Interest-holders’ views of implementing a school lunch program in primary schools within Australia Open Access

Government regulatory departments and health authorities acknowledge that a positive school food environment and the availability of nourishing food in primary schools are essential in promoting healthier eating habits in children for improved health and well-being later in life (Department of Health and Aged Care, 2019; FAO, 2025; WHO, 2017). Whilst spending several hours at school each day, children consume meals and snacks equating to approximately one-third of their daily nutritional intake (Manson et al., 2021; Zarnowiecki et al., 2018). Data from the 2024 Global Survey of School Meal Programs indicates that 125 countries provide some form of large-scale school meal program (i.e. breakfast, lunch etc.). Latin America and the Caribbean, closely followed by Europe, Central Asia and North America, have the highest feeding coverage globally (Global Child Nutrition Foundation, 2024). Yet Australian primary school children (aged 4–12 years) are not provided with any form of universal in-school meals.

Approximately 90% of Australian primary school-aged children bring meals and snacks from home (Zarnowiecki et al., 2018), whilst other children receive meals from food relief programs or purchase food from the school canteen (Manson et al., 2024). Although most children bring packed lunches to school, previous studies have identified a disproportionate presence of foods that are energy-dense and of low nutritional value in primary school children's lunchboxes (Sanigorski et al., 2005; Brennan et al., 2010; Manson et al., 2021). A recent study found that the lunchboxes of primary school-aged children consisted mostly of grains (34%), fruit (25%) and snacks (22%). Snack-type foods were present in approximately 68% of lunchboxes and more commonly included potato chips (crisps) and muesli/fruit bars. Other less common lunchbox items included vegetables (8%), dairy (7%) and sources of protein more commonly in the form of processed meats (2%) (Lalchandani et al., 2025). These findings align with national data indicating that Australian primary school-aged children consume approximately 40% of their daily energy from nutrient-poor, energy-dense foods (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2018) and fewer than 6% consume enough vegetables and fruit (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2022).

Recent research conducted by members of the research team demonstrates that parents have concerns about the food intake of their children while at school, including children not getting enough time to eat (Burton et al., 2022). Furthermore, parents are supportive of school lunch programs because they feel that preparing healthy lunchboxes can be costly and time-consuming (Nanayakkara et al., 2024b). Parents spend A$15-$50 per week per child on school lunches, and many are concerned that healthy foods are more expensive and take more time to prepare than other foods (Nanayakkara et al., 2024b). Currently, there is no universal lunch program within Australia; however, many schools have implemented breakfast programs to address food insecurity. Thirty-eight percent of households with children experiencing food insecurity seek food relief through school breakfast programs Foodbank Australia and Ipsos Public Affairs (2024). However, these programs are offered outside of regular school hours, not available at every school (Foodbank Australia and Ipsos Public Affairs, 2024) and limit the scope to one meal break. Therefore, a universal school-provided lunch program for all primary school students would ensure fair and equitable access to essential nourishment during the school day, which can positively impact academic achievement (Bleiweiss-Sande et al., 2019; Cohen et al., 2021) attention, behaviour and concentration (Smith, 2021; Anzman-Frasca et al., 2015), and mental health and well-being (Peirce et al., 2021).

There is increasing interest in reshaping food systems for health and equity (VicHealth, 2023) and there has been interest in school meals by Australian political parties (e.g. school meals were promised as part of the 2020 Queensland, 2021 Tasmanian, and 2022 Victorian state elections) (ABC News, 2022). Further, the Victorian Department of Education and Training is committed to providing a “supportive, healthy school environment” in schools (DET Victoria, 2024). Establishing healthy eating behaviours in childhood through school-provided healthy lunches would lay the foundation for improved food intake across the lifespan, improving quality of life and reducing disease burden. Although there has been interest in and advocacy for school-provided lunches in Victoria, political barriers, infrastructure, equipment required, government support and associated costs may be impacting the prioritisation of piloting a school lunch program (Johnson et al., 2020). A school lunch program has been successfully trialled in Tasmania (Jose et al., 2024); however, this model cannot be directly translated to the Victorian setting as schools within Australia are managed at the state level, each with different regulations and environments that need to be considered.

