Free and healthy school meals are gaining ground internationally. In countries such as Brazil, Sweden and Scotland, programmes have long existed that address poverty and health concerns. They have become a structural part of the education system. Indonesia has gone even further. It announced plans to reach more than 78 million children daily by 2029. Notably, this initiative is presented not only as social policy but also as part of the country’s economic growth strategy.

The economic case and its limits

This point is at the heart of a recent report by Mariana Mazzucato and Sarah Doyle (2025), written for the World Food Programme. They argue that school meals should not be viewed merely as a cost but as a tool of industrial strategy. Public procurement, they suggest, can create markets for local agriculture. It can stimulate sustainable production and generate employment in logistics and catering. Additionally, the long-term health benefits may translate into increased productivity. They may also lower healthcare costs. Some studies even suggest a multiplier effect. Every pound invested by the government can yield multiple times its value in social and economic returns.

There are, of course, reasons for caution. Many of the projected economic benefits are based on extrapolations or modelling. The causal link between school meals and national economic growth is not firmly established. It depends heavily on context. Moreover, while the idea of a mission-oriented industrial strategy is compelling on paper, in practice, such ambitions often encounter political divisions. They also face fiscal constraints. Procurement systems tend to favour larger suppliers. In this sense, the report offers a novel policy framework rather than a definitive empirical evaluation.

Context matters

It is therefore important to distinguish between contexts. In countries such as Indonesia, the sheer scale means that economic effects can become visible even in national growth figures. In Western countries such as Sweden and Scotland, the impacts are more subtle and dispersed. They provide a stable market for local producers, strengthen long-term health outcomes, and reduce inequalities in educational opportunities. These may not translate into dramatic growth statistics. However, they amount to robust and durable benefits that extend across generations.

The evidence on learning outcomes is also nuanced. Research consistently shows that school meals improve health, attendance and concentration. The impact on test scores, however, is more mixed. Some studies find clear gains, others very little. What does remain evident is that school meals strengthen the conditions that make learning possible.

What makes this debate so interesting is not only whether free school meals are a question of social policy, but how the same instrument can be framed in very different ways: as a poverty measure, as part of a welfare system, or even, as this report suggests, as an economic strategy.