Children’s rights (to food and nutrition)

Before reviewing the evidence, it is important to highlight that children have a right to food and adequate nutrition. Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights⁽⁸⁾ affirms that, ‘everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family’, while goal 2 of the Sustainable Development Goals commits signatories to achieving ‘zero hunger’, improving food security and nutrition for all, especially for vulnerable groups such as children⁽⁹⁾. In addition, many nations including Ireland are also a signatory to Article 24 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child⁽¹⁰⁾, which promotes the right of every child to the highest attainable standard of health, and the European Child Guarantee, which pledges that all children in need will have access to one healthy meal each school day⁽¹¹⁾. Child rights and equity underpin the recently ratified European Child and Adolescent health and well-being strategy⁽¹²⁾ and have been central to Irish strategies and frameworks on children and young people^(13–17). A human rights approach relies on governments to take steps to ensure children and young people consume. While Ireland has made advances in the provision of food in schools and additional supports for children in poverty, Ireland does not have a national food and nutrition policy nor a policy on child and adolescent nutrition. However, a child poverty and well-being programme office was established in the department of the Taoiseach in 2023 to enhance cross-government work on child poverty and child well-being. Priority areas include income supports, early learning and childcare and reducing education costs, the latter of which includes the provision of school meals and programmes to address holiday hunger. Key to delivering on children’s rights to safe and nutritious food and to sustainable and resilient food systems is ensuring that children’s rights are not overshadowed by the politics of food^{(Reference Woodhouse and Woodhouse18)}.

Dietary habits of children and adolescents in Ireland and beyond

The dietary habits and nutritional status of Irish children and adolescents have been thoroughly examined, with recent findings highlighting both progress and ongoing challenges. In the Republic of Ireland, nationally representative surveys of dietary habits include the National Children’s Food Survey II (NCFS II) (2017–2018), which assessed the dietary patterns of children aged 5–12 years, and the National Teens’ Food Survey II (NTFS II) (2019–2020), which provided detailed insights into the eating habits of adolescents aged 13–18 years^{(Reference McCarthy, Kehoe and Walton19–Reference Daly, O’Sullivan and Walton21)}. The most recent children’s survey reported that the consumption of fruits and vegetables remained similar to the previous survey (2002–03), but there was an increase in discrete (whole) fruit consumption (from 59 to 90 grams) and a decrease in fruit juice intake (from 86 to 38 grams)^{(Reference Kehoe, Buffini and McNulty20)}. Other positive findings included a significant decrease in the intake of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), while no-added-sugar varieties remained consistent^{(Reference Kehoe, Buffini and McNulty20)}. According to the most recent national teens survey (NTFS II), while all participants consumed fruits and vegetables, the average intake was below the recommended three servings per day^{(Reference Daly, O’Sullivan and Walton21,22)} . Positive changes included a decrease in the intake of SSBs and fruit juice from previous surveys and an increase in whole fruits⁽²²⁾. While macronutrient intakes among Irish school-aged children and adolescents were found to be generally adequate, there are concerns regarding higher intakes of saturated fats, free sugars and salt, alongside lower intakes of dietary fibre than recommended^{(Reference Kehoe, Buffini and McNulty20,22)} . In addition, a large proportion of children and teenagers had inadequate intakes of nutrients including vitamin D, Ca and folate^{(Reference Kehoe, Buffini and McNulty20)}. In summary, the overall dietary quality of children and teenagers in Ireland is unfavourable; intakes of key food groups are not in line with food-based dietary guidelines for these age groups and more efforts are needed to reduce the availability and intake of foods high in fat, sugar and salt, which are associated with chronic diseases and poor health outcomes^{(Reference Rusu23,Reference Moore Heslin and McNulty24)} .

