Poor diet and excess weight are now leading causes of preventable illness in the UK. They drive cardiovascular disease, diabetes and cancer, shorten healthy life expectancy by up to nine years and cost the NHS around £6.5bn each year in direct costs.
We know empirically that obesity is a systemic problem, not a matter of personal failing. More than 80 per cent of the variation between communities is explained by environmental and socioeconomic factors rather than individual behaviour. Where healthy produce is unaffordable or inaccessible, and foods high in fat, sugar and salt (HFSS) are marketed aggressively, poor health follows. Policy must act on these structural determinants of health rather than relying on appeals to individual responsibility.
Past obesity strategies fell short because they targeted behaviour change rather than the structural and commercial drivers of diet. Many lacked delivery plans, timelines or evaluation frameworks, leading to fragmented progress and limited long-term impact. Now, stronger structures are emerging to embed food policy as a health priority and support the shift towards prevention.
The food environment is shaped by the economic, political and cultural context in which people make choices. It is dominated by HFSS foods, which are widely available and heavily marketed.
Britain’s food system is among the most advanced in the world, with efficient supply chains, high safety standards and technological innovation. Yet that system is not serving us well, with farmers facing fragile margins and too many families struggling to access nutritious food.
The government’s new Good Food Cycle sets out ten outcomes to create a healthier, more sustainable and resilient food system. It builds on the Dimbleby National Food Strategy, mapping well against its vision but omitting some of its stronger fiscal and legislative levers. It reflects the wider shift towards prevention, recognising that a healthy food system underpins a healthy population.
The Soft Drinks Industry Levy has reduced sugar content in soft drinks by more than 35 per cent since its introduction. Standards for public-sector food procurement have improved, setting clearer expectations for healthier and more sustainable food in schools, hospitals and other institutions. Compliance varies, but the direction of travel is positive. The Good Food Cycle embeds these principles across government, linking nutrition, environmental sustainability and local economic resilience. It commits to developing metrics and implementation plans for each outcome, ensuring that decisions are evidence-based and measurable.
The next challenge is execution. If obesity is driven by structural and commercial determinants, then only structural and commercial levers will change it. Fiscal incentives, advertising regulation and local empowerment must now work together to rebalance the food environment.
To meet the ambitions of the Good Food Cycle, we should extend the levy model to high-sugar and high-salt foods; enforce the 9pm watershed for HFSS advertising and close brand-mark loopholes; provide stable funding for local food partnerships so councils can act on local needs; and build evaluation frameworks into all food and health interventions to ensure measurable outcomes.
Delivering the Good Food Cycle will require alignment between government, business and communities. To shift a system that drives ill health, policy must be systemic too. Transparent metrics, accountability and consistent incentives must drive progress.
Access to good food is one of the most powerful tools we have to reduce health inequality. Continued alignment across departments and sustained focus on delivery will ensure we can embed food policy as a national health priority.
This article first appeared in Spotlight on Heathcare: Designing a healthier future
Content from our partners
Related
