Although food environments have been highlighted as potentially effective targets to improve population diets, evidence on Mediterranean food environments is lacking. We examined differences in food availability and affordability in Madrid (Spain) by store type and area-level socio-economic status (SES).

Cross-sectional study. Trained researchers conducted food store audits using the validated Nutrition Environment Measures Survey in Stores for Mediterranean contexts (NEMS-S-MED) tool to measure the availability and price of twelve food groups (specific foods = 35). We computed NEMS-S-MED scores and summarised price data with a Relative Price Index (RPI, comparing prices across stores) and an Affordability Index (normalising prices by area-level income). We compared the availability and affordability of ‘healthier–less healthy’ food pairs, scores between food store types (supermarkets, specialised, convenience stores and others) and area-level SES using ANOVA and multi-level regression models.

City of Madrid. 2016 and 2019 to cover a representative sample.

Food stores within a socio-economically diverse sample of sixty-three census tracts (n 151).

Supermarkets had higher food availability (37·5/49 NEMS-S-MED points), compared to convenience stores (13·5/49) and specialised stores (8/49). Supermarkets offered lower prices (RPI: 0·83) than specialised stores (RPI: 0·97) and convenience stores (RPI: 2·06). Both ‘healthy’ and ‘less healthy’ items were more available in supermarkets. We found no differences in food availability or price by area-level SES, but affordability was higher in higher-income areas.

Supermarkets offered higher food availability and affordability for healthy and less healthy food items. Promoting healthy food availability through supermarkets and specialised stores and/or limiting access to convenience stores are promising policy options to achieve a healthier food environment.

The cost of food is a key influence on diet. The majority of diet cost studies match intake data from population-based surveys to a single source of food supply prices. Our aim was to examine the methodological significance of using food supply data to price dietary intakes.

Nationally representative 24-h dietary recall data from the 2015 Canadian Community Health Survey-Nutrition (CCHS-N) was matched to the 2015 Canadian Consumer Price Index (CPI) food price list. Proportions and means of reported intakes covered by the 2015 CPI price list were used to compare reported intakes of food groups and food components of interest and concern overall and by quartile of CPI coverage.

Canada.

In total, 20 487 Canadians ages one and older.

The CPI covered on average 76·3 % of total dietary intake (g) without water. Staple food groups that were more commonly consumed had better CPI price coverage than those less commonly consumed. Yet some food groups (vegetables, additions and sweets) that were also commonly consumed by Canadians were not well covered by price data. Individuals in the poorest CPI coverage quartile reported consuming significantly greater gram weight (g), dietary fibre (g) and energy (kcal) as compared with those with the best coverage.

Differential CPI price coverage exists among food components and commonly consumed food groups; additionally dietary intake differs significantly in the population by CPI coverage. Methodological refinements are needed to better account for error when using prices from food supply data to estimate diet costs.

This study qualitatively examined dietary diversity among married women of reproductive age who engaged in two socio-economic activities to explore the dynamics of food availability, access, costs and consumption.

Qualitative in-depth interviews. The food groups in the Minimum Dietary Diversity for women were used to explore women’s dietary diversity. IDI were used to develop a roster of daily food consumption over a week. We explored food items that were considered expensive and frequency of consumption, food items that women require permission to consume and frequency of permission sought and the role of economic empowerment. Data analysis followed an inductive–deductive approach to thematic analysis.

Rural and peri-urban setting in Enugu State, Nigeria.

Thirty-eight married women of reproductive age across two socio-economic groupings (women who work only at home and those who worked outside their homes) were recruited in April 2019.

Economic empowerment improved women’s autonomy in food purchase and consumption. However, limited income restricted women from full autonomy in consumption decisions and access. Consumption of non-staple food items, especially flesh proteins, would benefit from women’s economic empowerment, whereas staple food items would not benefit so much. Dietary diversity is influenced by food production and purchase where factors including seasonal variation in food availability, prices, contextual factors that influence women’s autonomy and income are important determinants.