Unsurprisingly, highly processed or ultra-processed foods (UPFs) are prevalent in child and adolescent diets in Ireland^{(Reference Moore Heslin and McNulty24)}. Indeed, across the lifespan there has been a shift in diets based on minimally processed foods to diets high in UPFs^{(Reference Monteiro, Louzada and Steele-Martinez25,Reference Wang, Martínez Steele and Du26)} and adolescents are the highest consumers on average of UPFs compared to other age groups^{(Reference Moore Heslin and McNulty24)}. There is strong evidence that diet quality deteriorates when diets are predominately made up of UPFs^{(Reference Elizabeth, Machado and Zinöcker27)}. This change in dietary pattern from minimally processed to ultra-processed is considered a key driver of the increasing global burden of multiple diet-related chronic diseases^{(Reference Monteiro, Louzada and Steele-Martinez25)}. There are a number of plausible mechanisms through which UPFs diets negatively affect health including that they displace minimally processed foods, home-cooked or freshly made food, reduce intake of phytochemicals and promote overeating related to the high energy density, palatability and texture of these foods^{(Reference Monteiro, Louzada and Steele-Martinez25)}. While processed foods such as cereals and dairy products can play an important role in meeting micronutrient recommendations for children and adolescents, public health policies and actions need to promote and protect the growing, harvesting, preparation and consumption of minimally processed and freshly made foods. A set of policies to address upstream food system drives of UPF production, marketing and consumption have been proposed including mandatory regulations that aim to address and restrict the marketing, availability and affordability of UPFs^{(Reference Scrinis, Popkin and Corvalan28)}.

Dietary patterns across Europe and beyond

Dietary patterns in Ireland mirror those in neighbouring countries and across Europe. Suboptimal dietary patterns have been widely documented among children in the UK^{(Reference Bates, Collins and Jones29–Reference Haney, Parnham and Chang31)}. Less than 15 % of school-age children meet the UK government’s five-a-day target for fruit and vegetables^{(Reference Bates, Collins and Jones29)} and the average daily intake of sugar is over double the recommended level^{(Reference Bates, Collins and Jones29)} with mean fibre intake below recommended levels in all age groups^{(Reference Haney, Parnham and Chang31)}.

Across Europe and North America, the Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) study, a WHO collaborative study, provides a useful snapshot of dietary habits in children and adolescents. All countries (n = 51) in the HBSC network agree and implement a standardised protocol, employ the same questions and collect data from children aged 11, 13 and 15 years in school at similar timepoints. The HBSC study also takes a social, rather than biomedical research perspective, which involves studying the social and environmental determinants of child and adolescent health and health behaviour. This unique focus on key settings and social relationships, and the socio-economic environment in which young people grow up, enables exploration of the patterns of health and health behaviour found in this population group^{(Reference Samdal, Kelly and Craig32)}.

With data from 279,117 young people, aged 11, 13 and 15 years from 44 countries, the most recent HBSC dataset (collected in 2020/2021) illustrate similar dietary patterns to those described above while also highlighting inequalities by sex, social class and geography^{(Reference Gudelj Rakić, Hamrik and Dzielska33)}. Boys were more likely to eat breakfast daily than girls, and this difference increased with age. Breakfast consumption declined with age for both boys and girls and adolescents from more affluent families were more likely to eat breakfast daily. Less than half of adolescents ate fruit daily, and daily fruit intake declined with age. A third of adolescents consumed sweets daily, with rates higher among girls, while SSB consumption was higher among boys across each age group. Differences by socio-economic status were also evident, with those from more affluent backgrounds reporting higher daily fruit and vegetable consumption and lower SSB consumption than those from less affluent backgrounds^{(Reference Gudelj Rakić, Hamrik and Dzielska33)}.

The WHO’s European Childhood Obesity Surveillance Initiative (COSI) provides further evidence of dietary inequalities with a focus on children aged 6–9 years across Europe. The most recent survey (2022–2024) found that unhealthy dietary behaviours were relatively common with less than half (46%) of 6–9-year-old children eating fresh fruit daily and less than a third (32%) consuming vegetables at least daily⁽³⁴⁾. As in previous COSI findings children of parents with a higher level of education were more likely to consume fruit and vegetables every day than children of parents with a low to medium level of education in most countries^(34–36). Frequent consumption (>3 d/week) of savoury snacks and of SSB was more common among children of parents with a low to medium level of education than those with a high level of education in almost all countries^(34–36). A socio-economic pattern was not observed for sweet consumption⁽³⁴⁾. Collectively, these findings highlight the persistent disparities in dietary behaviours linked to socio-economic status.

