context of a number of other policy goals (e.g. social, economic and environmental sustainability), is of keen interest to a range of UK stakeholders but requires an up-to-date evidence base and continuous innovation. An exercise was therefore conducted, under the auspices of the UK Global Food Security Programme, to identify priority research questions with a focus on the UK food system (though the outcomes may be broadly applicable to other developed nations). Emphasis was placed on incorporating a wide range of perspectives ('world views') from different stakeholder groups: policy, private sector, non-governmental organisations, advocacy groups and academia. A total of 456 individuals submitted 820 questions from which 100 were selected by a process of online voting and a three-stage workshop voting exercise. These 100 final questions were sorted into 10 themes and the 'top' question for each theme identified by a further voting exercise. This step also allowed four different stakeholder groups to select the top 7-8 questions from their perspectives. Results of these voting exercises are presented. It is clear from the wide range of questions prioritised in this exercise that the different stakeholder groups identified specific research needs on a range of post-farm gate activities and food security outcomes. Evidence needs related to food affordability, nutrition and food safety (all key elements of food security) featured highly in the exercise. While there were some questions relating to climate impacts on production, other important topics for food security (e.g. trade, transport, preference and cultural needs) were not viewed as strongly by the participants.