With limited income, agency and access to household financial resources coupled with norms that restrict women’s income earning, women continue to be at risk for not achieving adequate dietary diversity.

To measure change in price of food groups over time (1995–2030) in Brazil, considering the Brazilian Dietary Guidelines’ recommendations.

Data from the Household Budget Survey (2008–2009 HBS) and the National System of Consumer Price Indexes (NSCPI) were used to create a data set containing monthly prices for the foods and beverages most consumed in the country (n 102), from January 1995 to December 2017. Data on price of foods and beverages from 2008–2009 HBS (referring to January 2009) were used to calculate real price over time using the monthly variation in prices from NSCPI. All prices were deflated to December 2017. Foods and beverages were classified following the Brazilian Dietary Guidelines’ recommendations. The monthly price for each food group and subgroup was used to analyse changes in prices from 1995 to 2017 and to forecast prices up to 2030 using fractional polynomial models.

Brazil.

National estimates of foods and beverages purchased for Brazil.

In 1995, ultra-processed foods were the most expensive group (R$ 6·51/kg), followed by processed foods (R$ 6·44/kg), then unprocessed or minimally processed foods and culinary ingredients (R$ 3·45/kg). Since the early 2000s, the price of ultra-processed foods underwent successive reductions, becoming cheaper than processed foods and reducing the distance between it and the price of the other group. Forecasts indicate that unhealthy foods will become cheaper than healthy foods in 2026.

Food prices in Brazil have changed unfavourably considering the Brazilian Dietary Guidelines’ recommendations. This may imply a decrease in the quality of the population’s diet.

To examine the impacts of Seattle’s minimum wage ordinance on food prices by food processing category.

Supermarket food prices were collected for 106 items using a University of Washington Center for Public Health Nutrition market basket at affected and unaffected supermarket chain stores at three times: March 2015 (1-month pre-policy enactment), May 2015 (1-month post-policy enactment) and May 2016 (1-year post-policy enactment). Food items were categorized into four food processing groups, from minimally to ultra-processed. Data were analysed across time using a multilevel, linear difference-in-differences model at the store and price level stratified by level of food processing.

Six large supermarket chain stores located in Seattle (‘intervention’) affected by the policy and six same-chain but unaffected stores in King County (‘control’), Washington, USA.

One hundred and six food and beverage items.

The largest change in average price by food item was +$US 0·53 for ‘processed foods’ in King County between 1-month post-policy and 1-year post-policy enactment (P < 0·01). The smallest change was $US 0·00 for ‘unprocessed or minimally processed foods’ in Seattle between 1-month post-policy and 1-year post-policy enactment (P = 0·94). No significant changes in averaged chain prices were observed across food processing level strata in Seattle v. King County stores at 1-month or 1-year post-policy enactment.

Supermarket food prices do not appear to be differentially impacted by Seattle’s minimum wage ordinance by level of the food’s processing. These results suggest that the early implementation of a city-level minimum wage policy does not alter supermarket food prices by level of food processing.

To test whether diets achieving recommendations from the UK’s Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) were associated with higher monetary costs in a nationally representative sample of UK adults.

A cross-sectional study linking 4 d diet diaries in the National Diet and Nutrition Survey (NDNS) to contemporaneous food price data from a market research firm. The monetary cost of diets was assessed in relation to whether or not they met eight food- and nutrient-based recommendations from SACN. Regression models adjusted for potential confounding factors. The primary outcome measure was individual dietary cost per day and per 2000 kcal (8368 kJ).

UK.

Adults (n 2045) sampled between 2008 and 2012 in the NDNS.

On an isoenergetic basis, diets that met the recommendations for fruit and vegetables, oily fish, non-milk extrinsic sugars, fat, saturated fat and salt were estimated to be between 3 and 17 % more expensive. Diets meeting the recommendation for red and processed meats were 4 % less expensive, while meeting the recommendation for fibre was cost-neutral. Meeting multiple targets was also associated with higher costs; on average, diets meeting six or more SACN recommendations were estimated to be 29 % more costly than isoenergetic diets that met no recommendations.

