Currently browsing posts about: Sustainability

We are seeing intense pressure on food companies to adopt more sustainable supply-chain and production practices.  But can an ultra-processed food ever be sustainably produced?  Or, is a sustainable snack food an oxymoron?

In BakeryandSnacks.com’s Spotlight on Sustainability, snack food companies say what they are doing to reduce their impact on the environment:

• ‘Last 10% is always the hardest’: Inside General Mills’ push for sourcing, agriculture and communities: According to its 2019 Global Responsibility Report, the Minneapolis, Minnesota-based company sources 85% of its top ten ingredients in responsible ways. Read more 
• General Mills’ mega push towards healthy farming practices to lessen Big Food’s footprint: General Mills has committed to advancing regenerative agricultural practices on one million acres of US farmland by 2030. Read more
• General Mills reinvents cereal plan after crop failure of eco-friendly grain: General Mills’ plans to roll out a new cereal made from Kernza across the US have stalled. However, instead of crying over spilt milk, the company has put a new spin on marketing climate beneficial foods. Read more
•  Grupo Bimbo: One of the world’s most ethical companies baking bread for billions the world over: Mexico’s Grupo Bimbo began as a humble family store in 1945, growing into the largest baking company in the world and a relevant player in snacks, with net sales of $14.2bn in 2017. Read more
• Mondelēz on track to achieve 2020 sustainability and healthy snacking goals: Mondelēz has said it is on target to achieve its 2020 goals in healthy snacking and sustainability. Read more
• Mondelēz expands sustainable wheat program to cover 100% of European biscuits by 2022: The Oreo maker has announced it is expanding its Harmony program to ensure that its entire European biscuit production will be made from sustainable wheat within the next five years. Read more
• Barilla reconfirms responsible agriculture commitment with the launch of 100% sustainable wheat biscuits: Italian pasta producers Barilla has reconfirmed its commitment to responsible agriculture with the extended use of 100% sustainable soft wheat across its Mulino Bianco brand of products. Read more

The meat industry is under siege these days over issues of sustainability.  The major recommendation of the EAT-Lancet report is to cut consumption of red meat by half in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  This is a worry for the meat industry.

This collection of articles indicates how this industry is dealing with the sustainability issue—in some cases, with difficulty, denial, and fighting back.

GlobalMeatNews.com, an industry newsletter, has this Special Edition: Sustainability

In this special edition on sustainability, we look at what the major players in the international meat industry are doing to ensure the future of the sector. We start with quality control plans with Brazilian poultry as well as a massive investment in solar technology by Hormel Foods. We also look at Cargill’s work on reducing antibiotics and a new beef scheme in Ireland.

• ABPA outlines quality control plans for Brazilian poultry sector: In an effort to demonstrate its quality standards, the Brazilian Animal Protein Association (ABPA) recently undertook an in-depth on-site analysis of the poultry meat industry’s facilities, taking food safety, sustainability and animal health and welfare into account… Read
• Hormel Foods to build solar array: US processor Hormel Foods Corporation has started construction on a solar energy project at its Swiss American Sausage Company facility in California… Read
• Cargill’s holistic approach to antibiotic reduction: In an exclusive interview with GlobalMeatNews, Cargill’s food safety and quality lead for poultry Randy Giroux explains how the business is doing its part to reduce antibiotic usage… Read
• Meat diets will be maintained by consumers: The influx of meat alternatives may have led to reports about the demise of the traditional meat industry. However, new research from Cargill has shown that the majority of consumers intend to maintain or increase their consumption of animal protein over the next year… Read
• Green shoots: creating a positive future for meat: Ahead of unveiling its new ‘The Future of Meat is Green’ initiative at the IFFA show in Germany, concept developer Vaessen-Schoemaker spoke exclusively to GlobalMeatNews about its hopes for the scheme and how the meat debate could become a positive one… Read
• Glanbia and Kepak launch beef scheme: Irish processors Glanbia Ireland and Kepak Group have announced a new calf-to-beef pilot programme… Read
• Danish Crown aims to be world producer of sustainable meats: Meat processor Danish Crown has pledged to halve the company’s climate footprint per kilogram of pork by 2030 as part of its sustainability goals… Read
• ‘A major step forward’: Brazil founds trade group for carbon-neutral meat: The newly-formed Brazilian Association of Carbon-Neutral Meat Producers will develop both supply of, and demand for, carbon-neutral meat… Read
• JBS USA to develop global sustainability programme with Brazil: JBS USA has revealed that it is in talks with the businesses division in Brazil to develop a 2025 global sustainability programme following the successful progress of its 2020 goals for the US market… Read
• Register now for sustainable packaging webinar: The packaging and meat sectors have their opportunity to discuss sustainability in the latest GlobalMeatNews editorial webinar… Read
• Industry hits back at red meat consumption report: The international meat industry has hit back at a new report suggesting that red meat intake be halved in order to improve health and ensure a global food system… Read

The National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine has a new report out on Science Breakthroughs to Advance Food and Agricultural Research by 2030.

In the next decade, the major goals for food and agricultural research include (1) improving the efficiency of food and agricultural systems, (2) increasing the sustainability of agriculture, and (3) increasing the resiliency of agricultural systems to adapt to rapid changes and extreme conditions.

To that end, the committee that wrote this report examined “breakthrough opportunities that could dramatically increase the capabilities of food and agricultural science.”

The breakthroughs?

