Dietary assessment and guidelines across 11 European Union countries: a review from the PLAN'EAT project

Vittoria Aureli^1,2Federica Grant^1,3,4*Alicia Aguilar⁵Anke Brons⁶Anthony Fardet⁷Betty Pei Ing Chang⁸Francesca Vespa⁹Jana Kirschner¹⁰Ewa Kopczynska¹¹Lajos Böröcz¹²Maria Jacobsen¹³Siranush Ghukasyan¹⁴Yannis Manios^15,16Wencke Gwozdz^17,18Emese Antal^19,20Laura Rossi²¹

• ¹CREA - Council for Agricultural Research and Economics, Research Centre for Food and Nutrition, Rome, Italy
• ²Departmental Faculty of Science and Technology for Sustainable Development and One Health, University Campus Bio-Medico of Rome, Rome, Italy
• ³Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Food Sciences (DiAAA), University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy
• ⁴Department of Agricultural, Forestry and Food Sciences (DISAFA), University of Turin, Grugliasco, Italy
• ⁵Epi4Health Research Group, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain
• ⁶Public Administration and Policy, Department of Social Sciences, Wageningen University, Wageningen, Netherlands
• ⁷INRAE, Clermont-Auvergne University, Unité de Nutrition Humaine, Clermont-Ferrand, France
• ⁸European Food Information Council, Brussels, Belgium
• ⁹Division of Bioeconomics, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Katholieke 23 Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
• ¹⁰European Public Health Alliance, Brussels, Belgium
• ¹¹Institute of Sociology, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland
• ¹²Hungarian Hospitality Employers’ Association, Budapest, Hungary
• ¹³Department of Energy and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden
• ¹⁴TMG Think Tank for Sustainability, Berlin, Germany
• ¹⁵Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, School of Health Science and Education, Harokopio University, Athens, Greece
• ¹⁶Institute of Agri-Food and Life Sciences, Hellenic Mediterranean University Research Centre, Estavromenos, Greece
• ¹⁷Department of Consumer Behaviour, Nutritional Communication and Sociol ogy, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Nutritional Sciences and Environmental Management, Justus-Liebig University, Giessen, Germany
• ¹⁸Department of Management, Society & Communication, Copenhagen Business School, Copenhagen, Denmark
• ¹⁹Environmental Social Science Research Group, Impact Hub Budapest, Budapest, Hungary
• ²⁰Semmelweis University, Doctoral College, Health Sciences Division, Budapest, Hungary
• ²¹Department of Food Safety, Nutrition and Veterinary Public Health, National Institute of Health, Rome, Italy

Introduction: this paper presents a comparative assessment of dietary intake collection for surveillance and monitoring for adult population, Ffood Ccomposition Ddatabases (FCDBs), and Food-Based Dietary Guidelines (FBDGs) for children/adolescents, adults and the elderly population. Data and information were gathered until August 2025, concerning the 11 European countries participating in the European Horizon project PLAN'EAT "Food systems transformation towards healthy and sustainable dietary behaviour". Methodology: this assessment was conducted through questionnaires completed by PLAN'EAT partners, who collected data from scientific literature and official documents in their native languages. Results: despite efforts such as the European Food Safety Agency's EU Menu initiative to standardize dietary monitoring, significant inconsistencies persist in food intake assessment methodologies, database structures, and the development of dietary guidelines. These disparities hinder cross-country comparability, thereby limiting the evaluation of the effectiveness of EU-wide nutrition policies. The study identifies the aspects to be implemented in survey protocols, portion size assessment, software tools, and emphasizes the need to integrate current conussumers' eating habits when developing dietary guidelines. The importance of harmonizing data collection methods, ensuring regular national surveys, and synchronizing FBDGs updates with current consumption trends was emphasized. Key tools, such as adherence indicators and sustainability-integrated modelling approaches, were highlighted for their role in improving policy relevance and effectiveness. Best practicesDiet modelling from countries like France, Germany, and the Netherlands were identified as best practices to be were examined as scalable examplesmodels. Discussion: this work emphasizes the need for more coordinated EU-level actions to promote methodological consistency, enhance the sustainability and inclusivity of FBDGs, and support the development of coherent, evidence-based nutrition policies. These efforts are essential to foster healthier diets and more sustainable food systems across Europe.