Evidence demonstrates that poor dietary habits persist from childhood into adolescence and into adulthood, impacting both short and long-term health^{(Reference Craigie, Lake and Kelly37,Reference Dubois, Bédard and Goulet38)} . There is clear evidence that commercial actors, usually large transnational companies producing artificially cheap, poor quality but attractive food play a dominate role in the relationship between diet and health^{(Reference Gilmore, Fabbri and Baum39)}. Actions to try and curb their influence include fiscal policies such as taxes on SSBs and foods high in sugar, salt and fat and restrictions on marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages, especially those targeting children^{(40,Reference Kelly, Da Rosa and Remmele41)} . Notably, implementation of fiscal policies and mandatory regulation of marketing to children is lacking across Europe impeding efforts to improve food environments for all^{(Reference Boyland, McGale and Maden42,Reference Thow, Rippin and Mulcahy43)} . The WHO have called on countries to significantly strengthen taxes on sugary drinks because weak tax systems are currently in place allowing harmful products to remain cheap and thus more attractive to young people⁽⁴⁴⁾.

Overweight and obesity

Obesity in children and adolescents is a global health issue with increasing prevalence in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) as well as a high prevalence in many high-income countries^{(Reference Lobstein and Brinsden45)}. In 2022, over 390 million children and adolescents aged 5–19 years were overweight including 160 million living with obesity^{(Reference Phelps, Singleton and Zhou46)}. This represents a significant increase from 1990, when only 8% of this age group were living with overweight and obesity^{(Reference Phelps, Singleton and Zhou46)}.

In European countries 1 in 4 children (25%) aged 7–9 years are in overweight or obese categories⁽³⁴⁾, and 22% of adolescents are similarly affected (33). Trend data also show that no country or region involved in the HBSC study or the COSI study (except among girls in Malta) has shown a significant decrease in the proportion of overweight and obese adolescents and children, respectively^{(Reference Gudelj Rakić, Hamrik and Dzielska33,34)} . The HBSC and COSI data also demonstrate disparities in child and adolescent overweight and obesity by sex, regions and socio-economic characteristics^{(Reference Kelly, Da Rosa and Remmele41)}. Inequalities in obesity both within and between countries suggests a complex influence of structural and intermediary health determinants on the development and persistence of childhood and adolescent obesity.

Data from Ireland illustrate that 16.4% of children (5–12 yr olds) and 24% of adolescents are living with overweight and obesity^{(Reference Moore Heslin, O’Donnell and Kehoe47)}. In 2020 8% of adolescents were living with obesity compared to 3% in 2006^{(Reference Moore Heslin, O’Donnell and Kehoe47)}. Socio-economic disparities in obesity are evident in the Irish arm of the COSI study with the prevalence of overweight and obesity significantly greater in children attending schools classified as disadvantaged (DEIS) than in other schools. This pattern is consistent across COSI survey rounds while the most recent data also illustrate the increasing prevalence rate in disadvantaged schools as age increases^{(Reference Kilduff, Slattery and Lee48)}. This socio-economic gradient of overweight/obesity has also been observed in the NCFS II^{(Reference O’Donnell, Buffini and Kehoe49)} and in NTFS II where 41% of adolescents from the lowest affluent social class were affected by overweight/obesity^{(Reference Moore Heslin, O’Donnell and Kehoe47)}.

Notably, sex disparities in overweight and obesity differ in Ireland than other countries where the prevalence of obesity is higher in boys than girls in higher income countries^{(36,Reference Lobstein and Brinsden45)} . A higher prevalence of overweight and obesity in girls than boys in Ireland has been consistent across COSI survey rounds and in other research on children in Ireland^{(Reference Bel-Serrat, Heinen and Murrin50,Reference Layte and McCrory51)} . Further work to understand these differences is needed especially as sex-responsive interventions are recommended^{(Reference Kelly, Da Rosa and Remmele41)}. Indeed, there is growing recognition that social and environmental contexts, as well as race/ethnicity and sex, are determining factors influencing obesity risk^{(Reference Capoccia, Milani and Colangeli52)}.

The cause of obesity is complex and multifactorial, and a bio-socioecological framework recognises that biology, socio-economic and environmental factors interact together to create conditions that promote weight gain^{(Reference Jebeile, Kelly and O’Malley53)}. Indeed the rise in obesogenic environments coincides with the rise in obesity across the lifespan^{(Reference Lobstein and Brinsden45)}. Changes to the food environment, whether that is at school, community and/or broader sociopolitical levels (e.g. government policies, food industry, food marketing, transport systems) have been so significant and powerful that the food environment has been described as having the ability to ‘exploit people’s biological, psychological, social and economic vulnerabilities^{(Reference Roberto, Swinburn and Hawkes54)}’.

