2.1 Study Setting

The study was conducted at the University of Wollongong, a tertiary institution established in 1975, located in the coastal city of Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia. The University of Wollongong campus has grown to encompass 10 additional campuses in Sydney and regional NSW along with numerous international partnerships [27]. As of 2023, there were a total of 25,813 onshore students enroled at the University of Wollongong, with approximately 80% studying at the University of Wollongong Campus [28]. In 2024, the university supported the introduction of an urban farming initiative incorporating an indoor aquaponic system (Farmwall Pty Ltd, herein referred to as ‘Farmwall’) on campus to promote environmental sustainability and address the food insecurity of students through the cultivation of locally grown microgreens [29]. Farmwall utilises aquaponics to cultivate microgreens and sprouts, offering a practical example of a low-resource, high-yield food production system that supports urban sustainability practices. The reason an aquaponic system was preferred over either hydroponic or soil-based methods is that the Farmwall is a closed-loop, self-contained and compact unit that can easily be situated in an accessible place on campus for students to harvest their own microgreens for consumption. Additionally, the attractive drawcard of a fish tank provides visual appeal and may invoke curiosity and interest. A conventional soil-based food garden would require much more intensive upkeep and may not expose the students to alternative ways of growing food in an urban environment.

2.2 Learning Activity

An experiential learning activity utilising Farmwall was developed by the research team. It was integrated into a module for public health nutrition subject, which is a 300-level subject, typically taken in the third year of study. This subject is a core component of the undergraduate nutrition and dietetics programmes, but also includes postgraduate students completing equivalent coursework. The subject explores the intersection of food systems, public health and environmental sustainability.

2.3 Study Design

A mixed-methods embedded design was used to examine nutrition and dietetics students' knowledge, attitudes and behaviours towards sustainable and local food consumption. Using pre- and post-surveys, quantitative data were collected to assess changes before and after the experiential learning activity. Qualitative data, in the form of open-ended reflections embedded within the post-survey, were used to explore students' experiences and intentions for behaviour change in greater depth. In this design, the qualitative insights complemented the primary quantitative findings, providing a more comprehensive understanding of the impact of the intervention. Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committee of the University of Wollongong (Ethics Number: 2024/024).

2.4 Participants and Data Collection

Data collection took place between 3 April 2024 and 21 April 2024. All students enroled in the Autumn 2024 core public health nutrition subject were invited to participate. An e-invitation providing an overview of the project, learning activity and evaluation objectives was posted on the student online learning management system. Students who opted to participate accessed the corresponding pre-activity survey via an online link and provided informed consent before proceeding. After completing the learning activity in their allocated tutorial sessions, students were provided with a link to complete the post-activity survey.

2.5 Surveys

The survey questions were informed by existing tools and literature relevant to sustainability and food behaviours [31, 32], and were reviewed by the teaching team and student researcher for clarity and alignment with learning outcomes. The pre-survey collected student demographic and education characteristics including age, gender, level of study, enrolment status, degree of enrolment and living situation. It also assessed students' perceptions and behaviours related to sustainable food choices using questions adapted from a previous study [31]. Using a five-point Likert scale ranging from ‘not important’ to ‘very important,’ students were asked to rate the importance of purchasing foods and drinks with minimal environmental impact and the significance of various sustainable food procurement behaviours. These behaviours included growing their own food, finding sustainable foods affordable, purchasing locally grown, seasonal, organic or ethically certified foods, preferring minimal packaging and aiming for a more plant-based diet. Additionally, students responded to yes-or-no questions regarding their participation in these specific food procurement behaviours. Students also self-reported the frequency of making food purchasing choices aimed at minimising environmental impact (never, sometimes, about half the time, most of the time or always). Furthermore, students were surveyed on their knowledge and perceived importance of local food systems and their definitions of it, with response options including food produced within their region, within 100 kilometres, within their state or not sure. They were also asked about their views on campus initiatives for local and sustainable food practices, their interest in learning more about local food systems and sustainable agricultural practices and the perceived impact of choosing locally grown foods on the environment. Diet quality was only collected in the pre-activity survey and evaluated using a validated food-based questionnaire known as the Australian Recommended Food Score (ARFS) [32], which compares alignment of usual dietary patterns with the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating [33]. The questionnaire comprises 20 questions related to vegetables, 12 on fruits, 12 on breads and cereals, 10 on dairy foods, 7 on meat, 6 on meat alternatives, 2 on spreads or sauces and 1 on water intake. Scores range from 0 to 73, categorised as ‘needs work’ ( < 33), ‘getting there’ (33–38), ‘excellent’ (39–46) or ‘outstanding’ (47+).