Members of the research team have conducted qualitative and quantitative studies exploring over 1,500 parents' and 460 teachers' perceptions of having school-provided lunches in Australia (Aydin et al., 2023; Kempler et al., 2025; Nanayakkara et al., 2024a, b). Other researchers have also examined these groups' perspectives; however, the viewpoints of broader interest-holder groups, including government representatives, retailers and those with expertise in nutrition, health promotion, school-based food and nutrition programs, and meal provision have not been explored. School-provided lunches have been the subject of growing discussion in Australia, revealing mixed perspectives among teachers, parents, and children. For example, one study found that most teachers and parents favoured breakfast programs being made available in all schools, but few supported replacing lunchboxes with school-provided lunches (Nanayakkara et al., 2024a). In contrast, other research has reported that parents (Aydin et al., 2023; Manson et al., 2022), and teachers (Esdaile et al., 2025) are receptive to school-provided lunches. Although some teachers (Kempler et al., 2025) and principals (Esdaile et al., 2025) have raised concerns about cost, food waste, logistical challenges and responsibilities beyond their professional scope, many also argue that school-provided lunches would be beneficial for improving children's diet quality through food exposure (Esdaile et al., 2025; Kempler et al., 2025), enhancing student engagement and well-being, and promoting social equity by reducing lunchbox stigma (Esdaile et al., 2025). Although some parents prefer to maintain control over their children's lunches, many have acknowledged that planning and packing lunches every day of the school week is a demanding task (Esdaile et al., 2025). During the Tasmanian School Lunch Pilot, parents valued the convenience and reduced stress associated with not having to pack lunches (Smith, 2021). Other research indicates that food preferences and variety play an important role for children in relation to school-provided lunches (Lalchandani et al., 2025; Coulls et al., 2023). Furthermore, children emphasise the social aspects of mealtimes, and the need for designated times for eating and playing, with sufficient time allocated for both activities (Coulls et al., 2023).

The research team acknowledges the importance of involving primary school students and their parents in the planning stage of a school lunch program; however, first we needed to identify specific needs and determine financial and structural interest, which would directly inform a pilot program in Victoria. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore interest-holders’ opinions of school-provided lunches and gain insight into the enablers for a successful school lunch trial in Victoria. Two research questions were developed to guide data collection and analysis: 1) how can key interest-holders and organisations contribute to a statewide school-provided lunch program? and 2) what will enable the success and sustainability of school-provided lunches in Victoria?

This study was guided by a phenomenological exploratory approach to gain an understanding of individuals' insights into a concept (school meals) through their lived experiences (Braun and Clarke, 2021). Qualitative data were collected through one-on-one semi-structured interviews underpinned by stakeholder theory. This theory is used to understand and evaluate interest-holders' enthusiasm and potential influence on the planning and implementation of a program or policy (Brugha and Varvasovszky, 2000; Kok et al., 2015). In this case, stakeholders are referred to as interest-holders from a range of organisations with an interest in healthy school lunches and meal provision within Victorian primary schools.

This research was conducted by a team of four Australian middle-class female researchers comprising three nutritionists and one dietitian, who share a professional and academic interest in school food systems and nutrition education. The team includes a lecturer, senior lecturer, associate professor and graduate researcher, each bringing unique perspectives shaped by their roles in academia and practice. The team has extensive collective experience in qualitative research, which informed the design, data collection, and analysis processes. The team has also previously worked together on other research studies and understand each other's perspectives and experiences. The graduate researcher is a qualified teacher with firsthand experience working in classroom settings, offering valuable insights into the educational context of the study. This background enriched the team's understanding of the school environment and the practical realities of implementing a primary school lunch program.

Our collective expertise positions us as both insiders and outsiders in relation to the participants. While our professional alignment with the subject matter may enhance empathy and depth of understanding, we remain critically aware of the potential for bias. Given that the study explored participants' views on school-provided lunches and factors influencing the success of a school-provided lunch trial in Victoria, the interviewer's positionality had the potential to shape the interview dynamics and influence responses. To mitigate this, she adhered strictly to the approved interview guide, using only the designated questions and prompts to maintain neutrality and reduce bias. Throughout the research process, we engaged in reflexive dialogue to examine how our assumptions, disciplinary lenses and professional experiences may influence data collection and interpretation. We also employed strategies, including member checking and peer debriefing, to support the credibility and trustworthiness of our findings.

