Do We Choose Our Food, or Does the Food Environment Choose for Us?

Minh Anh Hoang

Trade Union University, Hanoi, Vietnam

*Contact: anhhm@dhcd.edu.vn

© Wix

For decades, discussions about healthy eating have often focused on personal responsibility. If people eat too much fast food, the argument goes, they simply need more willpower, better information, or healthier habits.

But what if the problem is not only about individual choices?

A growing body of research suggests that our food decisions are profoundly shaped by the environments surrounding us. Food environments include everything from the restaurants on our streets and the products in local stores to advertising, pricing, urban design, and public policies (Boswell & Kober, 2016; Sonnino et al., 2019; Swinburn et al., 2019; Treutwein & Langen, 2021). Today, many of these environments are saturated with inexpensive, heavily promoted, and readily available unhealthy foods.

This creates a paradox. While individuals are encouraged to make healthier choices, they are often navigating landscapes specifically designed to make less healthy options convenient, attractive, and affordable.

Recognizing this challenge, cities around the world have begun exploring ways to shape healthier food environments. Yet local governments frequently encounter resistance when proposing measures such as restricting new fast-food outlets or regulating food marketing. Critics often view such interventions as government overreach, arguing that food choices should remain entirely a matter of personal freedom and market competition (Chambers & Traill, 2011).

A recent study published in Food Policy examined why some municipalities in the Netherlands successfully placed food environment policies on their political agendas while others did not. Researchers analyzed ten municipalities participating in the Dutch "City Deal: Healthy and Sustainable Food Environment" network and found that success depended less on scientific evidence alone and more on how food issues were framed (ter Ellen et al, 2026).

Municipalities that successfully adopted food strategies rarely discussed food solely as a health issue. Instead, they connected it to multiple community concerns simultaneously: reducing obesity, addressing health inequalities, supporting local businesses, improving neighborhood livability, and promoting environmental sustainability. In contrast, municipalities that viewed food policy as a politically sensitive topic often struggled to generate support.

Interestingly, proposals to limit the spread of fast-food outlets gained traction when they were presented not simply as restrictions on consumer behavior but as efforts to create healthier, more attractive, and economically vibrant communities. Food policy became easier to support when it aligned with values that different groups already cared about.

This finding reveals something important about how societies solve complex problems. People rarely evaluate policies through a single lens. Health, economic opportunity, personal freedom, environmental stewardship, and community well-being often coexist in public decision-making. Rather than competing, these values can sometimes reinforce one another (Vuong, 2025; Khuc & Nguyen, 2026).

The Dutch experience suggests that transforming food environments may require more than nutritional evidence. It may depend on building bridges between diverse priorities and finding shared goals across different segments of society (Anh, 2026; Nguyen, 2026).

Food is never just about calories. It is also about culture, livelihoods, neighborhoods, identities, and the kind of future communities hope to create. When policymakers recognize these interconnected dimensions, healthier food environments become not only a public health objective but also a collective community project.

References

Anh, T. T. M. (2026). Chương trình máy tính Bayesvl: Từ thuật toán thống kê đến nhịp cầu ngoại giao khoa học. https://vjst.vn/chuong-trinh-may-tinh-bayesvl-tu-thuat-toan-thong-ke-den-nhip-cau-ngoai-giao-khoa-hoc-86721.html

Barnhill, A., & Bonotti, M. (2023). Healthy eating policy and public reason in a complex world: normative and empirical issues. Food Ethics, 8(2), 22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41055-023-00131-9

Boswell, R., & Kober, H. (2016). Food cue reactivity and craving predict eating and weight gain: a meta‐analytic review. Obesity Review, 17(2), 159-177. https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.12354 

Chambers, S. A., & Traill, W. B. (2011). What the UK public believes causes obesity, and what they want to do about it: a cross-sectional study.  Journal of Public Health Policy, 32(4), 430-444. https://doi.org/10.1057/jphp.2011.45

Khuc, V. Q., & Nguyen, M. H. (2026). Cultural Additivity Theory. Available at SSRN 6767760. https://ssrn.com/abstract=6767760 

Nguyen, M.-H. (2026). Ayn Rand and Kingfisher on zero-carbon bombs and a sustainable future. Visions for Sustainability, 25(13474), 1-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.13135/2384-8677/13474  

Sonnino, R., Tegoni, C. L. S., & De Cunto, A. (2019). The challenge of systemic food change: Insights from cities. Cities, 85, 110-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2018.08.008

Swinburn, B. A., et al. (2019). The global syndemic of obesity, undernutrition, and climate change: the lancet commission report. Lancet, 393(10173), 791-846. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32822-8

ter Ellen, F., et al. (2026). Agenda-setting in local food environment policy: A comparative Multiple Streams Analysis of the City Deal network in the Netherlands. Food Policy, 141, 103097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2026.103097

Treutwein, R., & Langen, N. (2021). Setting the agenda for food waste prevention–a perspective on local government policymaking. Journal of Cleaner Production, 286,125337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125337

Vuong, Q. H. (2025). Wild Wise Weird. AISDL. https://books.google.com/books?id=C5dDEQAAQBAJ