Food environments

Multiple factors influence our food choice, but evidence shows that the food environment often dictates what we eat. The food environment encompasses any opportunity to obtain food and includes physical, sociocultural, economic, policy and digital influences at both micro- and macro-levels^{(Reference Swinburn, Vandevijvere and Kraak55–Reference Townshend and Lake57)}. The food environment or foodscape can include both physical (markets, stores, supermarkets in towns and cities) and virtual (online, grocery and takeaway foods) food offerings. It has changed significantly over the last 50 years, indeed the Covid-19 pandemic demonstrated how adaptable and dynamic the foodscape is through its response to consumer demand for online and takeaway options^{(Reference Lake, Moore and Cotton56,Reference Wilkins, Radley and Morris58,Reference Townshend, Brown and Bradford59)} .

Food environments have been described and conceptualised in different ways^{(Reference Granheim, Løvhaug and Terragni60)}. A global framework considers food environments in two domains and is particularly useful when considering children and adolescent’s agency in the food environment^{(Reference Turner, Aggarwal and Walls61)}. The external domain is not directly controlled by individuals; that is, food availability, price, food type or vendor type, marketing and regulation. The personal domain includes factors more directly related to individual/adolescent agency and includes accessibility, affordability, convenience and desirability. The interaction between these external and personal factors shapes food consumption and health outcomes and may affect disadvantaged groups disproportionately. Importantly, both the built and food environment is postulated to have a stronger effect among those of low socio-economic status^{(Reference Feng, Glass and Curriero62,Reference Burgoine, Forouhi and Griffin63)} . This ‘deprivation amplification’ means families of lower socio-economic status must tolerate the default options in their communities, whereas families with more resources can seek out better food choices^{(Reference Feng, Glass and Curriero62)}. In addition, living in a family of high social class may also act as a buffer to the exposure to unhealthy food environments around schools^{(Reference Kelly, Callaghan and Molcho64)}. Indeed, this suggests that socio-economic inequalities, driven by unequal access to the resources needed for high-quality diets and physical activity, necessitate stronger welfare and employment policies^{(Reference Adams65,Reference Vaughan, Spyreli and McKinley66)} .

Associations between obesogenic food environments and unhealthy dietary patterns and outcomes such as overweight and obesity are clear^{(Reference Wilkins, Radley and Morris58,Reference Granheim, Løvhaug and Terragni60,Reference Atanasova, Kusuma and Pineda67,Reference Shaw, Barrett and Shand68)} . Food retailers also cluster around schools^{(Reference Trapp, Pulker and Hurworth69,Reference Caruso, McEachern and Minaker70)} and especially around disadvantaged schools and areas^{(Reference Trapp, Pulker and Hurworth69,Reference Smets and Vandevijvere71,Reference Da-Costa-Peres, Gardone and De-Lima-Costa72)} . Overall, the school food retail environment is associated with unhealthy food purchasing and consumption behaviours among adolescents^{(Reference Shaw, Barrett and Shand68,Reference Da-Costa-Peres, Gardone and De-Lima-Costa72–Reference Jia, Luo and Li74)} . However, the data linking school food retail environments with obesity among children and adolescents is mixed^{(Reference Smets and Vandevijvere71,Reference Da-Costa-Peres, Gardone and De-Lima-Costa72,Reference Jia, Luo and Li74)} .

While the research is sometimes conflicting with respect to associations with overweight and obesity, the complexity in measuring the food environment and the outcome variables can help to explain why some of the data are not as convincing as expected^{(Reference Wilkins, Radley and Morris58,Reference Da-Costa-Peres, Gardone and De-Lima-Costa72,Reference Roda, Charreire and Feuillet75,Reference Cobb, Appel and Franco76)} . Measurement of the distribution and density of food outlets are commonly applied, but the methods used differ greatly across studies and reporting of such methods is poor^{(Reference Wilkins, Radley and Morris58)}. Indeed, it may be more appropriate to explore the mix of food outlets within local areas or around schools and to also incorporate the accessibility of these stores to the consumer, including children and adolescents. There is a documented need to use standardised and evidence-based methods^{(Reference Granheim, Løvhaug and Terragni60)} and this is important from a methodologically viewpoint but also to confidently explore and examine the impact of policies and actions to improve food environments. Monitoring retail food environments and actions to improve food environments globally is the remit of the International Network for Food and Obesity/non-communicable diseases Research, Monitoring and Action Support (INFORMAS)^{(Reference Swinburn, Vandevijvere and Kraak55)}.