The research team compiled a broad list of the types of organisations to include (e.g. government bodies, food manufacturers, health promotion organisations, etc.) and identified specific organisations that were assessed for their interest and potential influence surrounding meal provision in Victorian primary schools. Individual interest-holders were identified based on their role within a specific organisation and any prior knowledge and experience they had in nutrition and health promotion, school-based food and nutrition programs, and meal provision. The research team anticipated that recruiting one to three participants from each type of organisation (a total of 20–30 participants) would provide a variety of perceptions and information-rich data. With this in mind, interest-holders were purposefully recruited from a variety of key organisations to gather insights and build support for the future implementation of a school lunch trial in Victorian primary schools. Interest-holders represented not-for-profit (NFP) organisations, government bodies, local councils, Victorian primary schools, food manufacturers/producers, retailers, public health and community health services, and health-promoting organisations. Interest-holders were contacted directly via email by the research assistant (ED) which included an invitation to participate, a plain language statement and a consent form. The email also specified that individuals could pass on the email invitation to other relevant staff within their organisation if they were unable to participate or believed that there would be someone else better suited to participate in an interview for the study. Completed consent forms were returned via email prior to the interview, with permission to record the interviews. All participants were offered a A$50 shopping voucher for their time; however, two participants were unable to accept a voucher due to their organisation's policies.

Interview questions were developed by the research team following insights gained from prior research conducted by members of the research team (Burton et al., 2022; Aydin et al., 2023) exploring consumer interests and needs surrounding school-provided lunches. Due to the phenomenological nature of this study, original questions were drafted and included eight open-ended questions and three demographic questions (Table 1). Two teachers reviewed the questions for relevance and clarity, and minor wording adjustments were made. Interest-holders were asked about their opinion on the current school food and eating environment and about school meal provision. Questions relating to their roles, contributions and potential barriers were also asked. These questions addressed the challenges and considerations surrounding school-provided lunches, existing and proposed enablers to assist with overcoming challenges, the importance and priority of healthy school lunches, and the design and feasibility of school-provided lunches. The main questions also included prompts that were used for extended understanding.

Interviews were conducted by a trained research assistant (ED) who had prior experience in conducting interviews and formal training in qualitative analysis. Interviews were conducted via Zoom, between 29th September and 1st December 2023, and were recorded using live captions, with verbatim transcription produced by Zoom. The interviews ranged between 18 and 45 min with an average length of 30 min. Recruitment was ongoing throughout the interview process and after the 21st interview recruitment ceased. The research team met regularly throughout the recruitment and interview stage to discuss the patterns observed from participant responses and the potential need to recruit additional participants. Recruitment concluded after the 21st interview, after it was identified that no new concepts were being introduced and the collected data had provided rich and diverse opinions on school-provided lunches from a variety of participants (Guest et al., 2006). The interviewer (ED) listened to the audio recordings and read through the transcripts several times for data familiarisation and to ensure accuracy of transcripts. Identifying characteristics, including participants' names, specific locations and names of organisations and programs were replaced with general descriptions or code names (e.g. NFP organisation). Words incorrectly transcribed by Zoom were also corrected during this time. All participants were given the opportunity to request their transcript for review prior to data analysis, allowing them to confirm and request adjustments to the deidentification of the transcript, correct errors and add to or edit the wording of their responses for clarity (Birt et al., 2016). Three participants requested a copy of the transcript to review and edit. One of the three participants returned the transcript with minor edits, and no changes were made to the other two.

Data analysis was guided by Braun and Clarke's six-phase analytical process (Braun and Clarke, 2021). Transcripts were uploaded into NVivo version 20.6.2 (QSR International Pty Ltd.), where thematic analysis was used to categorise the data into themes. Initial codes were formed inductively, identifying recurring ideas, phrases, and concepts throughout the interview transcripts. The research team identified similarities, and collated codes into categories by combining, removing, adding and renaming codes accordingly. As further patterns and meanings were identified within the codes, initial themes were constructed. Themes and sub-themes were named, logically ordered and reviewed by the research team to ensure they cohesively captured the participants' views on the importance of healthy school lunches and the feasibility of meal provision in Victorian primary schools, whilst addressing the aim of the study. All transcripts were initially coded by the interviewer (ED), identifying the common patterns and ideas throughout. The research team (ED, AB, CM, JN) were all involved in refining the codes, categories, themes and sub-themes for data analysis.

