Contracting campus food agreements between universities and food providers in South Africa
More details
Hide details
1
SAMRC/WITS Centre Health Economics and Decision Science (PRICELESS SA), School of Public Health, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa
2
School of Public Health, University of the Western Cape, Belville, Cape Town, South Africa
3
Department of Human Nutrition and Dietetics, University of Limpopo, Limpopo, South Africa
4
Department of Dietetics and Nutriton, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa
Popul. Med. 2026;8(Supplement Supplement 1):A3640
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION:
The university food environment is an important local setting with the potential to promote healthy eating and support the prevention of diet-related non-communicable diseases among emerging adults transitioning to independence from family supervision. While existing literature documents dietary and behavioural changes associated with exposure to university food environments, limited attention has been given to the institutional and governance and policy processes through which these environments are created, particularly in South Africa. This study examines how South African universities’ structure, govern, and regulate food provision through agreements with food providers.
METHODS:
We conducted 17 semi-structured key informant interviews with food providers and university staff members involved in procurement across three South African universities: the University of the Witwatersrand, the University of the Western Cape, and the University of Limpopo. Data were analysed using an abductive thematic approach in which the deductive codes were informed by food environment and food governance mechanisms, shaping the university food environment.
RESULTS:
University food procurement governance and contractual arrangements were centralised, formal, and collaborative in documented procedures and institutional practices. However, informal historical arrangements and legacy status influenced the retention and re-selection of providers on campus. Food providers were managed primarily as a commercial strategy to generate third-stream income. The process focused mainly on compliance requirements and institutional food security objectives. Particularly the provision of affordable food and beverage options to support student well-being. This dimension of the campus food environment was a key determinant of vendor selection. However, food security was framed as access to safe, hygienic, and affordable food, with limited consideration of nutritional quality and healthfulness.
CONCLUSIONS:
South African Universities represent a missed opportunity to leverage food procurement and governance mechanisms to create healthier campus food environments by strengthening institutional regulations and guidelines to explicitly integrate nutrition and health considerations.