Up until ten years ago, there was limited peer-reviewed work on retail food environments including school food environments in Ireland^{(Reference Callaghan, Molcho and Gabhainn77)}. Since then, three studies have been published with a focus on the external food environment around schools using subjective and objective measurements^{(Reference Kelly, Callaghan and Molcho64,Reference Callaghan, Molcho and Gabhainn77,Reference Kelly, Callaghan and Gabhainn78)} . Subjective measures can include individual’s perceptions and experiences of their food environments while objective measurements can include counts of food outlets using technology such as geographic information systems^{(Reference Kelly, Callaghan and Molcho64,Reference Callaghan, Molcho and Gabhainn77,Reference Kelly, Callaghan and Gabhainn78)} . In summary, using data from a nationally representative sample of post-primary schools in Ireland, substantial concentrations of ‘local shops’ and fast-food outlets within 1 km of post-primary schools were reported (an average of 6.71 and 4.03 respectively). Local shops are smaller convenience stores and they sell a range of items from fruit and vegetables, confectionary and some have a hot food ‘deli’ with affordable ‘special offers/meal deals’ available, which are typically energy-dense, nutrient poor food items. For more than two thirds of the schools fast-food outlets represented greater than 10% of the food outlets within a 1 km radius of the school. Students within these schools were less likely to eat fruit and vegetables daily than students in schools with a healthier external food environment^{(Reference Kelly, Callaghan and Molcho64)}.

As noted earlier, objective measures of the food environment have dominated the literature even though subjective measures of the food environment may be more strongly related to dietary behaviours and may incorporate dimensions of food access not captured in available objective measures^{(Reference Caspi, Kawachi and Subramanian79)}. Using participatory mapping techniques, photographs and group discussions, adolescents’ perception of their external school food environment in Irish towns and cities were explored^{(Reference Kelly, Daniels, Burke and HDK80)}. Cost, convenience and choice were key factors influencing preference for food outlets and certain foods. Post-primary school students described how hard it was to find good quality, healthy and affordable food, for example, ‘Its more unhealthy than healthy^{(Reference Kelly, Daniels, Burke and HDK80)}’. These findings map onto the framework proposed by Turner and colleagues^{(Reference Turner, Aggarwal and Walls61)}, illustrating that adolescent agency is constrained by the current offerings in stores located close to schools. More research is needed to understand how adolescents interact and use their food environments and to better inform how policy measures and in-store interventions could support healthier options and choices^{(Reference Shaw, Barrett and Shand68)}.

Collectively, the data support the need to consider how policy measures and interventions can improve what is available and affordable to schoolchildren in Ireland. Approximately ten years ago, a fast-food exclusion ban around schools was debated by the Irish government, and there is a precedent in neighbouring countries, such as England^{(Reference McKinnon, Pineo and Chang81)}. With a lack of action nationally in Ireland, some local authorities/councils set out objectives and local policies to restrict the opening of fast-food outlets close to schools^{(Reference Martin82)}. These initiatives align health with planning for the built environment. Evidence of the challenges, limitations and barriers to such policy initiatives is growing^{(Reference Lake, Moore and Cotton56,Reference Brown, Kirkman and Albani83–Reference Keeble, Burgoine and White85)} and little is known yet about their impact, if any on reducing health inequalities. However, recent work in the UK demonstrated that exclusion zone policies reduced the number of planning applications and increased the number of rejections of plans for takeaways around schools^{(Reference Rahilly, Williams and Chang86)}. Takeaway management zone policies may have the potential to curb the proliferation of new takeaways near schools and subsequently impact population health. While many in opposition to planning rules will argue that the strength of the evidence to support such a change is not available or that economy is more important than health^{(Reference Keeble, Burgoine and White85,Reference Lake, O’Malley and Moore87)} , there are times, and this is one, where action, including planning laws and actions to support healthy food environments close to schools, should proceed without the need for perfect evidence.