Fifty interest-holders were contacted via email (including 2 via snowball sampling), 29 were unable to participate or did not respond to the email and 21 interest-holders were interviewed (including one recruited via snowball sampling).

Organisation types, interest-holder job roles and demographic characteristics are presented in Table 2. Some interest-holders were new to their existing role; however, they stated that they had extended experience within the industry and had been previously involved in programs surrounding the school food environment or school meal provision.

Three themes were identified, which are presented with supporting quotes in this section.

Improving the school food and eating environment was identified as a priority. Interest-holders expressed concerns about the varied quality and nutritional content of food brought from home or provided by school canteens, articulating the influence of the school's geographical location and school policies. They highlighted that children are provided with limited time (approximately 10 min) to eat lunch, which was perceived to disrupt their eating behaviours, prompting rushed consumption and suboptimal food choices. Additionally, interest-holders emphasised the importance of adequate seating arrangements and advocated for the integration of food and nutrition education within the primary school curriculum to promote health and develop skills. Consensus emerged around the importance of providing students with opportunities to consume nutritionally adequate meals during school hours. While many supported the implementation of school-provided lunches in Victoria, some specified that the need varied and should be reflective of the needs and priorities of individual school communities.

Although many interest-holders working in NFP organisations, government schools, local government, retail and food charities viewed the provision of adequate and nutritious food for school as the primary responsibility of parents, a food manufacturer dietitian, consumer group manager, NFP organisation program manager and retail dietitian also emphasised the school's role in reinforcing healthy eating habits and behaviours among children. Government school teachers and a NFP organisation program coordinator more specifically expressed that feeding children becomes the school's responsibility when students arrive with inappropriate or inadequate food for the day. Furthermore, differing views emerged regarding accountability. Some interest-holders representing NFP organisations, science agencies and community health organisations articulated the need for stronger government regulation through formalised school lunch policies and guidelines, whereas others representing NFP organisations and consumer groups perceived that schools should take responsibility for providing healthy food options within their canteens.

Interest-holders generally expressed a positive perspective on the prospect of school-provided lunches in Victorian primary schools. However, several acknowledged the potential for conflicting views or hesitations within the broader community regarding the implementation of such programs. Contrastingly, others perceived no downfalls and anticipated that a formalised school lunch program would be welcomed and well-received by the community.

Interest-holders identified a range of perceived benefits and opportunities associated with implementing a school lunch program. Many perceived that school-provided lunches would be more convenient for families as the daily burden of having to prepare and pack lunchboxes would be eliminated, alleviating stress within household routines. Additionally, more than half of the interest-holders highlighted the potential of such a program to assist with improving food security and accessibility to nutritious meals for children, particularly within communities facing socioeconomical disadvantage.

Health promotion and nutritional benefits were also discussed by a variety of interest-holders, along with the potential to enhance food and nutrition education and skill development. Furthermore, interest-holders working in different industries perceived that school-provided lunches would increase food exposure and acceptance (NFP, retail, health and nutrition initiative, community health, and consumer group) and promote positive social and cultural opportunities (community health, NFP and science agency). Some working in the food industry, retail, NFP, government schools, community health, and local government highlighted how school-provided lunches could also benefit the wider community, including local food producers, community organisations and community health.

Many interest-holders shared their insights regarding the logistical aspects of implementing a school lunch program, such as accessibility, feasibility, cost and sustainable delivery of the program. Some working in community health, NFP, a science agency, government schools and a health and nutrition initiative perceived that the uptake of such a program should be optional. All interest-holders expressed their willingness to support the implementation of a school lunch program, with some indicating their ability to assume multiple functional roles. Others expressed their ability to provide health promotion, education and resources to families and schools.

Interest-holders working in community health, local government, government schools and NFP organisations mentioned advocating and providing support and guidance to schools, whilst a nutrition scientist and consumer group manager mentioned that their research could assist with influencing and implementing policies, guidelines and framework surrounding school meal provision.

