Features of the built environment are increasingly being recognised as potentially important determinants of obesity. This has come about, in part, because of advances in methodological tools such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS). GIS has made the procurement of data related to the built environment easier and given researchers the flexibility to create a new generation of environmental exposure measures such as the travel time to the nearest supermarket or calculations of the amount of neighbourhood greenspace. Given the rapid advances in the availability of GIS data and the relative ease of use of GIS software, a glossary on the use of GIS to assess the built environment is timely. As a case study, we draw on aspects the food and physical activity environments as they might apply to obesity, to define key GIS terms related to data collection, concepts, and the measurement of environmental features.

Findings from the current review add depth and scope to quantitative literature and can guide ongoing theory, interventions and policy development in food environment research. There is a need to investigate contextual influences within food environments as well as individual and household socio-economic characteristics that contribute to the differing use of and views towards local food environments. Greater emphasis on how individual and environmental factors interact in the food environment field will be key to developing stronger understanding of how environments can support and promote healthier food choices.

SummaryRetail food environments are increasingly considered influential in determining dietary behaviours and health outcomes. We reviewed the available evidence on associations between community (type, availability and accessibility of food outlets) and consumer (product availability, prices, promotions and nutritional quality within stores) food environments and dietary outcomes in order to develop an evidence-based framework for monitoring the availability of healthy and unhealthy foods and non-alcoholic beverages in retail food environments. Current evidence is suggestive of an association between community and consumer food environments and dietary outcomes; however, substantial heterogeneity in study designs, methods and measurement tools makes it difficult to draw firm conclusions. The use of standardized tools to monitor local food environments within and across countries may help to validate this relationship. We propose a stepwise framework to monitor and benchmark community and consumer retail food environments that can be used to assess density of healthy and unhealthy food outlets; measure proximity of healthy and unhealthy food outlets to homes/ schools; evaluate availability of healthy and unhealthy foods in-store; compare food environments over time and between regions and countries; evaluate compliance with local policies, guidelines or voluntary codes of practice; and determine the impact of changes to retail food environments on health outcomes, such as obesity.

Previous school obesity-prevention reviews have included multi-component interventions. Here, we aimed to review the evidence for the effect of isolated food environment interventions on both eating behaviours (including food purchasing) and/or body weight. Five electronic databases were searched (last updated 30 November 2013). Of the 1,002 unique papers identified, 55 reported on school food environment changes, based on a review of titles and abstracts. Thirty-seven further papers were excluded, for not meeting the inclusion criteria. The final selection consisted of 18 papers (14 United States, 4 United Kingdom). Two studies had a body mass index (BMI) outcome, 14 assessed purchasing or eating behaviours and two studies assessed both weight and behaviour. Seventeen of 18 papers reported a positive outcome on either BMI (or change in BMI) or the healthfulness of food sold or consumed. Two studies were rated as strong quality and 11 as weak. Only three studies included a control group. A school environment supportive of healthy eating is essential to combat heavy marketing of unhealthy food. Modification of the school food environment (including high-level policy changes at state or national level) can have a positive impact on eating behaviours. A need exists, however, for further high-quality studies.

Background/Objectives: Living in socioeconomically disadvantaged neighbourhoods is associated with increased risk of a poor diet; however, the mechanisms underlying associations are not well understood. This study investigated whether selected healthy and unhealthy dietary behaviours are patterned by neighbourhood-socioeconomic disadvantage, and if so, whether features of the neighbourhood-nutrition environment explain these associations. Subjects/Methods: A survey was completed by 1399 women from 45 neighbourhoods of varying levels of socioeconomic disadvantage in Melbourne, Australia. Survey data on fruit, vegetable and fast-food consumption were linked with data on food store locations (supermarket, greengrocer and fast-food store density and proximity) and within-store factors (in-store data on price and availability for supermarkets and greengrocers) obtained through objective audits. Multilevel regression analyses were used to examine associations of neighbourhood disadvantage with fruit, vegetable and fast-food consumption, and to test whether nutrition environment factors mediated these associations. Results: After controlling for individual-level demographic and socioeconomic factors, neighbourhood disadvantage was associated with less vegetable consumption and more fast-food consumption, but not with fruit consumption. Some nutrition environmental factors were associated with both neighbourhood disadvantage and with diet. Nutrition environmental features did not mediate neighbourhood-disadvantage variations in vegetable or fast-food consumption. Conclusions: Although we found poorer diets among women living in disadvantaged neighbourhoods in Melbourne, the differences were not attributable to less supportive nutrition environments in these neighbourhoods.