School food in Ireland

Schools play a fundamental role in promoting health and well-being and the Health Promoting Schools (HPS) framework from the WHO is a holistic, whole-school approach designed to strengthen a school’s capacity as a healthy setting for living, learning and working^{(Reference Langford, Bonell and Jones88)}. Linked to HPS is school meal provision, school food environments and other measures to educate and enable children to source, cook, choose and consume healthy diets. In fact, school meals are a common feature of national social safety net programmes and typically provide students with breakfast and/or lunch with a focus on improving diet quality, particularly among low-income populations. Evidence for the provision of school meals include benefits for cognitive development, well-being, school attendance, reduced obesity risk, and protecting children from food insecurity and poverty^{(Reference O’Mahony, Kerins and Barrett89,Reference Cohen, Hecht and McLoughlin90)} . The benefit for children, particularly those who are food-insecure and/or near eligible for free meals, is sufficient to advocate for the roll out of Universal Free School Meal (UFSM) programmes, especially those that include lunch^{(Reference Cohen, Hecht and McLoughlin90,Reference Cohen, Verguet and Giyose91)} . UFSM programmes provide meals at no cost to all children who wish to participate and because universal programmes improve meal participation rates, and due to economies of scale, these policies are also cost-effective^{(Reference Cohen, Verguet and Giyose91)}. Moreover, some studies demonstrate a long-term return on investment; students with access to UFSM had on average a 3% higher lifetime income than students who attended schools without this policy^{(Reference Lundborg, Rooth and Alex-Petersen92)}.

School meals have been a part of the Irish school system since the early 1900s^{(Reference Carney93)}. There have been different schemes, both statutory and non-statutory, and different funding models over time, which were generally targeted towards children and families experiencing disadvantage. School food provision was often met with dissatisfaction by various stakeholders, with students identifying social and environmental factors to be important intervention functions to improve dietary choice, and teachers advocating for further education^{(Reference Browne, Barron and Staines94)}.

The current School Meals Programme in Ireland aims to provide ‘regular, nutritious food to children who are unable, by reason of lack of good quality food, to take full advantage of the education provided for them⁽⁹⁵⁾’. In 2018 nutrition standards for school meals and hot school meals were published and apply to all food funded under the DSP School Meals Scheme⁽⁹⁵⁾ and apply to food provided in breakfast clubs, school lunches, snacks and after-school clubs. In 2019, a Hot School Meals Programme was piloted in 30 schools, and in 2025, it has rolled out to all primary schools across the country. In 2022 a multi-stakeholder evaluation of the School Meals Programme found positive experiences of the programme, improvements in attendance and benefits to families, although measurement of the impact on food insecurity was not captured⁽⁹⁶⁾. Experiences depended on location of schools, food suppliers and there were concerns about food quality, choice, portion size, waste and administrative load. Given the design of the study, objective measures were not used and indeed longitudinal studies that incorporate measures of attendance, diet and education attainment have been recommended⁽⁹⁶⁾. The evaluation did not focus on the implementation and adherence to nutrition standards specifically.

Evidence suggests that implementation and evaluation of voluntary or mandatory nutrition standards in schools is complex and challenging^{(Reference O’Mahony, Kerins and Barrett89,Reference Barnes, McCrabb and Stacey97)} and Ireland is not immune to these challenges. Concern from parent groups and NGOs about school meal standards in Ireland has resulted in considerable media attention and numerous Government debates on school food⁽⁹⁸⁾. A recent government report noted a significant operational burden on schools, who apply each year for funding and must procure a supplier who in turn needs to meet the standards⁽⁹⁹⁾. Schools do not receive additional funding for administration, and the choice or lack of supplier varies greatly across the country, with rural schools disproportionally affected. Reports also highlight issues with the quality of the food, its nutritional composition, taste and food waste which does not support the circular economy nor support local producers and businesses⁽¹⁰⁰⁾. The Government have, since September 2025, seconded a dietitian to review the menus and recipes of suppliers relative to the nutritional standards and the DSP have engaged with suppliers, schools and parents to obtain a deeper understanding of the challenges being faced. The DSP are also engaging with schools that have not signed up for the Hot School Meals programme to assess the challenges experienced and how these can be managed⁽¹⁰¹⁾. Numerous research opportunities exist with the ongoing review of school meals including the assessment of the barriers and facilitators to implementation of nutrition standards in schools, from all stakeholder perspectives^{(Reference O’Mahony, Kerins and Barrett89)}. This work would also inform the roll out of hot school meals to all post-primary schools which was in the programme for Government⁽¹⁰²⁾.