Additionally, interest-holders from the food industry, a food charity, and a retailer, offered their assistance with providing, preparing or delivering the food and supplies required for a school lunch program, with one retailer and some NFP organisations discussing their potential role in menu creation and guidance.

All interest-holders were asked who they thought could be involved in the implementation of a school lunch program. Several NFP organisations were suggested along with food providers and suppliers such as local producers, catering businesses and canteens, and retailers.

Several interest-holders identified government entities, including the Department of Education, the Department of Health and VicHealth, local councils and local government authorities as potentially playing a significant role in supporting meal provision in Victorian primary schools.

The importance of including the school community in designing and implementing a school lunch program was also highlighted with specific contributors such as volunteers, parents/carers, children, staff and school committees suggested.

Furthermore, health professionals and health promotion organisations were also perceived as important contributors to promote and support the implementation of a school lunch program. Some interest-holders also expressed that the wider community, such as advocates, sponsors and ambassadors could assist with reinforcing the importance of healthy school lunches.

All interest-holders discussed a range of challenges and considerations surrounding the implementation of a school lunch program in Victoria. However, only a few interest-holders working within community health, local government and an NFP organisation said that there would be no barriers specifically linked to their role and contributions to the program.

Most interest-holders identified potential logistical challenges associated with implementing a school lunch program, raising concerns around structural design, operational feasibility and the implications for those responsible for its delivery and management.

Concerns were raised about the lack of resources, facilities and appropriate infrastructure available to schools for the implementation of a school lunch program. Staffing, cost to schools and parents, and funding available to interest-holders were also perceived as important challenges to consider.

Some interest-holders also expressed concerns surrounding a lack of monitoring and appropriate healthy eating policies and guidelines.

Children's dietary requirements and food preferences, including cultural considerations, were perceived as considerable challenges.

Some interest-holders were concerned about the nutritional value and the quality of meals that would be provided to children along with food safety considerations surrounding preparation and storage.

Concerns were raised about the possible resistance and lack of engagement from school communities. Furthermore, the possibility of conflicting priorities and differing opinions among families, school staff and interest-holders within the wider community was also perceived as a potential challenge.

Interest-holders reflected on both existing and prospective enablers perceived to facilitate overcoming the challenges associated with implementing a school lunch program. Some suggestions included evaluating existing meal provision systems such as meals provided through early childhood centres, the breakfast program provided by Foodbank, and the lunch program trial in Tasmania; exploring meal provision systems in Europe, the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States (US); the importance of prior research and involving community hubs; and utilising existing programs and initiatives including the SAKG Program and the Achievement Program. Evaluating, modifying and utilising existing policies, guidelines and frameworks were also recommended as ways that may assist with alleviating some of the challenges.

This study employed a phenomenological exploratory approach to examine how individuals with professional experience in children's health, nutrition, and education perceive the provision of school lunches in Victorian primary schools. The findings highlight the nuanced and context-dependent nature of participants lived experiences, revealing how institutional, environmental and policy-related factors shape their understanding of school food practices.

In Victoria, most primary schools allocate approximately 10 min for children to eat their lunch, and eating often occurs in the classroom or outside (Burton et al., 2022). Although interest-holders from the present study believed that food consumption during school time varies between schools and children, many expressed that the overall food and eating environment in primary schools could be improved. They perceived factors relating to time and location impact children's food choices and eating behaviours. Consistent with these findings, a recent study reported that primary school-aged children tend to prioritise the consumption of more readily accessible food items during ten-minute lunch breaks, resulting in a large proportion of uneaten or discarded fruits and vegetables (Burg et al., 2021). Whereas, extended seated lunch periods of approximately 20 min were positively associated with increased consumption of fruits and vegetables. Although parents and carers are expected to provide their children with adequate and nutritious food for school within Australia (Kremer et al., 2006), some interest-holders in the current study believed that schools and government bodies should play a more supportive role through enforcing policies and guidelines to provide appropriate eating environments for children. The importance of including food and nutrition education in primary schools to aid the development of food literacy skills was also acknowledged. Similar findings were reported by members of the research team in a qualitative study exploring the views of Australian primary school parents and teachers about schools' strengths and weaknesses in promoting healthy eating (Aydin et al., 2021). Teachers and parents believe that primary schools are an ideal setting to promote and support healthy eating behaviours and food skills; however, positive impacts can be influenced by the school's food and eating environments (Aydin et al., 2021). Clarke et al. (2013) suggest that canteen menus should provide more healthy food options and schools should work in collaboration with families to support and reinforce food literacy. These findings are consistent with the recommendations made by the Victorian Education Department, stating the importance of a whole-school approach to promote and support healthy eating and healthy lifestyles (DET, 2024).

