Physical, social and economic access to food at all times (food security) is a basic human right and yet, food insecurity remains a global public health problem (1). Food insecurity, the lack of regular or reliable access to nutritious food, disproportionately affects people living in geographically isolated areas such as rural, regional and remote (RRR) Australia (1). Food security is underpinned by six dimensions: food access, availability, utilisation; stability; agency; and sustainability (1). These dimensions and their determinants are interconnected, characterising food security as a complex, “wicked” problem that requires multidimensional responses (2). Australia’s dominant responses to food insecurity, including emergency food relief, nutrition education programs, and social welfare payments, typically focus on isolated aspects of the issue and therefore fail to address the complexities of the problem (2,3). In contrast, multidimensional responses tackle various determinants of food insecurity simultaneously to better identify and address the underlying causes of the issue (2). The Food Community project has implemented the innovative Systemic Innovation Lab approach to support food security in RRR Western Australia (WA) (2). The project aims to map existing initiatives addressing food security in RRR WA against 36 systems change characteristics associated with a transition towards a more effective way of supporting food security in their location (2). This presentation will focus on identifying and exploring the barriers perceived by food security initiative leaders to undertaking systems change. This study was conducted across six regions of WA, including the Wheatbelt, Midwest, Great Southern, Kimberley, Pilbara and Goldfields. Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 101 leaders representing 148 initiatives operating across RRR WA. Initiatives included any program, project or service that was addressing one or more determinant of food security. Interviews were managed using NVivo, and analysed thematically following the six-phase qualitative data analysis approach outlined by Braun and Clarke (4). The most common initiative type was food literacy/health promotion programs (n=57) and ‘food access’ was the dimension most commonly addressed by initiatives (n=89). Initiatives in this study were least likely to possess the systems change characteristics associated with undertaking meaningful engagement with government representatives. Participants identified barriers to government-community interaction, including limited opportunities, a perceived lack of interest from government representatives, and challenges to undertaking advocacy. Government-community engagement helps to align policies with local contexts and empower communities to govern their food security (2). Therefore, initiative leaders require support, potentially in the form of toolkits and guides, to enhance their skills and capacity to undertake advocacy and strategically engage with government representatives. These findings provide valuable insights into the perspectives of initiative leaders and highlights key areas for improving food security systems change, including the need to strengthen collaboration between government and community for sustainable food security solutions.