1. A systems approach to understand the nature of interactions among the different elements of the food and agricultural system can be leveraged to increase overall system efficiency, resilience, and sustainability.
2. The development and validation of precise, accurate, field-deployable sensors and biosensors will enable rapid detection and monitoring capabilities across various food and agricultural disciplines.
3. The application and integration of data science, software tools, and systems models will enable advanced analytics for managing the food and agricultural system.
4. The ability to carry out routine gene editing of agriculturally important organisms will allow for precise and rapid improvement of traits important for productivity and quality.
5. Understand the relevance of the microbiome to agriculture and harness this knowledge to improve crop production, transform feed efficiency, and increase resilience to stress and disease.

I’m worried about how all this will help make agricultural production more sustainable.  For that, we need smaller scale, fewer chemical inputs, crop rotations, and other such methods.  I wish NASEM would do a serious study on agricultural sustainability.

Update, May 26: Benjamin Chaulet has translated this into French and posted it on his blog, nutrition-newage.com. Here is a pdf.

I’ve saved this for Weekend Reading because it will take a weekend to get through it.  The report is a blockbuster: 37 authors, 47 pages, 357 references.

The Lancet commissioned this report from the EAT Forum, which brought together international experts on diet and health (most of whom I do not know) to define unifying dietary principles that best promote will promote the health of people and the planet.

Fortunately, the diet that is best for health is the same diet as is best for the planet.  The report defines it on page 5.

To summarize:

This report has many strengths:

• It is researched in depth and is now the reference source for information about needed dietary changes.
• It firmly links dietary health to environmental sustainability.
• Its findings are consistent with many previous reports on diet and health, including that of the 2015 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee DGAC).
• Its messages are unambiguous.
• The summary report is a big help
• The timing  is excellent; the 2020 Dietary Guidelines advisory committee, if it ever gets appointed, will have to pay close attention to the science reviewed in this report.
• It focuses on food, not nutrients (these meals meet the standards of recommended diets).

Does this report settle the questions?  Hardly.  Remember the fuss over sustainability (the “S-word?”) in the 2015 report of the DGAC?

• The meat industry does not like advice to eat less meat.
• The dairy industry doesn’t like it either.  Its trade associations emphasize its nutritional value and source of livelihood for a billion people.
• The food industry has lots of complaints.

There is lots to read and think about here.  Enjoy!

• The Lancet home page for the report (includes slides, links)
• The Lancet editorial accompanying the report
• The EAT Forum home page for the report (information about EAT, the launch, the commission members, etc)
• The EAT Forum summary report

The World Resources Institute has a new report on how to feed the world in a way that is sustainable.

The report is based on the premise that 56% more food will be needed by 2050.  Given that premise, the unavailability of more land on which to grow food, and the need to mitigate greenhouse gases, the report recommends (among other things) increasing the efficiency of production and managing demand.

I’d like to see some careful evaluations of the basic premise of this report as well as its recommendations, which seem to place a large burden on individuals rather than governments or corporations.  The word “corporation” does not appear in the report; food companies come up only in the context of food waste (a non-controversial issue):

• The full report is here.
• The working papers for each of its recommendations are here.
• The charts are summarized here.

Two new Index Systems rank countries for sustainability and corporations for promoting health.

I.  Sustainability Index.

The Economist and Barilla have devised a new, interactive Index that ranks countries on the basis of food loss and waste, sustainable agriculture, and the ability to meet nutritional challenges.  Its scoring system goes from 0 (terrible) to 100 (perfect).

The top ten scoring countries are:

None of the scores is exemplary.  The US rank is #26.

II.  Access to Nutrition Index

The Access to Nutrition Foundation (Netherlands) ranks corporations on their strategies, policies, and actions to address obesity and diet-related diseases in the US.

The overall rankings, shown here, are relatively low.  Some do better than others on governance, products, accessibility, marketing, lifestyles, labeling, and engagement.

The highest scores are for labeling.  The lowest scores are for accessibility.

Indexes like these are useful for understanding where we are.  They should inspire us to action.

The Committee on World Food Security of the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization has a report out on this topic, well worth pondering.

Sustainability, respect, safety, health, transparency, accountability—all good ideas.  The trick is to put them into practice.

Sustainable Food Trust has a report on a conference on the True Cost of American Food.

Health is the obvious cost, but others include:

• the cost of nitrate and pesticide pollution of ground and river water from agro-chemicals, which in some areas of the US are so high that the water industry is struggling to provide drinking water within legal limits,
• air pollution from CAFOs shown to be increasing respiratory infections and other diseases in people living nearby,
• the loss of biodiversity, including the decline of farmland birds and pollinating insects,
• soil degradation and erosion from continuous monoculture crop production,
• the human health costs to employees working in stressful conditions in food processing plants.

The American Farmland Trust and Growing Food Connections have published GROWING LOCAL: A Community Guide to Planning for Agriculture and Food Systems.

This is an enormously useful how-to guide to developing local food systems with lots of facts and figures .  Here is an example:

The Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis , of all things, has issued “Harvesting Opportunity: The Power of Regional Food System Investments to Transform Communities.”

Harvesting Opportunity…highlights models for collaboration between policymakers, practitioners and the financial community, and discusses research, policy and resource gaps that, if addressed, might contribute to the success of regional food systems strategies.

New Food Economy has an analysis by Katy Kieffer on who really owns America’s farmland

While urban commercial real estate has skyrocketed in places like New York, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C., powerful investors have also sought to turn a profit by investing in the most valuable rural real estate: farmland. It’s a trend that’s driving up costs up for the people who grow our food, and—slowly—it’s started to change the economics of American agriculture.