In the post-activity survey, the same questions from the pre-activity survey were used to measure changes in students' perceptions, awareness and knowledge of local food systems, as well as their attitudes and intentions towards sustainability and local food consumption following the learning activity. Intention for change was measured using a five-point Likert scale, ranging from ‘extremely unlikely’ to ‘extremely likely,’ where students rated their likelihood of adopting the same sustainable food procurement and purchasing behaviours covered in the pre-activity survey. Additionally, this Likert scale was used to assess students' likelihood of applying their learnings in future nutrition/dietetic practice. Finally, students were asked two open-ended questions about their key learnings from the experiential learning activity and suggestions for improving the activity for future learning experiences.

2.6 Data Analysis

Survey data were exported into IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 28) for analysis, with a significance level of 0.05 applied to all tests. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise demographic data, perceptions, awareness and knowledge of local food systems, and attitudes towards sustainable and local food consumption. To assess the baseline relationship between perceived importance and engagement in sustainable behaviours, five-point Likert scale responses were recoded into binary categories (high vs. low importance), and Chi-Square tests were conducted. Linear regression models examined differences in diet quality (ARFS scores) based on engagement in sustainable food procurement behaviours. For baseline and post-activity comparisons, McNemar−Bowker tests assessed significant shifts in the proportion of students reporting high knowledge and positive perceptions regarding local food systems and university sustainability initiatives, as well as changes in the likelihood of adopting sustainable food behaviours.

Qualitative data on key learnings and suggestions for improvement were exported to an Excel spreadsheet on a password-protected computer, deidentified, and analysed. A thematic analysis approach, as outlined by Braun and Clarke [34], was conducted to generate and review initial themes, then define and name the final themes before documenting the findings. Two members of the research team (K.K. and I.C.) independently reviewed and coded the qualitative responses. They met to discuss and reach a consensus on theme development, ensuring consistency in interpretation. Although formal inter-rater reliability statistics were not calculated, the coding process was guided by reflexive discussion and cross-checking of data to enhance rigour.

3.1 Baseline Perceptions and Behaviours

At baseline, students reported strong support for local food systems, with 77.6% believing they are very important and 70.7% defining local food as being regionally produced (Table 2). However, only 5.2% felt they had strong knowledge, indicating a knowledge gap. While 60.3% see a significant positive impact of locally grown food, fewer (43.1%) were very interested in learning more. Additionally, only 39.7% agreed that their university supports local and sustainable food practices.

Table 3 presents both students' perceived importance (measured using a five-point Likert scale) and actual engagement (measured via yes/no questions) in specific sustainable food behaviours. Despite this, the majority placed high importance on sustainable food practices (see Table 3), particularly purchasing foods and drinks with minimal packaging (69.0%), buying locally grown foods (60.3%) and purchasing ethically certified products (56.9%). Conversely, the least valued behaviours were buying mostly plant-based foods (27.6%) and purchasing organic foods (31.0%).

Regarding engagement in sustainable food practices, students most frequently reported buying seasonal foods (75.9%) and purchasing food and drinks with minimal packaging (62.1%). However, participation in other sustainable behaviours was relatively low, with less than a third purchasing locally grown foods and fewer than a quarter buying organic foods. Chi-square tests were used to assess whether students who rated each behaviour as highly important were also more likely to report engaging in that behaviour. The strongest associations were observed for buying mostly plant-based foods and buying seasonal foods, suggesting that valuing these practices significantly predicts participation. The weakest association was found for buying locally grown foods indicating that while many students value this behaviour, fewer actively engage in it (Table 3).

