Summary: Non‐communicable diseases (NCDs) dominate disease burdens globally and poor nutrition increasingly contributes to this global burden. Comprehensive monitoring of food environments, and evaluation of the impact of public and private sector policies on food environments is needed to strengthen accountability systems to reduce NCDs. The International Network for Food and Obesity/NCDs Research, Monitoring and Action Support (INFORMAS) is a global network of public‐interest organizations and researchers that aims to monitor, benchmark and support public and private sector actions to create healthy food environments and reduce obesity, NCDs and their related inequalities. The INFORMAS framework includes two ‘process’ modules, that monitor the policies and actions of the public and private sectors, seven ‘impact’ modules that monitor the key characteristics of food environments and three ‘outcome’ modules that monitor dietary quality, risk factors and NCD morbidity and mortality. Monitoring frameworks and indicators have been developed for 10 modules to provide consistency, but allowing for stepwise approaches (‘minimal’, ‘expanded’, ‘optimal’) to data collection and analysis. INFORMAS data will enable benchmarking of food environments between countries, and monitoring of progress over time within countries. Through monitoring and benchmarking, INFORMAS will strengthen the accountability systems needed to help reduce the burden of obesity, NCDs and their related inequalities.

Background: Several studies have assessed the effects of food and nonalcoholic beverage (hereafter collectively referred to as food) advertising on food consumption, but the results of these studies have been mixed. This lack of clarity may be impeding policy action.

Exposure to the marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages is a widely acknowledged risk factor for the development of childhood obesity and noncommunicable diseases. Food marketing involves the use of numerous persuasive techniques to influence children’s food attitudes, preferences and consumption. This systematic review provides a comprehensive contemporary account of the impact of these marketing techniques on children aged 0–18 years and critically evaluates the methodologies used. Five electronic academic databases were searched using key terms for primary studies (both quantitative and qualitative) published up to September 2018; 71 eligible articles were identified. Significant detrimental effects of food marketing, including enhanced attitudes, preferences and increased consumption of marketed foods were documented for a wide range of marketing techniques, particularly those used in television/movies and product packaging. Together, these studies contribute strong evidence to support the restriction of food marketing to children. However, the review also signposted distinct gaps: Firstly, there is a lack of use of qualitative and physiological methodologies. Secondly, contemporary and sophisticated marketing techniques used in new media warrant increased research attention. Finally, more research is needed to evaluate the longer-term effects of food marketing on children’s weight.

Objectives. We compared television food advertising to children in several countries. Methods. We undertook a collaboration among 13 research groups in Australia, Asia, Western Europe, and North and South America. Each group recorded programming for 2 weekdays and 2 weekend days between 6:00 and 22:00, for the 3 channels most watched by children, between October 2007 and March 2008. We classified food advertisements as core (nutrient dense, low in energy), noncore (high in undesirable nutrients or energy, as defined by dietary standards), or miscellaneous. We also categorized thematic content (promotional characters and premiums). Results. Food advertisements composed 11% to 29% of advertisements. Noncore foods were featured in 53% to 87% of food advertisements, and the rate of noncore food advertising was higher during children's peak viewing times. Most food advertisements containing persuasive marketing were for noncore products. Conclusions. Across all sampled countries, children were exposed to high volumes of television advertising for unhealthy foods, featuring child-oriented persuasive techniques. Because of the proven connections between food advertising, preferences, and consumption, our findings lend support to calls for regulation of food advertising during children's peak viewing times.

Summary: Government action is essential to increase the healthiness of food environments and reduce obesity, diet‐related non‐communicable diseases (NCDs), and their related inequalities. This paper proposes a monitoring framework to assess government policies and actions for creating healthy food environments. Recommendations from relevant authoritative organizations and expert advisory groups for reducing obesity and NCDs were examined, and pertinent components were incorporated into a comprehensive framework for monitoring government policies and actions. A Government Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food‐EPI) was developed, which comprises a ‘policy’ component with seven domains on specific aspects of food environments, and an ‘infrastructure support’ component with seven domains to strengthen systems to prevent obesity and NCDs. These were revised through a week‐long consultation process with international experts. Examples of good practice statements are proposed within each domain, and these will evolve into benchmarks established by governments at the forefront of creating and implementing food policies for good health. A rating process is proposed to assess a government's level of policy implementation towards good practice. The Food‐EPI will be pre‐tested and piloted in countries of varying size and income levels. The benchmarking of government policy implementation has the potential to catalyse greater action to reduce obesity and NCDs.

The placement of nutrition information on the front of food packages has been proposed as a method of providing simplified and visible nutrition information. This study aimed to determine the most acceptable and effective front-of-pack food labelling system for Australian consumers. Consumers' preferences and ability to compare the healthiness of mock food products were assessed for different front-of-pack labelling systems. Four systems were tested, including two variations of the Percentage Daily Intake system (Monochrome %DI and Colour-Coded %DI), which displays the proportion of daily nutrient contribution that a serve of food provides; and two variations of the Traffic Light (TL) system (Traffic Light and Traffic Light + Overall Rating), which uses colour-coding to indicate nutrient levels. Intercept surveys with 790 consumers were conducted, where each participant was exposed to a single labelling system for performance testing. Participants indicated strong support for the inclusion of nutrient information on total fat, saturated fat, sugar and sodium on the front of packages, and a consistent labelling format across all products. Using the TL system, participants were five times more likely to identify healthier foods compared with the Monochrome %DI system [odds ratio (OR) = 5.18; p < 0.001], and three times more likely compared with the Colour-Coded %DI system (OR = 3.01; p < 0.05). Consumers supported the introduction of consistent front-of-pack food labelling. The TL system was the most effective in assisting consumers to identify healthier foods. Mandatory TL labelling regulations are recommended to assist consumers in making healthy food choices.