Food choices play a dual role in shaping both human health and environmental sustainability. At the individual level, diets that lack diversity, fall short of essential nutrients, contain excessive amounts of foods high in sugar, unhealthy fats, and salt, or fail to meet food safety standards, and can have serious negative consequences for health (Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, 2025; World Health Organization, n.d.). At the same time, the ways food is produced and consumed affect the environment, —contributing to land degradation, freshwater depletion, climate change, and biodiversity loss (Crippa et al., 2021; Tilman et al., 2017). These environmental impacts, in turn, influence which foods are available, accessible, and affordable, and can alter the nutrient density of crops (Beach et al., 2019; Smith & Myers, 2018), reinforcing this close connection between our food choices and the environment.

Yet most methods used to evaluate which foods to support in nutrition programmes focus on only one dimension at a time. By assessing nutritional value, food safety, or sustainability in isolation, such approaches are unable to capture how these factors interact and shape real-world outcomes. How can we ensure that diets are nutritious, safe, and sustainable to support both people and the planet?

At GAIN, programme teams often navigate this complexity when deciding which foods or value chains to promote and prioritize, especially in resource-constrained settings. While guidance exists on what constitutes nutritious, safe, and environmentally- friendly foods, it significantly varies by context, making it difficult to apply consistently across programmes. How can organizations maximize nutritional outcomes for target beneficiaries, while being mindful of environmental and food safety trade-offs? And on what grounds should decisions be made when it comes to supporting specific foods? Which compromises between different dimensions are acceptable and which aren’t? 

Operationalizing Food Screening: The Five-Step Approach  

GAIN’s newly launched screening process offers a one-stop solution for selecting food-based options across projects by operationalizing theoretical guidelines around what constitutes a nutritious, safe, and sustainable food. It provides a standardized framework for assessing the multi-dimensional implications of a wide range of interventions, including macro- and micronutrient supplements, food groups and single foods (comprising fortified products), meals and recipes, and whole diets. The screening process enables programmes to take a more consistent, transparent, and evidence-based approach, supporting choices that promote positive nutrition outcomes while minimizing food safety risks and impacts on the environment.

Take fish, for example. While fish is highly nutritious, careful consideration is needed to avoid overfishing and destructive practices like bottom trawling, as well as to reduce the risk of chemical and biological hazards.

Rather than reinventing the wheel for each project, the screening process sets up a pre-established protocol for evaluating food-based solutions across these three key dimensions: nutritional quality, food safety risks, and environmental concerns. This integrated approach also takes into account availability, acceptability, and affordability, helping ensure that food-based options are feasible, culturally appropriate, and relevant for the target population within the local geographic context. The five key steps of the screening include:  

1. Identifying the health or dietary challenge.
2. Mapping potential food-based solutions.
3. Screening solutions for core risks and benefits for nutrition, food safety, and the environment.
4. Assessing feasibility and relevance in context, considering availability, affordability, and acceptability.
5. Refining the identified solution to optimize food safety, social desirability, and environmental co-benefits.

The process leverages a wide range of fit-for-purpose, practical tools to provide tailored guidance, including a workbook for analyzing the nutritional quality of (ultra-)processed foods, an affordability calculator, and a traffic-light heat map that classifies food groups into ‘go,’ ‘caution,’ or ‘no-go’ categories for promotion in programmes. Whether designing a project proposal, implementing or monitoring a programme, or supporting a small- or medium-sized enterprise, the screening process offers a structured way to inform better food-related decisions.

Ultimately, healthy and sustainable food choices start by asking the right questions and looking beyond nutrition alone, toward benefiting individuals, communities, and the environment alike.  

References:

• Beach, R. H., Sulser, T. B., Crimmins, A., Cenacchi, N., Cole, J., Fukagawa, N. K., Mason-D’Croz, D., Myers, S., Sarofim, M. C., Smith, M., & Ziska, L. H. (2019). Combining the effects of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide on protein, iron, and zinc availability and projected climate change on global diets: A modelling study. The Lancet Planetary Health, 3(7). https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(19)30094-4
• Crippa, M., Solazzo, E., Guizzardi, D., Monforti-Ferrario, F., Tubiello, F. N., & Leip, A. (2021). Food Systems are responsible for a third of global anthropogenic GHG emissions. Nature Food, 2(3), 198–209. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00225-9
• Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. (2025). Global burden of disease 2023: Findings from the GBD 2023 study. Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation.
• Smith, M. R., & Myers, S. S. (2018). Impact of anthropogenic CO2 emissions on Global Human Nutrition. Nature Climate Change, 8(9), 834–839. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0253-3
• Tilman, D., Clark, M., Williams, D. R., Kimmel, K., Polasky, S., & Packer, C. (2017). Future threats to biodiversity and pathways to their prevention. Nature, 546(7656), 73–81. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature22900
• World Health Organization. (n.d.). Estimating the burden of foodborne diseases. World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/activities/estimating-the-burden-of-foodborne-diseases