IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i7p6149-d1114879.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving Communication of the UK Sustainable Healthy Dietary Guidelines the Eatwell Guide: A Rapid Review

Author

Listed:
  • Amy E. Culliford

    (Independent Public Health Nutrition Consultant, 68 Coronation Road, St. Helens WA10 6BG, UK)

  • Jane Bradbury

    (Medical School, Edge Hill University, St Helens Road, Ormskirk L39 4QP, UK)

  • Elphee B. Medici

    (Nutrition & Sustainable Diets Communications Consultant, Nutrilicious, London N2 0EF, UK)

Abstract

Background: Food-based dietary guidelines (FBDG) are a key public health tool, providing evidence-based recommendations for a healthy and more environmentally sustainable diet. Current adherence to national FBDG in the UK is poor with only 0.1% of the population meeting all of the recommendations set out in the Eatwell Guide. Communication of the Eatwell Guide is one of the many essential strategies needed to improve adherence and to support the necessary shift towards sustainable diets in the UK. An effective strategy is needed to communicate this information to policy makers, the food industry, health professionals and the public in order to drive dietary behaviour change. Methods: The authors conducted a rapid review of the scientific literature available in the SCOPUS database published between 2012 and 2022 (inclusive). Keywords searched related to the communication and implementation of FBDG. Additionally, examples of communication strategies for national FBDG globally are presented to demonstrate examples of good practice in this field. Results: The review highlighted several key themes relating to effective communication of FBDG. As a result, five recommendations are made for how communication of the Eatwell Guide could be improved to drive better adherence to these sustainable healthy guidelines. The recommendations are (1) review of language and tone of nutrition and sustainability related messages; (2) targeting of FBDG and communications to specific population segments; (3) addressing barriers to and benefits of adopting the Eatwell Guide recommendations; (4) development of practical tools and resources to support implementation of the guidelines; and (5) leveraging social media and social marketing techniques to increase public engagement. Conclusions: This research summarises the current scientific literature on the effective communication of FBDG. The recommendations may be used to improve future communication strategies for the Eatwell Guide as well as other national and international sustainable healthy FBDG.

