New SPOON Report Reveals What It Takes for Citizens to Share Food-Related Data Food data is now everywhere: supermarket purchases, delivery orders, nutrition apps, and everyday habits. As more of this data is collected, a new SPOON report shows that sharing food-data only works when people feel in control, not exposed. We often talk about the food system in big numbers: emissions, crop yields, prices, and health targets. But the transition to healthier and more sustainable food systems also happens in small, ordinary moments such as what ends up in a shopping basket, what gets cooked, what is wasted, what feels safe to eat, what raises questions. As more of these moments happen or are captured digitally, the resulting data can reveal patterns that surveys miss, validate self-reported behaviour, and help target interventions in nutrition, food safety, waste reduction, and sustainability. At the same time, this data can be very personal. A purchasing history may reveal health conditions, household composition, financial constraints, cultural practices, or moments of vulnerability. A food log can show daily routines, struggles, and self-image. Location data can turn eating habits into clues about someone’s lifestyle. This is where the tension begins: the data is useful, but it can also reveal sensitive information about people’s lives. The new SPOON report combines literature review with focus group validation across the project’s target regions—Spain, Slovenia, Italy, Germany, Greece, and Belgium—to clarify what “food-related personal data” includes (behavioural, transactional, perceptual) and what makes people more or less willing to share it. What emerges is a gradual negotiation rather than a simple yes or no decision. Many participants were open to sharing their data when the purpose seemed meaningful—especially for research and public benefit. Hesitation increased when the value was unclear, data requests felt excessive, or people worried about what could be revealed when combined with other sources. The main concerns weren’t just security breaches, but also subtle misuses like profiling, judgment, nudging, or secondary uses that go beyond the original purpose. One participant from the Pomerje region in Slovenia, noted: “We feel uneasy when clarity and transparency are missing. We are not always sure why certain data are needed, and often feel that we do not receive enough information about how our data are processed, for what purpose, and by whom. We also do not want to be profiled or judged because of what we eat, and we fear being constantly evaluated on the basis of our habits. Another concern is the loss of control: we worry about where our data may go and sometimes feel as if we are observed or monitored.” In addition to these concerns, there are also real opportunities. The report shows how combining different data types can create a fuller picture of food practices and attitudes, while also highlighting barriers that have to be designed around: sensitivity in specific contexts (children’s data, eating disorders, stigma), limited sense of control once data is shared, low awareness of rights and protections, and low tolerance for opaque systems or complex explanations. Trust differences across institutions are decisive: research actors tend to be perceived as more credible, commercial actors less so. Other key takeaways include: Improving food-data sharing isn’t about more jargon or better technology—it’s about clarity and restraint. Collect only what’s necessary and clearly explain why the data is requested and what it reveals. Limit how the data is used, make consent meaningful and flexible, and provide simple controls to view, manage, or delete data. Prevent secondary use by design, and ensure participants see value through feedback, insights, and tangible impact. Food data can improve the food system only when handled with clarity, care, fairness, and accountability. If you’d like to learn more, you can read the full report or reach out to Francesca Grossi and Ahmad ur Rehman Hafiz. For further information, please reach out to Arlind Xhelili. Image by Unsplash / charlesdeluvio