Holiday hunger

While the evaluation of the school meals programme suggests a positive impact on families, the School Meals Programme does not extend to out-of-term or holiday periods, leaving many children in Ireland at risk of hunger during these times. Food insecurity during school holidays, often described as ‘holiday hunger’, is a growing concern in Ireland and internationally^{(Reference Byrne, Moody and Gray103–Reference Stretesky, Defeyter and Long105)}. Evidence from the UK suggests that holiday hunger leads to substantial emotional and financial strain on families, including social isolation among children and increased stress on parents^{(Reference Stretesky, Defeyter and Long105)}. Further studies in the UK demonstrate that financial and food constraints during holiday periods negatively impact children’s social inclusion and development, particularly due to food costs^{(Reference Defeyter, Graham and Prince106)}. Children themselves describe going hungry particularly, but not exclusively, during school holidays and how schools and after-school venues are important sources of food for them. Children’s narratives reveal food insecurity as a multi-dimensional experience, that includes hunger, poor quality food and social exclusion^{(Reference Byrne, Moody and Gray103)}.

Programmes that provide meals during school holidays can help address holiday hunger and the associated risks. Evaluations of UK-based holiday clubs/programmes show that these interventions improve children’s dietary intake, reduce stress on parents and foster multiple educational and social benefits^{(Reference Defeyter, Graham and Prince106–Reference Holley and Mason109)}. In addition, such programmes can also support social interactions and help combat stigma associated with food poverty^{(Reference Garthwaite110)}. The benefits of delivering such programmes through local, community-based settings in a manner that is contextually sensitive has also been reported^{(Reference Defeyter, Graham and Prince106,Reference Biernat107,Reference Evans111)} .

In Ireland, food provision out-of-term time is being viewed as a necessary broader, cross-government response to food insecurity⁽¹¹²⁾, in order to deliver on the National Policy Framework for Children and Young People and support children and young people to achieve the five National Outcomes⁽¹⁵⁾. In Summer 2025, a Summer Meals Pilot Programme was delivered through local and established youth services which provided a prime opportunity to test approaches and models for out-of-term food provision for children that align with national goals, and global commitments, towards child well-being. It also provided an opportunity to address challenges identified in other contexts, such as food preparation facilities, food type, serving styles, staff, children ratios and peer pressure^{(Reference Bayes, Holley and Haycraft108,Reference Holley and Mason109)} . In parallel, an assessment of nutrition and quality standards, the context in which the food is being served/offered and the environment in which children can choose and eat different foods with their peers would also be useful. An evaluation report, expected in 2026, will provide evidence of the impact of holiday food provision on summer food insecurity and will hopefully also provide details on whether and how meals were delivered and how the programme was experienced by all stakeholders.

Food insecurity

Food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical, economic and social access to sufficient, safe, nutritious food to maintain a healthy and active life⁽¹¹³⁾. This definition highlights the multiple dimensions involved and that it is broader than material resources only. Indeed, there are multiple interacting determinants including physical (storage/cooking and access), sociocultural (education and social networks), economic (income and employment) and political (welfare payments and housing policies) conditions that impact food security^{(Reference Castetbon, Biesalki, Drewnowski, Dwyer, Strain, Weber and Eggersdorfer114)}. Food insecurity has increased worldwide in recent years due to global events such as the COVID-19 pandemic, geopolitical conflicts, the climate crisis and globalisation of markets⁽¹¹⁵⁾.

