Food diversity and accessibility enabled urban environments for sustainable food consumption: a case study of Brisbane, Australia

Sustainable food consumption is critical to achieving multiple UN Sustainable Development Goals by 2030, but progress has been slow or regressive. The UN urges countries outside Europe and Central Asia, including Australia, to develop policies that shift consumption patterns (SDG 12.1) and integrate climate measures (SDG 13.2). Simultaneously, global inequities in consumption and carbon footprints are widening, while rapid urbanisation concentrates food demand in cities. Merely increasing production to eradicate hunger is unlikely to be sufficient; inequitable consumption is linked to wealth and income disparities, and much consumption and waste occur in advanced economies. A two-pronged approach tackling hunger in low-income countries and overconsumption in high-income countries could reduce global food demand by 9% with better environmental outcomes. However, most policies and research remain focused on obesity and healthy diet promotion, offering limited understanding of sustainable food consumption in urban areas beyond unhealthy overconsumption and overlooking socio-environmental urban factors that shape consumption. This paper uses Brisbane, Australia, as a case study to conceptualise a framework of sustainable food consumption and analyse public perceptions via 500 online surveys. It highlights a double-helix of overconsumption of unhealthy foods and underconsumption of healthy foods, arguing consumption is a conditional demand shaped by socio-spatial urban characteristics. The study contributes a structured framework and evidence-based policy insights to foster environments that enable access to affordable, nutritious food, diversify retail options, and reduce carbon footprints, supporting SDG12 and SDG13.

The paper conceptualises sustainable food consumption as a conditional demand influenced by socio-spatial urban factors, drawing on extensive literature. Beyond individual responsibility, consumption outcomes affect urban health, social, economic, and environmental domains within a “new food equation” shaped by price volatility, insecurity, climate change, and urbanisation. The framework emphasises four interlinked factors: (1) Affordability—rising prices and shocks (floods, fires, pandemics) erode the ability to purchase healthy foods, risking “food poverty.” (2) Access to healthy food—low-density, car-dependent urban forms and weak transit impede access, creating food deserts and trade-offs that favour unhealthy options; an abundance of unhealthy outlets can create “food swamps,” disproportionately affecting low-income and marginalised groups. (3) Retail options—market concentration (e.g., supermarkets holding ~70% share in Australia) reduces diversity, squeezes small retailers, restricts consumer choice, and can elevate prices. (4) Carbon footprint—food system activities across production to waste account for about 30% of global GHGs; urban sprawl increases food miles and waste. The framework’s enabling layer proposes that accessibility- and diversity-conducive urban environments—via densification, mixed-use, walkability, diversified retail, and waste infrastructure—can collectively mitigate affordability, access, retail concentration, and carbon challenges, fostering sustainable consumption.

Case study: Brisbane, Australia, a rapidly growing, highly urbanised, low-density city representative of many developed urban contexts. Despite national self-sufficiency in food production, significant proportions of Australians report food insecurity. Data design: An online survey investigated experiences and perceptions related to the framework’s four factors (affordability, access to healthy food, retail options, carbon footprint), and patterns of over- and underconsumption. Most items used 5-point Likert scales; some were yes/no. Topics included availability and affordability of fresh/healthy and culturally relevant foods; household food spending; discretionary (non-essential) food purchasing preferences, frequency, and reasons; transport mode and driving time for food shopping; awareness and experiences with food charities; attitudes toward availability, accessibility, and affordability of healthy and culturally relevant foods; perceptions and desires for diversified retail; and awareness of food waste/loss and support for waste infrastructure and improved commercial practices. Estimated completion time: 10–15 minutes. Data collection: 564 responses were collected (Sep–Nov 2021). After four screening/filtering steps to ensure data quality and representation, 500 eligible responses remained. Simple random sampling targeting 50% population proportion achieved 95% confidence (alpha 0.05) with power 0.8. Data analysis: Descriptive statistics (Microsoft Excel, SPSS) profiled respondents (age, gender, culture, religion, employment, income, household structure) and summarised response distributions. Inferential analysis used Pearson chi-square tests of independence on recoded categorical variables (Likert collapsed to 3-point categories where needed) to test associations (assumption of expected counts ≥5 satisfied).