In the current study, decreasing food insecurity and assisting with health promotion were perceived as important factors for prioritising the implementation of school-provided lunches in Victoria as this would increase accessibility to and consumption of nutritious foods. This is likely due to interest-holders’ knowledge and experience surrounding children's food consumption at school, the development and delivery of school-based food and nutrition programs, and their involvement in existing meal provision strategies such as canteen services and school breakfast programs. Some of these individuals include teachers who work directly with children and families experiencing disadvantage who have likely witnessed the benefits from breakfast programs and school food relief services. These findings are consistent with another study conducted by members of the research team exploring teachers' perspectives of school-provided lunches, which identified that many children from areas of low socioeconomic position often attend school without lunch (Kempler et al., 2025). Furthermore, the Victorian Department of Education suggests that school food services can greatly impact students' exposure to and consumption of certain foods (DET, 2024). Therefore, a school lunch program would increase accessibility to and consumption of nutritious foods.

Although interest-holders from the current study presented positive opinions on the possibility of school-provided lunches in Victoria, there is still some hesitancy, with some believing that the program should be made available to all families, but not mandatory. In a study recently conducted by members of the research team both teachers and parents reported being more accepting of school breakfast programs than school-provided lunches as many schools offer breakfast programs; therefore, they are more familiar to parents and teachers (Nanayakkara et al., 2024a). Many schools across Australia source food from local and NFP organisations to provide to children in need. However, implementing strategies addressing food insecurity is at the discretion of individual schools (Lindberg et al., 2022). Therefore, hesitancy towards a school-provided lunch program could be because this is an unfamiliar concept as there are no national ongoing school lunch programs offered in Australia (Nanayakkara et al., 2024a). Interest-holders in the current study perceived there to be many other benefits associated with implementing a school lunch program, including convenience for families, food exposure and acceptance, nutritional benefits, positive impact on health and well-being, and improvements to concentration and learning from consuming adequate nutritious food. Interest-holders also perceived a school lunch program would provide opportunities to increase children's food and nutrition knowledge, and skill development. In line with our findings, teachers involved in the Tasmanian School Lunch Project reported an improvement in student concentration and behaviour (Jose et al., 2024). Furthermore, parents expressed that the school-provided lunches presented their children with opportunities to try new foods and consume healthy, filling meals (Jose et al., 2024). Similarly, a study conducted in the Netherlands found that 60% of school staff expressed the benefits of school-provided lunches, stating that children would be exposed to a variety of foods, which would contribute to a nutritious diet (van Kleef et al., 2022).

Interest-holders from the current study discussed ways in which they could assist with the implementation of a school-provided lunch program in Victoria. Many of the interest-holders who would advocate for school-provided lunches and could provide support and guidance for schools and families had experience in health promotion, program planning and implementation, and resource development. Furthermore, some thought that utilising their community connection could be useful for the distribution of educational resources. Interest-holders who mentioned they could assist with providing, preparing and delivering food and supplies to schools had knowledge and experience in menu development and meal preparation or access to equipment, storage, transport and supplies. The importance of collaborating with and involving other organisations and interest-holders such as government bodies, NFP organisations, health professionals, local food producers and manufacturers, educators, parents and children was also highlighted. As recommended in the Victorian Canteen, Healthy Eating and Other Food Services policy, building a culture that provides children with the support to improve eating behaviours and attitudes involves collaboration (DET, 2024). Similar findings were reported in a rapid review of 19 papers exploring food and drink policy implementation within Australia, Canada, the Philippines, Uruguay, the UK and the US (Nguyen and Thomas, 2020). Interest-holder engagement, involving community members, working with local health organisations, enforcing and monitoring policies, guidance and training, information and resources and gradual implementation processes were identified as enablers to successful policy implementation (Nguyen and Thomas, 2020).

