Summary
Children are exposed to food environments that make nutrient-poor, energy-dense food cheap, readily available and heavily marketed; all conditions with potential negative impacts on diet and health. While the need for programmes and policies that improve the status of food environments is clear, greater public support is needed for governments to act. The purpose of this qualitative collective case study was to examine if community engagement in the Local Environment Action on Food (LEAF) project, a community-based food environment intervention in Alberta, Canada, could build public support and create action to promote healthy food environments. Semi-structured interviews with a purposeful sample of 26 stakeholders from 7 communities explored LEAF’s impact and stakeholder experiences creating change. Data collection and analysis were iterative, following Charmaz’s constant comparative analysis strategy. Participants reported environmental and community impacts from LEAF. Notably, LEAF created a context-specific tool, a Mini Nutrition Report Card, that communities used to promote and support food environment action. Further, analysis outlined perceived barriers and facilitators to creating community-level food environment action, including level of engagement in LEAF, perceived controllability, community priorities, policy enforcement and resources. Findings from this study suggest that community-based interventions, such as LEAF, can help build community capacity and reduce existing barriers to community-level food environment action. Thus, they can provide an effective method to build public awareness, demand and action for healthier food environments.
Background
Citizen science bears potential to build a comprehensive view of global food environments and create a broader discussion about how to improve them. Despite its potential, citizen science has not been fully utilised in food environment research. Thus, we sought to explore stakeholders’ experiences of the Local Environment Action on Food (LEAF) project, a community-based intervention that employs a citizen science approach to monitoring food environments.
Methods
We used a qualitative collective case study design to explore citizen science through the LEAF process in seven communities in Alberta, Canada. Data generating strategies included semi-structured interviews with citizen scientists (n = 26), document review of communities’ Mini Nutrition Report Cards (n = 7), and researcher observation. Data were analyzed in a multi-phase process, using Charmaz’s constant comparison analysis strategy.
Results
Analysis revealed two main themes: relationship building and process factors. Communities used three interconnected strategies, engaging the right people, treading lightly, and reaching a consensus, to navigate the vital but challenging relationship building process. Process factors, which were influences on the LEAF process and relationship building, included the local context, flexibility in the LEAF process, and turnover among LEAF community groups.
Conclusion
Citizen science through the LEAF project supported the creation and application of food environment evidence: it enabled residents to collect and interpret local food environment data, develop realistic recommendations for change, and provided them with an evidence-based advocacy tool to support the implementation of these recommendations. We recommend a web application that enables independent community food environment assessments. Such a tool could stimulate and sustain citizen involvement in food environment efforts, helping to build the necessary evidence base and promote the creation of healthy food environments.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.