BackgroundPrevious studies have provided mixed evidence with regards to associations between food store access and dietary outcomes. This study examines the most commonly applied measures of locational access to assess whether associations between supermarket access and fruit and vegetable consumption are affected by the choice of access measure and scale.MethodSupermarket location data from Glasgow, UK (n = 119), and fruit and vegetable intake data from the ‘Health and Well-Being’ Survey (n = 1041) were used to compare various measures of locational access. These exposure variables included proximity estimates (with different points-of-origin used to vary levels of aggregation) and density measures using three approaches (Euclidean and road network buffers and Kernel density estimation) at distances ranging from 0.4 km to 5 km. Further analysis was conducted to assess the impact of using smaller buffer sizes for individuals who did not own a car. Associations between these multiple access measures and fruit and vegetable consumption were estimated using linear regression models.ResultsLevels of spatial aggregation did not impact on the proximity estimates. Counts of supermarkets within Euclidean buffers were associated with fruit and vegetable consumption at 1 km, 2 km and 3 km, and for our road network buffers at 2 km, 3 km, and 4 km. Kernel density estimates provided the strongest associations and were significant at a distance of 2 km, 3 km, 4 km and 5 km. Presence of a supermarket within 0.4 km of road network distance from where people lived was positively associated with fruit consumption amongst those without a car (coef. 0.657; s.e. 0.247; p0.008).ConclusionsThe associations between locational access to supermarkets and individual-level dietary behaviour are sensitive to the method by which the food environment variable is captured. Care needs to be taken to ensure robust and conceptually appropriate measures of access are used and these should be grounded in a clear a priori reasoning.

BackgroundCross-country differences in dietary behaviours and obesity rates have been previously reported. Consumption of energy-dense snack foods and soft drinks are implicated as contributing to weight gain, however little is known about how the availability of these items within supermarkets varies internationally. This study assessed variations in the display of snack foods and soft drinks within a sample of supermarkets across eight countries.MethodsWithin-store audits were used to evaluate and compare the availability of potato chips (crisps), chocolate, confectionery and soft drinks. Displays measured included shelf length and the proportion of checkouts and end-of-aisle displays containing these products. Audits were conducted in a convenience sample of 170 supermarkets across eight developed nations (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden, United Kingdom (UK), and United States of America (US)).ResultsThe mean total aisle length of snack foods (adjusted for store size) was greatest in supermarkets from the UK (56.4 m) and lowest in New Zealand (21.7 m). When assessed by individual item, the greatest aisle length devoted to chips, chocolate and confectionery was found in UK supermarkets while the greatest aisle length dedicated to soft drinks was in Australian supermarkets. Only stores from the Netherlands (41%) had less than 70% of checkouts featuring displays of snack foods or soft drinks.ConclusionWhilst between-country variations were observed, overall results indicate high levels of snack food and soft drinks displays within supermarkets across the eight countries. Exposure to snack foods is largely unavoidable within supermarkets, increasing the likelihood of purchases and particularly those made impulsively.

BackgroundSupermarkets play a major role in influencing the food purchasing behaviours of most households. Snack food exposures within these stores may contribute to higher levels of consumption and ultimately to increasing levels of obesity, particularly within socioeconomically disadvantaged neighbourhoods. We aimed to examine the availability of snack food displays at checkouts, end-of-aisle displays and island displays in major supermarket chains in the least and most socioeconomically disadvantaged neighbourhoods of Melbourne.MethodsWithin-store audits of 35 Melbourne supermarkets. Supermarkets were sampled from the least and most socioeconomically disadvantaged suburbs within 30 km of the Melbourne CBD. We measured the availability of crisps, chocolate, confectionery, and soft drinks (diet and regular) at the checkouts, in end-of-aisle displays, and in island bin displays.ResultsSnack food displays were most prominent at checkouts with only five stores not having snack foods at 100% of their checkouts. Snack foods were also present at a number of end-of-aisle displays (at both the front (median 38%) and back (median 33%) of store), and in island bin displays (median number of island displays: 7; median total circumference of island displays: 19.4 metres). Chocolate items were the most common snack food item on display. There was no difference in the availability of these snack food displays by neighbourhood disadvantage.ConclusionsAs a result of the high availability of snack food displays, exposure to snack foods is almost unavoidable in Melbourne supermarkets, regardless of levels of neighbourhood socioeconomic disadvantage. Results of this study could promote awareness of the prominence of unhealthy food items in chain-brand supermarkets outlets.