Food Environment Assessment in Two Socioeconomic Contexts in Queensland, Australia

ABSTRACT Objective To assess the availability and affordability of healthy food options in restaurants and supermarkets across two communities with different socioeconomic contexts. Methods The cross‐sectional comparative study was conducted in Inala, a low socioeconomic status (SES) suburb and Springfield, a nearby, internationally recognised master‐planned community in Queensland, Australia. A total of 60 restaurants and five supermarkets were assessed using the Nutrition Environment Measurement Survey (NEMS). Data were collected between July and September 2024 and compared using Fisher's exact test. Results Pronounced difference in food environment was observed between restaurants but not between supermarkets across the two study locations. No significant differences were observed in the availability (1.95 vs. 2.18, p  > 0.05) or quality (mean score of 3 for both, p  > 0.05) of healthy food items between the two suburb supermarkets and healthier food options were also more expensive than less healthy alternatives in both locations. In contrast, restaurants in Inala offered significantly fewer supports for healthy eating compared with Springfield restaurants (NEMS‐R mean sub score = 0.93 vs. 2.45, p  = 0.002). Additionally, individual restaurant meals were not cheaper than combo meals in either suburb. Conclusion Restaurant food environment in Inala was found less supportive of healthy eating compared with Springfield. Therefore, future initiatives in Inala should prioritise equitable access to and availability of nutritious food with a particular focus on restaurants. Relevance to Health Promotion The study offered insights into the healthy eating environment in two Australian suburban communities. Findings deepen the understanding of environmental determinants of healthy eating and carry the scope to inform the co‐design of future place‐based and sustainable healthy eating initiatives.