Suggested Citation

  • Amy E. Culliford & Jane Bradbury & Elphee B. Medici, 2023. "Improving Communication of the UK Sustainable Healthy Dietary Guidelines the Eatwell Guide: A Rapid Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-23, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:7:p:6149-:d:1114879
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/7/6149/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/7/6149/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Scarborough & Paul Appleby & Anja Mizdrak & Adam Briggs & Ruth Travis & Kathryn Bradbury & Timothy Key, 2014. "Dietary greenhouse gas emissions of meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans in the UK," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 125(2), pages 179-192, July.
    2. Antje Gonera & Erik Svanes & Annechen Bahr Bugge & Malin Myrset Hatlebakk & Katja-Maria Prexl & Øydis Ueland, 2021. "Moving Consumers along the Innovation Adoption Curve: A New Approach to Accelerate the Shift toward a More Sustainable Diet," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-21, April.
    3. van Dooren, C. & Marinussen, Mari & Blonk, Hans & Aiking, Harry & Vellinga, Pier, 2014. "Exploring dietary guidelines based on ecological and nutritional values: A comparison of six dietary patterns," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 36-46.
    4. Bingli Clark Chai & Johannes Reidar van der Voort & Kristina Grofelnik & Helga Gudny Eliasdottir & Ines Klöss & Federico J. A. Perez-Cueto, 2019. "Which Diet Has the Least Environmental Impact on Our Planet? A Systematic Review of Vegan, Vegetarian and Omnivorous Diets," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-18, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cavaliere, Alessia & De Marchi, Elisa & Frola, Enrica Nadia & Benfenati, Alessandro & Aletti, Giacomo & Bacenetti, Jacopo & Banterle, Alessandro, 2023. "Exploring the environmental impact associated with the abandonment of the Mediterranean Diet, and how to reduce it with alternative sustainable diets," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    2. Jennifer A. Jay & Raffaella D’Auria & J. Cully Nordby & David Andy Rice & David A. Cleveland & Anthony Friscia & Sophie Kissinger & Marc Levis & Hannah Malan & Deepak Rajagopal & Joel R. Reynolds & We, 2019. "Reduction of the carbon footprint of college freshman diets after a food-based environmental science course," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 154(3), pages 547-564, June.
    3. Louise Seconda & Julia Baudry & Benjamin Allès & Christine Boizot-Szantai & Louis-Georges Soler & Pilar Galan & Serge Hercberg & Brigitte Langevin & Denis Lairon & Philippe Pointereau & Emmanuelle Kes, 2018. "Comparing nutritional, economic, and environmental performances of diets according to their levels of greenhouse gas emissions," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 148(1), pages 155-172, May.
    4. Anna Kustar & Dalia Patino-Echeverri, 2021. "A Review of Environmental Life Cycle Assessments of Diets: Plant-Based Solutions Are Truly Sustainable, even in the Form of Fast Foods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-22, September.
    5. Johanna Ruett & Lena Hennes & Jens Teubler & Boris Braun, 2022. "How Compatible Are Western European Dietary Patterns to Climate Targets? Accounting for Uncertainty of Life Cycle Assessments by Applying a Probabilistic Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-21, November.
    6. Bingli Clark Chai & Johannes Reidar van der Voort & Kristina Grofelnik & Helga Gudny Eliasdottir & Ines Klöss & Federico J. A. Perez-Cueto, 2019. "Which Diet Has the Least Environmental Impact on Our Planet? A Systematic Review of Vegan, Vegetarian and Omnivorous Diets," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-18, July.
    7. Jayne Hutchinson & Stephanie L. Prady & Michaela A. Smith & Piran C. L. White & Hilary M. Graham, 2015. "A Scoping Review of Observational Studies Examining Relationships between Environmental Behaviors and Health Behaviors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-26, May.
    8. I. D. Brouwer & M. J. Liere & A. Brauw & P. Dominguez-Salas & A. Herforth & G. Kennedy & C. Lachat & E. B. Omosa & E. F. Talsma & S. Vandevijvere & J. Fanzo & M. Ruel, 2021. "Reverse thinking: taking a healthy diet perspective towards food systems transformations," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 13(6), pages 1497-1523, December.
    9. Cristóvão Fraga Andrade Pereira da Rocha & Catarina de Sousa Tavares Pinho da Silva & Rafaela Martins da Silva & Manuel Joaquim da Silva Oliveira & Belmira de Almeida Ferreira Neto, 2023. "The Dietary Carbon Footprint of Portuguese Adults: Defining and Assessing Mitigation Scenarios for Greenhouse Gas Emissions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-22, March.
    10. Goldstein, Benjamin & Hansen, Steffen Foss & Gjerris, Mickey & Laurent, Alexis & Birkved, Morten, 2016. "Ethical aspects of life cycle assessments of diets," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 139-151.
    11. Birgit Kopainsky & Anita Frehner & Adrian Müller, 2020. "Sustainable and healthy diets: Synergies and trade‐offs in Switzerland," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 908-927, November.
    12. Mervenur Özel & Diana Bogueva & Dora Marinova & Ismail Hakki Tekiner, 2022. "Climate Change Knowledge and Awareness of Nutrition Professionals: A Case Study from Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-13, March.
    13. Melanie Speck & Katrin Bienge & Lynn Wagner & Tobias Engelmann & Sebastian Schuster & Petra Teitscheid & Nina Langen, 2020. "Creating Sustainable Meals Supported by the NAHGAST Online Tool—Approach and Effects on GHG Emissions and Use of Natural Resources," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-13, February.
    14. Menrad, K. & Emberger-Klein, A. & Schops, J., 2018. "Factors influencing consumers behavioral intention towards climate-friendly food consumption in Southern Germany," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277108, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Oriana Gava & Fabio Bartolini & Francesca Venturi & Gianluca Brunori & Angela Zinnai & Alberto Pardossi, 2018. "A Reflection of the Use of the Life Cycle Assessment Tool for Agri-Food Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    16. Helen Harwatt & Joan Sabaté & Gidon Eshel & Sam Soret & William Ripple, 2017. "Substituting beans for beef as a contribution toward US climate change targets," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 143(1), pages 261-270, July.
    17. Bauer, Jan M. & Aarestrup, Simon C. & Hansen, Pelle G. & Reisch, Lucia A., 2022. "Nudging more sustainable grocery purchases: Behavioural innovations in a supermarket setting," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    18. Minna Santaoja & Mikko Jauho, 2020. "Institutional Ambiguity and Ontological Politics in Integrating Sustainability into Finnish Dietary Guidelines," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-18, July.
    19. Aroub Alnasser & Nsreen Musallat, 2022. "Food Sustainability Knowledge among Saudis: Towards the Goals of Saudi Vision 2030," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-17, September.
    20. Vivian G. M. Quam & Joacim Rocklöv & Mikkel B. M. Quam & Rebekah A. I. Lucas, 2017. "Assessing Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Health Co-Benefits: A Structured Review of Lifestyle-Related Climate Change Mitigation Strategies," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-19, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:7:p:6149-:d:1114879. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.