Many groups are at risk of food insecurity, including children and adolescents, although adolescents have had less research attention than most groups^{(Reference Capitán-Moyano, Cañellas-Iniesta and Arias-Fernández116–Reference Leung, Odoms-Young and Essel118)}. The consequences of food insecurity for children and adolescents include poor dietary habits, nutritional deficiencies, poor academic performance and negative impacts on social health and well-being^{(Reference Dush117,Reference Moradi, Mirzababaei and Mohammadi119–Reference Shankar, Chung and Frank121)} . Given increased autonomy during adolescence and the social value of eating with friends, it is unsurprising that food insecurity impacts children and youth in unique ways beyond the effects of poverty alone^{(Reference Dush117,Reference Leung, Odoms-Young and Essel118,Reference Cook, Black and Chilton122)} . The high risk for cumulative stress among adolescents warrants greater attention from researchers and practitioners alike^{(Reference Dush117,Reference Leung, Odoms-Young and Essel118)} .

Parents, especially mothers try to protect their children from food insecurity but research illustrates that children know there is food insecurity even when parents try to buffer it^{(Reference Fram, Frongillo and Jones123,Reference Bernal, Frongillo and Herrera124)} . Children and adolescent’s experiences of food insecurity may be conceptually distinct and different from those of adults^{(Reference Bernal, Frongillo and Herrera124)} and thus research with children on their experiences of food insecurity rather than parent’s reported experiences are key going forward. Going a step further is the need to involve children and adolescents in the design of studies on food insecurity.

Research with families on low incomes living in Ireland illustrate that upstream policy measures strongly mediate access to and availability of healthful nutritious food^{(Reference Vaughan, Spyreli and McKinley66)}. Obvious policy measures include school meals and welfare benefits, but the need for policies that contribute to a health-promoting environment, such as a well-functioning transportation system, family-friendly labour policies and the regulation of the commercial environment, including digital food marketing would further support families with less resources^{(Reference Vaughan, Spyreli and McKinley66)}.

Youth participation

Children have a fundamental right to be involved in matters affecting their lives⁽¹⁰⁾. Ireland is a world leader in participation practices, being the first country in Europe to have a dedicated participation strategy for children and young people; the National Strategy for Children and Young People’s Participation in Decision-Making for the years 2015–2020^(16,17) . The strategy examined the challenges that exist in children and young people’s lives and focused on enabling their participation in decision-making. A successor document, Participation of Children and Young People in Decision-Making: Action Plan 2024–2028, was published in 2024⁽¹⁷⁾.

There is also recognition of the capacities and rights of youth to influence research that will shape policies or programmes to improve their health. There is an array of terms to describe youth participation (e.g. youth voice, youth engagement) and of approaches used to engage youth (e.g. peer education, youth boards, youth-led participatory action research)^{(Reference Ozer, Abraczinskas and Duarte125)}. Models and frameworks have been developed to better understand youth participation but there is still a need to improve reporting and documentation of associated outcomes^{(Reference Ozer, Abraczinskas and Duarte125–Reference Sanchez, Thorburn and Rea127)}. The Lancet commission on adolescent health and well-being proposed a conceptual framework of the essential elements in meaningful youth engagement while also recognising the barriers^{(Reference Patton, Sawyer and Santelli128)}. The second Lancet commission on adolescent health and well-being^{(Reference Baird, Choonara and Azzopardi5)} appointed six youth commissioners to advance the recommendations made in the first Lancet Commission and established a WHO Youth Council that includes youth representatives from health-related and non-health-related organisations and movements^{(Reference Baird, Choonara and Azzopardi5)}.

Given that children provide an ‘insider’ view of their lives, their active engagement in research that is relevant to them is essential. The HBSC network have developed a range of research methodologies designed to facilitate active participation of young people in the research process. Adolescents have been involved in data generation, devising research themes and questions, data analysis, data interpretation and dissemination, and advocacy initiatives developed on foot of research findings^{(Reference Kelly, Daniels, Burke and HDK80,Reference Kelly, Branquinho and Dzielska129)} . To ensure the HBSC study is shaped by those it sets out to affect, children and adolescents under 18 years of age, and not young adults, are involved.

Children and adolescents’ active involvement in nutrition research and in food systems is evolving. Fleming and colleagues work^{(Reference Fleming, Sharma and Brunacci130)} with adolescents living across the globe demonstrates that they not only want to see change but also want to be a part of the change, including implementing effective regulation of food industries and promoting and enabling individual and community behaviour change. Adolescents want to be meaningfully engaged, have agency and a voice to co-create solutions in food systems transformations. Researchers and policy-makers alike should work with children and adolescents to collectively build a resilient and sustainable food system.