Despite interest-holders’ support, several challenges were raised surrounding the implementation and sustainability of a school lunch program in Victorian primary schools. Catering to children's dietary requirements and food preferences was perceived as a significant issue. Interest-holders thought that this would cause further challenges, such as food waste, increased costs and resistance from families. Previous studies have described the cost of healthier food options as a barrier to school-provided meals (Nguyen and Thomas, 2020; Clarke et al., 2013). In addition, Walz (2014) reports that food is often wasted rather than consumed by students due to taste preferences and reluctance to eat unfamiliar foods (Walz, 2014). Interest-holders highlighted the need for funding to support the cost of food, supplies and staff. There were concerns surrounding resistance from the school community if the program would incur a cost to families. These challenges are consistent with findings from other recent studies where insufficient funding (Clarke et al., 2013) and securing ongoing funding were problematic (Smith, 2021). Furthermore, local food sources and special dietary meals (gluten-free, vegetarian, dairy-free) are generally produced on a small scale, therefore, may incur additional costs (Lehtinen, 2012; Ronto et al., 2020). There are a variety of policies and guidelines surrounding the school food environment in Australia (State Government Victoria and Cancer Council Victoria, 2018; DET, 2024); however, implementation is voluntary and at the discretion of individual schools (Nanayakkara et al., 2024b). This has been reported as problematic in the promotion of healthy eating behaviours in schools (Clarke et al., 2013). In line with previous studies (Clarke et al., 2013), interest-holders in the present study expressed their concerns surrounding the nutritional quality of meals that would be provided to children, due to cost and the lack of enforced and monitored healthy eating policies and guidelines for school meal provision in Victoria. According to international guidelines, the creation of a nutritious lunch menu should be guided by nutritional standards and program evaluation (Galloway et al., 2025). In an Australian context, lunch menus should be consistent with the Australian Dietary Guidelines (Smith, 2021; NHMRC, 2013). Interest-holders’ interpretations of feasibility, equity and nutritional quality within the Australian school food landscape are likely shaped by their direct engagement with social, cultural and organisational contexts and reflect their experiences and perceptions of the challenges surrounding the implementation of a school lunch program in Victorian primary schools.

In the present study, interest-holders had mixed opinions surrounding school facilities and infrastructure in Victoria. Several perceived current school facilities could be utilised for meal provision, as most schools are equipped with kitchens and/or canteens. Contrastingly, many others were concerned about the space available and thought primary schools were not appropriately equipped to facilitate whole-school meal provision. Similar concerns were raised in the evaluation of the Tasmanian School Lunch Pilot in Australia, where insufficient infrastructure in schools was reported as challenging (Smith, 2021). Some participating schools had access to canteen facilities, a commercial kitchen or other cooking facilities. However, not all Australian schools are equipped with the same amenities; therefore, additional facilities may be required, such as dishwashers, refrigerators and large ovens (Smith, 2021). As the Tasmanian School Lunch Project expanded, schools were offered the option to have meals prepared off-site by a central kitchen and delivered to their school (Jose et al., 2024). In New Zealand, meal provision varies to allow schools to select the most suitable model for their school (Ministry of Education, 2023). Schools may elect to have meals provided and delivered by an external supplier, receive meals from local providers or internally prepare and deliver meals to their students or other schools within their region. These models could be used as a guide to address concerns surrounding infrastructure, equipment and resources when planning and designing the trial of a school-provided lunch program in Victorian primary schools.