- Double-helix pattern: Co-existence of overconsumption of unhealthy foods and underconsumption of healthy foods in a market-driven, low-density urban context. - Affordability vs availability: 90% agreed fresh/healthy foods are adequately available, but only 48.6% found them affordable. For culturally relevant foods, 72% perceived adequate supply vs 42.3% affordability. 42% of households spent more than one-third of expenditure on food; 6.1% spent more than half, indicating risk of food poverty. - Discretionary food purchasing: 58.2% preferred to spend more on fresh/healthy essentials, yet >30% reported frequent discretionary purchases (more than twice a week/all the time). Stated reasons: convenience (28%), accessibility (19%), availability (19%), taste/delicious (16%), promotions/affordability (11%). Health awareness was high (81.4% aware of harms from overconsuming non-essential foods). Significant association between preference to spend on fresh/healthy foods and perceiving harms of overconsumption, χ²(4, N=500)=28.017, p<0.001; no significant association between frequency of discretionary purchases and that perception, χ²(4, N=500)=6.106, p=0.191. - Access and mobility: Driving was the dominant shopping mode (66.6%). Among drivers, only 38% spent <5 minutes driving; 63% drove >5 minutes, reflecting sprawl and car dependence. 51% were unaware of food charity options when in hardship; some reported awkwardness or physical difficulty accessing charities. Strong support (90.6%) that fresh/healthy foods should be available, accessible, and affordable to everyone; those with prior food charity experience were more likely to agree (94.8% vs 86.5%), χ²(2, N=500)=10.175, p=0.006. For culturally relevant/diverse foods, 59% agreed more should be available/accessible/affordable; respondents with cultural backgrounds were more likely to agree (77.4% vs 64.9%), χ²(2, N=500)=7.838, p=0.020. - Retail concentration and diversity: 78% predominantly shopped at supermarkets. Household income did not significantly relate to shopping at supermarkets, χ²(2, N=500)=5.266, p=0.072. Desire for more supermarkets: 63.4%; desire for more small-scale retail/markets/outlets: 68.8%. 60.4% believed greater retail diversity would encourage buying more fresh/healthy food; no significant link between current shopping mode and perceiving the benefits of retail diversity, χ²(2, N=500)=0.615, p=0.735. - Carbon footprint awareness and action: 71% agreed food waste and loss significantly contribute to global GHG emissions; respondents with cultural backgrounds were more likely to agree (78.1% vs 68.7%), χ²(2, N=500)=6.014, p=0.049; no significant association with household income, χ²(4, N=500)=8.273, p=0.082. 69% supported establishing neighbourhood food waste disposal infrastructure; 77% agreed food-related companies should improve practices (reduce waste, eco-packaging, better transport, apply technology).

Findings indicate that food consumption in advanced, low-density urban settings is a conditional demand shaped by socio-spatial characteristics rather than solely individual choice. The identified double-helix—overconsumption of unhealthy foods alongside underconsumption of healthy foods—arises from intertwined challenges: reduced affordability of healthy and culturally relevant foods, car-dependent and dispersed urban forms that impede access to healthy options and support services, concentrated retail structures that limit diversity and competition, and substantial food-system-related carbon emissions. Despite adequate supply, affordability gaps and spatial barriers drive residents toward convenient, promoted discretionary foods, even as health awareness remains high. Supermarket dominance and the relative paucity of small-scale, fresh food outlets constrain healthy choices, while urban sprawl increases travel time, food miles, and waste. Public support for making healthy and culturally diverse foods universally available, for diversified retail, and for waste infrastructure reveals readiness to change if urban provisioning improves. Thus, policy levers that densify and mix land uses, enhance walkability and transit, support small and medium food retailers, and build waste-reduction systems can realign provisioning with demand, enabling healthier, lower-carbon consumption and advancing SDG12 and SDG13.

The study demonstrates that sustainable food consumption is a conditional demand shaped by urban socio-spatial factors. In Brisbane, four interrelated challenges—declining affordability, constrained access to healthy food and support services, limited retail diversity with supermarket dominance, and increasing food-related carbon emissions—collectively produce a double-helix of overconsumption of unhealthy foods and underconsumption of healthy foods. Creating urban environments conducive to food accessibility and diversity—through densification, mixed-use, improved walkability and transit, support for diversified retail, and food waste infrastructure—can enhance access to affordable, nutritious foods, reduce waste and emissions, and facilitate healthier choices. Such provisioning-oriented policies, aligned with public demand for healthier and culturally diverse options, can reduce global food demand by an estimated 9% and accelerate progress toward SDG12 and SDG13. Future work could evaluate policy instruments that enable small and medium retailers, assess impacts of compact city strategies on food access and emissions, and test interventions that translate high public awareness into sustained behaviour change.