Process evaluation of two environmental nutrition programmes and an educational nutrition programme conducted at supermarkets and worksite cafeterias in the Netherlands

Abstract

Introduction This article describes the process evaluation of two environmental programmes and an educational nutrition programme, implemented at supermarkets and worksite cafeterias. Studies conducted earlier, indicated that the programmes had no effect on consumers’ eating behaviour. Consequently, the more specific purpose of the present study was to identify explanations for the ineffectiveness of the programmes and to formulate recommendations for future programmes. Materials and methods The environmental programmes included labelling of healthy products and increasing the range of healthy foods on offer. The education programme consisted of several elements, such as brochures and a self‐help guide. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with 21 managers of supermarkets and worksite cafeterias where the programmes were implemented. Results Although materials were not always entirely compatible with the different supermarkets and worksite cafeterias, the degree of implementation was satisfactory. According to the managers, the programmes were not striking enough, the labelling would have been more effective if it had discriminated between different brands of a product, and the number of new products was too small compared with the total range of foods on offer. Conclusions The findings suggest that programmes should be promoted intensively. Furthermore, the relevant manufacturers and wholesalers supplying worksite cafeterias should be encouraged to increase their range of suitable low‐fat products. Finally, the feasibility and possible effects of brand‐specific labelling should be investigated further.

What is the effectiveness of obesity related interventions at retail grocery stores and supermarkets? —a systematic review

“…The study sample sizes range from 37 supermarket customers [50] to more than 200,000 beneficiaries of a large intervention [23]. Most studies were conducted in the U.S.A. Four were conducted in Canada [51–54], one in the UK [55], one in Japan [56], one in France [57], one in South Africa [23], one in Norway [58], one in Australia [27] three in New Zealand [59–61], four in the Netherlands [26, 62–64] and one in the Republic of Marshal Islands [65]. …”

“…Apart from few studies [55, 59, 60, 62, 63, 74], store interventions have been found to be effective in one or more of their main outcomes. In some studies, overall energy intake did not significantly change [50], although positive and significant change in targeted food was achieved.…”

Improving the diet of employees at blue-collar worksites: results from the ‘Food at Work’ intervention study

“…This emphasizes the importance of developing strategies to improve the nutritional content in all meal types, making the healthier choices both more appealing and accessible for customers with different food choice preferences. It is, however, well recognized that improving the nutritional quality of food served by food services can be challenging, and efforts to change the food selection and content may be met with resistance by both canteen staff and customers (33)(34)(35) . In order to support the ongoing progress towards healthier menu meals, the provision of an assessment tool directed at worksite canteens would be valuable for conducting self-evaluation and setting targets for work (36) .…”

What determines consumer attention to nutrition labels?

“…Although a majority of consumers have a reasonable knowledge of nutrition and can use nutrition labels when prompted, only a minority seem to look at the nutrition labels when shopping (Black & Rayner, 1992;Grunert, 2008;Steenhuis, van Assema, Reubsaet, & Kok, 2004). It thus seems that (lack of) attention may be an important bottleneck in the context of nutrition information on the product packaging (Van Trijp, 2009).…”