School food systems play a role in the wider food system, but there is a scarcity of literature exploring interventions that aim to improve the environmental sustainability of school food systems. The present review aimed to understand and describe the types of interventions that have previously been explored to strengthen the sustainability of school food systems along with their impact. We applied a scoping review methodology guided by Arksey and O’Malley, which included a review of the online database Scopus and the grey literature. Information relating to intervention design, study population, evaluation method and impact were extracted. In total, 6016 records were screened for eligibility, 24 of which were eligible for inclusion. The most common types of interventions were school lunch menus designed to be more sustainable; school food waste reduction; sustainable food system education using school gardens; and dietary interventions with added environmental components. This review highlights a range of interventions which could positively influence the environmental sustainability of school food systems. Further research is needed to explore the effectiveness of such interventions.

The transition away from high meat and dairy consumption and towards more plant-based diets is vital for environmental sustainability targets, including reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and land use associated with food. Food-based dietary guidelines (FBDG) communicate nutrition information to a country's general public. However, it is unknown how different countries' FBDG communicate reducing meat and dairy intake in the context of sustainability. To address this gap, we reviewed global consumer-facing FBDG (n = 58) in middle- and high-income countries to examine recommendations and information around meat and dairy consumption, and to explore the pictorial representation of these foods. Few countries used a sustainability argument to recommend reducing meat (6/58) or dairy consumption (2/58). The proportion of dairy images within food guides was consistently higher than meat images. Some countries' guidelines are starting to consider meat intake in the context of sustainability and implementing meat reduction recommendations. However, this is not the case for dairy, potentially due to complex nutritional implications. Overall, our review shows that very few countries recommend reducing either meat or dairy consumption. To reduce the environmental impact of food systems, clearer guidelines backed by current evidence are needed, which provide justification behind recommendations, actionable advice for how to meet the recommendations, and appropriate quantified food targets or limits. This well-rounded advice is imperative to empower citizens to take action on their dietary habits, to reduce global meat and dairy consumption and replace these with more sustainable alternatives for human and planetary health.

The transition away from meat and dairy consumption and towards more plant-based diets is vital for meeting environmental sustainability targets, including reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and land use from food. Food-based dietary guidelines (FBDG) exist to communicate nutrition information to the public of a country’s population. However, it is not known how different countries’ FBDG communicate reducing meat and dairy intake in the context of sustainability. To address this gap, we reviewed global consumer-facing FBDG (n=58) to explore whether and how recommendations and information around meat and dairy consumption were included, and the pictorial representation of these two groups compared to other foods. Few countries used a sustainability argument to recommend reducing meat (6/58) or dairy consumption (2/58). The proportion of dairy images within food guides was consistently higher than meat images. Some countries’ guidelines are starting to consider meat in the context of sustainability and implementing meat reduction as recommendations. However, this is not the case for dairy, potentially due to complex nutritional implications. Overall, our review shows that not enough countries recommend reducing either meat or dairy consumption. Clearer guidelines backed by current evidence are needed, which provide justification behind recommendations, actionable advice for how to meet the recommendations, and appropriate quantified targets or limits of certain foods. This well-rounded advice is imperative to empower citizens to take action on their dietary habits, to reduce global meat and dairy consumption and replace these with more sustainable alternatives for human and planetary health.

Reducing meat consumption is essential to curb further climate change and limit the catastrophic environmental degradation resulting from the current global food system. However, consumers in industrialised countries are hesitant to reduce their meat intake, often because they find plant-based foods less appealing. Despite the climate emergency, eating meat is still perceived as the norm, and recommended in most national dietary guidelines. To support the transition to more sustainable diets by providing insights for increasing the appeal of plant-based foods to mainstream consumers, this article reviews recent research findings on how people think and communicate about meat-based and plant-based foods. The key findings we review include: (1) While vegans think about plant-based foods in terms of enjoyable eating experiences, omnivores think about plant-based foods in terms of health, vegan identity, and other abstract information that does not motivate consumption in the moment. (2) Packages of ready-meals and social media posts on Instagram present plant-based foods with fewer references to enjoyable eating experiences than meat-based foods. (3) Presenting plant-based foods with language that references enjoyable eating experiences increases their appeal, especially for habitual meat eaters. This language includes words about sensory features of the food (e.g., crunchy, creamy), eating context (e.g., pub; with family), and immediate positive consequences of eating (e.g., comforting, delicious). In contrast, the term “vegan” is strongly associated with negative stereotypes. Hence, rather than referring to being vegan, meat-free, or healthy, the language used for plant-based foods should refer to sensory appeal, attractive eating situations, and enjoyment.

Food-based dietary guidelines (FBDG) communicate government-supported nutrition guidance and can support people in making sustainable food choices. However, FBDGs rarely contain explicit references to environmental sustainability. Here, we report the results of a mixed-methods survey to understand how UK participants (n = 305) interpret guidelines in the Eatwell Guide concerning sustainability, particularly the consumption of animal-based and plant-based foods. To contextualise findings through participants’ lifestyles, we also assessed dietary habits and priorities, and how they access nutrition information. Participants reported high familiarity with, but low use of, the Eatwell Guide, accessing nutrition information instead through online sources and food labels. Most participants felt the Eatwell Guide recommended a diet including plant-based foods and lower in animal-based foods; however, meat-eaters found the guidelines consistent with their diet and interpreted a diet supporting the consumption of animal-based foods. Participants were motivated to eat sustainably while prioritising food prices and animal welfare. Furthermore, participants struggled with accessing, trusting, and processing information about sustainability and food. These findings highlight a unique opportunity for the Eatwell Guide, and possibly other countries’ FBDGs, to convey consistent and accessible nutrition guidelines that integrate health and sustainability. Featuring clearer information in FBDGs to increase capacity in adopting sustainable dietary practices should happen alongside other initiatives (e.g. food labelling, prioritising plant-based foods in public procurement, subsidising fruits and vegetables) to support people in the transition towards environmentally sustainable diets.

School holidays are typically a time of anxiety for families, particularly those who are socially and economically disadvantaged. Food insecurity is heightened during school holidays in the United Kingdom as children eligible for Free School Meals (FSM) do not have access to them. Since 2018, the UK government’s Holiday Activities and Food (HAF) programme has offered free activities and nutritious meals during holidays. In 2020, HAF operated across 17 local authorities (LAs), supporting 50,000 children and very recently expanded to 153 LAs, delivering over 15.6 million activity days. Previous barriers reported include resource constraint and limited access. Given the substantial investment to support families during school closure, research is needed to understand its implementation practices, how it is received by families and its perceived impacts. This study aimed to gain an in‐depth understanding of HAF delivery by exploring stakeholder views and perceptions and its influence on families. A qualitative exploration was undertaken at four LAs across Yorkshire, where 40 stakeholders, comprising of 20 HAF leads and 20 parents, participated in semistructured interviews and focus groups, respectively. Data were collected between August and September 2021. Reflexive thematic analysis highlighted all stakeholders’ perceptions on HAF delivery, content and influence on families. These are categorised as follows: (1) operational structure, (2) activities: content and approach, (3) food quality and knowledge, (4) supportive environment, and (5) relationships and social connections. Our study revealed that some LAs offered a universal provision, going beyond FSM eligibility and creating an equal platform for all children. Stakeholders highlighted positive influences of the programme, particularly for disadvantaged families, in terms of food provision and the rich range of activities, which created learning environments, as well as providing childcare and opportunity for parents/children to interact. Universal access to HAF is needed to boost engagement and minimise perceived stigma.