Food costs may be a population-level barrier limiting the adoption of dietary recommendations in the UK. Future research should focus on identifying systems- and individual-level strategies to enable consumers achieve dietary recommendations without increasing food costs. Such strategies may improve the uptake of healthy eating in the population.

People on a limited budget want to know the ‘good price’ of foods. Here we report the methodology used to produce an educational tool designed to help recognize foods with good nutritional quality and price, and assess the validity and relevancy of the tool.

A ‘Good Price Booklet’ presenting a list of foods with good nutritional quality and price was constructed. The validity of the in-booklet prices was assessed by comparing them with prices actually paid by households from the Opticourses project. The relevancy of the booklet tool was assessed by semi-structured interviews with Opticourses participants.

Socio-economically disadvantaged neighbourhoods of Marseille, France.

Ninety-one participants collected household food-purchase receipts over a 1-month period.

Based on the French food database, foods with higher-than-median nutritional quality were identified. After grouping similar foods, 100 foods were selected and their corresponding in-booklet prices were derived based on the distribution of average national prices by food group. Household food purchases data revealed that of the 2386 purchases of foods listed in the booklet, 67·1 % were bought at prices lower than the in-booklet prices. Nineteen semi-structured interviews showed that participants understood the tool and most continued using it more than a month after the intervention.

A method was developed to ease the identification of foods with good nutritional quality and price. The Good Price Booklet is an effective tool to help guide people shopping on a low budget.

Food insecurity has been rising across Europe following the Great Recession, but to varying degrees across countries and over time. The reasons for this increase are not well understood, nor are what factors might protect people’s access to food. Here we test the hypothesis that an emerging gap between food prices and wages can explain increases in reported inability to afford protein-rich foods and whether welfare regimes can mitigate its impact.

We collected data in twenty-one countries from 2004 to 2012 using two databases: (i) on food prices and deprivation related to food (denoted by reported inability to afford to eat meat, chicken, fish or a vegetarian equivalent every second day) from EuroStat 2015 edition; and (ii) on wages from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2015 edition.

After adjusting for macroeconomic factors, we found that each 1 % rise in the price of food over and above wages was associated with greater self-reported food deprivation (β=0·060, 95 % CI 0·030, 0·090), particularly among impoverished groups. However, this association also varied across welfare regimes. In Eastern European welfare regimes, a 1 % rise in the price of food over wages was associated with a 0·076 percentage point rise in food deprivation (95 % CI 0·047, 0·105) while in Social Democratic welfare regimes we found no clear association (P=0·864).

Rising prices of food coupled with stagnating wages are a major factor driving food deprivation, especially in deprived groups; however, our evidence indicates that more generous welfare systems can mitigate this impact.

Improving diet quality is a key factor for promoting population health. Social norms can support or undermine these efforts. The present study aimed to investigate the relationship between seasonal variation in food purchases and BMI.

The study population comprises members of a South African health promotion programme. Data come from scanner data of food purchases by 400 000 enrolled households at supermarkets and repeated individual surveys (about 500 000 participants) between 2009 and 2013.

Members in the health promotion programme spent 16·7 % of total food expenditure on nutritionally undesirable foods (sugar-sweetened beverages, candy, ice cream, etc.) and 24·7 % on healthy foods (fruit/vegetables, whole grains, non-fat dairy, etc.). Fruits and vegetables accounted for 13·5 % of purchases (half of all healthy food spending). Yet there were pronounced seasonal variations, with December being the peak month for unhealthy food purchases, which were 40 % higher than in January. This holiday peak was associated with short-term weight gain, but average body mass did not revert to pre-holiday levels. From 2009 to 2013, respondents gained about 0·13 BMI units per year (0·43 kg for men, 0·30 for women). From November to January alone, the increase was 0·1 BMI units for men (0·35 kg) and 0·8 BMI units for women (0·20 kg).

Purchases of nutritionally undesirable foods peak in December and are accompanied by weight gain from November to January. Despite weight loss after January, the November to January weight gain accounts for 60–70 % of the annual gain.