Back

Scoring policies with stakeholders to support healthy, sustainable food (kai) in Aotearoa New Zealand

Kidd, B.; Enright, H.; McKerchar, C.; Cleghorn, C. L.

2026-01-21 nutrition
10.64898/2026.01.16.26344283 medRxiv
Show abstract

Engaging with stakeholders/contributors is vital to achieve a comprehensive approach to policymaking about the food (kai) system. The food system in Aotearoa New Zealand (Aotearoa NZ) is associated with high environmental impacts and inequitably distributed health consequences by ethnicity and socio-economic status. We engaged with contributors from government agencies, industry, academics, community, rural and urban M[a]ori communities to develop policy actions to support New Zealanders to eat healthy sustainable food. This paper outlines methods used to score contributor identified policies with follow-up focus groups and interviews where the highest scored policies were discussed, to understand contributor perspectives on the scope, implementation, barriers, and possible unintended consequences of these policies. Semi-structured interviews (12) and focus groups (6) were conducted. The top five scored policies among all contributors were: healthy food and drink policies in schools and kura (M[a]ori-language immersion schools); supporting m[a]ra kai (food garden) and community gardens; garden to table programmes in schools and kura; education about sustainable and healthy food; and increasing incomes. The top five policies for M[a]ori were: healthy food and drink policies in schools and kura; garden to table programmes in schools and kura; remove GST from core foods; increase incomes and make local food cheaper by supporting local growers. Considerations for policy implementation involved implementing multiple policies at once, the importance of evaluation, finding existing examples of policies, strong collaboration for long-term outcomes, and centring policies through a M[a]ori framework.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.