Exploring and evaluating existing meal provision systems within Australia and other countries was viewed as an enabler to designing and implementing a school lunch program for Victorian primary schools. Interest-holders specifically mentioned the Tasmanian School Lunch Pilot, current meal provision systems adopted by early childcare centres, meal provision partnerships with NFP organisations, and meal provision systems implemented in other countries. In Australia, Early Childcare and Long Daycare centres must provide food and beverages to children throughout the day (ACECQA, 2023). All providers must adhere to the requirements of Quality Area 2: Children's Health and Safety as presented under the Education and Care Services National Quality Framework (ACECQA, 2023). This includes providing food and beverages that are nutritious and meet the dietary requirements for children's growth and development (ACECQA, 2023). Adapting these regulations and processes to support a primary school lunch program was suggested by interest-holders in the present study. The Swedish school lunch reform has shown that exposure to school-provided lunches for the entire schooling period resulted in positive health outcomes in early adulthood (Lundborg et al., 2022). The school lunch reform was introduced gradually between 1959 and 1969, where promotional information outlining the benefits of school-provided lunches resulted in uptake by those with initial negative perceptions of the program (Lundborg et al., 2022). These findings are consistent with the present study, where many interest-holders expressed the importance of promoting the benefits of school-provided lunches for increased community acceptance and engagement. Furthermore, a recent evaluation of the Tasmanian School Lunch Project in Australia reported that despite some initial hesitance, school lunch provision was positively regarded by parents, students, staff and the wider community (Jose et al., 2024). Some benefits included equitable access to nutritious food, increased willingness to try new foods, increased sense of belonging and improved student behaviour and concentration.

Several interest-holders in the present study explained that Australia currently has many existing policies, guidelines and frameworks that can be utilised and modified to support a school lunch program. Furthermore, it was suggested that any policy changes and new programs and initiatives should be introduced gradually and in collaboration with the school community. Similar suggestions were presented in a systematic literature review reporting that sudden changes to school-based healthy food and beverage policies were not well received by interest-holders, with the suggestion that introduction and implementation occur gradually (Ronto et al., 2020). Other studies also support the notion of involving interest-holders and members of the school community, including children and families, in the design and implementation of school-based interventions (Myers et al., 2018; Nguyen and Thomas, 2020; Eustachio Colombo et al., 2021). Interest-holders’ understanding of policy and perspectives surrounding program implementation have been shaped by lived experience, providing insight into existing frameworks and the need for gradual, collaborative change.

This study adopted a qualitative approach, which allowed for in-depth descriptions of interest-holder viewpoints. Interest-holders from a variety of organisations were interviewed, allowing a diverse range of experience and expertise relating to nutrition, food literacy, children's health and education, and school meal provision. Differences in school meal-related experiences among interest-holders may have influenced their perceptions of school-provided lunch programs; however, the phenomenological epistemology was chosen for this study to gain insight into the lived experiences of interest-holders. This study also encountered some limitations. The research team endeavoured to recruit interest-holders with diverse roles across a range of organisations; however, some individuals may have been inadvertently overlooked, leaving some relevant perspectives and experiences uncaptured. Although snowball sampling was also used, this process may not have reached relevant interest-holders. During the interviews, participants were not presented with a specific model of school-provided lunches; therefore, some found it difficult to expand their viewpoints as there were no specifications to refer to.

International interest in school meals is continuing to grow. Some novel insights and learnings from this study could help guide further development or implementation of school meals in other countries and across Australia. However, because the feasibility and sustainability of implementing a school lunch program may vary across states, these findings would directly inform a pilot school lunch program in Victorian primary schools. A pilot program would ascertain community acceptance, availability and accessibility of produce, design and delivery logistics, and costs involved. To foster broader community acceptance and program uptake, key interest-holders should include teachers, parents and children as well as the organisations suggested by the interest-holders we interviewed for this study (e.g. government bodies, NFP organisations, health professionals, local food producers and manufacturers). Evaluating existing school lunch models, including the Tasmanian School Lunch Project, may offer alternative approaches to address some of the concerns raised by interest-holders.

Although interest-holders acknowledge the significant benefits of a school lunch program in Victorian primary schools, many challenges and considerations were raised surrounding the implementation, feasibility and sustainability of a large-scale program. Gradual changes and adaptability surrounding a school lunch program were suggested as strategies to decrease hesitance from families and school staff. Involving the school community and interest-holders from the local and wider community in program design and implementation could alleviate concerns around meal quality, dietary requirements and program structure. Furthermore, a collaborative approach would increase uptake and community acceptance.

Estée V. Driscoll: methodology, writing – original draft, review and editing.

Claire Margerison, Janandani Nanayakkara, Alison O. Booth: conceptualisation, methodology, writing – review and editing.

This study received ethics approval from the Deakin University Human Ethics Advisory Group HEAG-H 128_2023.

The authors gratefully acknowledge the interest-holders who participated in this study. Their willingness to share their perspectives and experiences were invaluable to this research and deeply appreciated.