High importance reflects students who rated each behaviour as important or very important. Engagement reflects those who answered ‘yes’ to participating in the behaviour.

The average diet quality score among students was 39.7 ± 8.4 ARFS, classified as ‘excellent’. Vegetarian students had a slightly higher diet quality score (43.0 ± 3.7) compared to non-vegetarians (39.3 ± 8.7). Linear regression analysis demonstrated significant associations between sustainable food practices and diet quality, with growing food, buying locally grown foods and purchasing seasonal foods linked to an average increase of approximately five ARFS points (Table 4).

3.2 Post-Learning Activity

Participation in the module and experiential learning activity resulted in a significantly larger proportion of students reported high knowledge of local food systems and expressed agreement with the universities support of local and sustainable food practices on campus (Figure 1).

Most participants reported that they would implement learnings from the tutorial activity into future practice (81.6%). After the tutorial, there was a significant increase in the proportion of students who reported intentions to adopt various food procurement behaviours (Figure 2), including purchasing foods with minimal environmental impact, growing their own food, buying locally grown foods (all p < 0.001) and eating mostly plant-based foods (p < 0.05).

Thematic analysis of open-ended responses identified four themes including [1]: The complexity of sustainability within food systems [2]; the identification and advantages of sustainable practices [3]; promoting healthy and sustainable diets; and [4] the incorporation into diverse professional practice. The responses highlighted a clear understanding for the intricate challenges of sustainability within food systems, with several recognising that food systems involve interconnected environmental, social and economic dimensions. One student remarked on learning about ‘how closely knit our food systems are with the overall health of ourselves and also the environment around us’ (Participant 2). They also consistently recognised the learning activities' focus on the environmental benefits of reducing food transportation, and practices such as promoting locally grown and urban agriculture. Students identified that foods produced this way could be nutrient-dense food options and integral to sustainable diets. For instance, one participant highlighted they learned the importance of ‘incorporating highly nutrient and sustainable foods sourced locally to minimise transport and packaging’ (Participant 18). Others highlighted they learned more about the benefits of ‘encouraging local produce as a healthy habit’ (Participant 6). Another student explained they learned more about the link between dietary choices, health and environmental impact: ‘growing your own little plants can attribute to big health benefits’ (Participant 12). Furthermore, participants considered the future of sustainability and its broad influence on personal and professional lives. For instance, one participant reflected on the bigger role of sustainability in food systems and that ‘sustainable food systems will help future food industry’ (Participant 30), underscoring the transformative potential of sustainable practices. Another participant highlighted they learned the importance of ‘promoting sustainably grown produce’ (Participant 23) as a nutrition professional, indicating a commitment to fostering environmentally responsible agricultural practices.

Participants were also asked to provide feedback on how the tutorial and activity could be enhanced for future use. Three key recommendations were derived [1]: sustained engagement across the curriculum [2]; increased awareness and outreach; and [3] broad interdisciplinary participation. Feedback from participants underscored a desire for more interactive and sustained engagement with the Farmwall unit throughout the semester. One participant suggested, ‘make it a more interactive thing throughout the semester. I probably won′t really think about this again unless it′s another tutorial in class’ (Participant 1), emphasising the need for continuous involvement beyond initial interactions. Others recommended expanding its presence across campus, stating, ‘add it to other cafes or food services around campus’ (Participant 2), and allocating dedicated times for student visits outside of tutorial hours. Enhancing awareness was also a key theme, with suggestions like, ‘creating a strong and engaging social media platform’ (Participant 7) and ‘engaging more classes for larger distribution of information’ (Participant 8). Participants highlighted the value of regular activities such as maintenance, harvests and fish feeding to sustain interest and deepen learning experiences. They also expressed an interest to involve more faculties and students in Farmwall activities to broaden its impact on campus with one participant stating that we should be ‘encouraging more faculties to get involved’ (Participant 26).