Conducting cross-sectoral collaborative research for food system transformation: learnings from a qualitative evaluation study
Abstract Background The SALIENT consortium aimed to bring together research, government and food system stakeholders to co-design, implement and evaluate public-facing food system interventions targeting health and sustainability whilst maintaining affordability and commercial viability. A total of 40 organizations engaged with SALIENT; 8 progressed to deliver and evaluate a total of 10 interventions. We conducted an evaluation to understand how and why the SALIENT stakeholder engagement process worked for different organizations and to inform future food system intervention research. Methods Using theory-based evaluation principles, a theory of change (ToC) was developed to describe how the SALIENT process was expected to function. A total of 38 semi-structured interviews were conducted with government partners, researchers and food system representatives. Data were thematically analysed and interpreted in relation to the ToC. Results Findings highlighted the fragmented nature of existing health and sustainability actions across the food system, shaped by differing priorities, agendas and constraints of stakeholders. Power dynamics influenced stakeholder participation, with engagement strongest when research was aligned with core stakeholder goals and offered them tangible benefits. Whilst pragmatic co-design processes built trust and feasibility, they sometimes led to interventions with limited potential to address critical uncertainties in the evidence base. Academic processes were often perceived as misaligned with stakeholders’ practical needs. Conclusions Long-term government direction, stronger accountability, and incentives are needed to foster meaningful collaboration between researchers and food system stakeholders. Future partnerships should balance flexibility with rigour, build trust through sustained relationships, and establish strong governance, communication and evaluation processes early to generate robust, scalable evidence for meaningful food system change.
Authors
- Oliver Huse (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9366-8012)
- Jean M Adams (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5733-7830)
- Claire Thompson (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0864-9811)
- N Cooke (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7448-9297)
- David Ogilvie (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0270-4672)
- Steven Cummins (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3957-4357)
- Peter Scarborough (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2378-2944)
- Rachel Loopstra (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7541-6209)
- Martin J. White (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1861-6757)
- Sarah Shaw (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2206-6858)
- Bea Savory (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0005-7159-4509)
Institutions
- University of Hertfordshire (GB)
- University of Liverpool (GB)
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- University of Oxford (GB)
- London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
- MRC Epidemiology Unit (GB)
- University of Southampton (GB)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Health Research Policy and Systems
- Published
- 2026-10-06
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-026-01540-y
- Primary Topic
- Evaluation and Performance Assessment
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00