METHODS: We developed, piloted and implemented multiple cultural adaptations and two methodological innovations to the commonly used GMB process in Fang Cheng Gang city, China. We included formal, ceremonial and policy maker engagement events before and between GMB workshops, and incorporated culturally tailored arrangements during participant recruitment (officials of the same seniority level joined the same workshop) and workshop activities (e.g., use of individual scoring activities and hand boards). We made changes to the commonly used GMB activities which enabled mapping of shared drivers of multiple health issues (in our case MIAIF) in a single causal loop diagram. We developed and used a 'hybrid' GMB format combining online and in person facilitation to reduce travel and associated climate impact.

RESULTS: Our innovative GMB process led to high engagement and support from decision-makers representing diverse governmental departments across the whole food systems. We co-identified and prioritised systemic drivers and intervention themes of MIAIF. The city government established an official Local Action Group for long-term, inter-departmental implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the co-developed interventions. The 'hybrid' GMB format enabled great interactions while reducing international travel and mitigating limitations of fully online GMB process.

METHODS: We systematically searched for publications in PubMed® and Scopus, manually searched the grey literature and consulted with national health and nutrition officials, with no restrictions on publication type or language. We included low- and middle-income countries in the World Health Organization South-East Asia Region, and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and China. We analysed the included programmes by adapting the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's public health surveillance evaluation framework.

FINDINGS: We identified 82 surveillance programmes in 18 countries that repeatedly collect, analyse and disseminate data on nutrition and/or related indicators. Seventeen countries implemented a national periodic survey that exclusively collects nutrition-outcome indicators, often alongside internationally linked survey programmes. Coverage of different subpopulations and monitoring frequency vary substantially across countries. We found limited integration of food environment and wider food system indicators in these programmes, and no programmes specifically monitor nutrition-sensitive data across the food system. There is also limited nutrition-related surveillance of people living in urban deprived areas. Most surveillance programmes are digitized, use measures to ensure high data quality and report evidence of flexibility; however, many are inconsistently implemented and rely on external agencies' financial support.