Официальная обратная связь диалогов

Solution #3: Innovative policies and programs Dialogue participants stressed the importance of policy to achieve food equity for all, with programs implemented by a diverse group of government agencies that reflect the communities they serve. Some participants noted that programs could support soil health and urban agriculture, as well as work to enforce existing regulations like antitrust laws or develop new legislation to address systemic discrimination like the Justice for Black Farmers Act. Some participants emphasized that good soil health practices could help capture and store carbon in ... Подробнееsoil and benefit plant and animal production and health. Some participants discussed how urban agriculture could mitigate greenhouse gas emissions by reducing the need to transport food and could also address urban food deserts. Some participants thought that USDA subsidy programs could be revamped to promote the production of healthier foods. Some participants noted that government outreach programs could build bridges between rural and urban communities and shape sustainable consumption behaviors. Some participants also noted evidence gaps including on the productivity of urban farming and data on the health outcomes for consumers of different diets. Скрыть

Solution #4: Predictive food supply chain analytics Dialogue participants identified improving prediction through Artificial Intelligence (AI) as a solution. Some participants noted that an opportunity exists for U.S. food systems to better harness and share data to improve food distribution, reduce food loss and waste, and enhance precision agriculture. Some participants noted that improved use of data could allow stakeholders to learn from experiences such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Some participants noted a need for further evidence and research on the impacts of increased uptake of AI techn... Подробнееology, and noted concerns that tradeoffs could include job loss, unintended consequences as ecosystems are not one size fits all, and social issues related to agricultural extension and education. Скрыть

Points of consensus or disagreement included discussion on the value of increased education for sustainable and healthy diets and making healthy choices easier for consumers. Some participants agreed that strengthening the ability to deliver food in emergency situations is important for the food security of low-income families. While some participants agreed that the government could play a greater role in outreach on nutrition and agriculture programs, other participants speculated that government interventions could lead to community push back due to a lack of trust. Some participants noted ... Подробнееthat local food systems could be a solution to food waste, while other participants noted that access to global markets is key to ensuring food security and combatting economic shocks. Participants also noted that raising awareness of innovative technology can increase adoption of potentially beneficial technology for those initially skeptical. Скрыть

This report represents the views of U.S. stakeholders invited to the Dialogue; it does not represent the official views of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) or the United States Government. In following with the guidelines of the UN Dialogues Toolkit and to ensure a systematic, comprehensive approach to assessing food systems, the second U.S. National Dialogue focused on identifying solutions to building more socially, economically, and environmentally sustainable food systems in the United States. The discussions focused on building on the results of the first U.S. National F... Подробнееood Systems Dialogue, breaking away from the five “action tracks” framework used in the first dialogue. The event agenda consisted of opening remarks, followed by two one-hour breakout sessions with small groups (where each breakout session had a different composition of participants) led by U.S. government experts and researchers, and concluding with read-outs of the breakout session discussions by facilitators. The participants noted in Section 1. Participation of this report are only those who participated in breakout rooms, not including U.S. government facilitators and notetakers. To motivate the breakout discussions, participants were requested to come to the Dialogue with 2-3 solutions addressing one or more of the three overarching challenges identified in the first U.S. National Food Systems Dialogue: 1) information gaps with respect to nutrition and sustainability, 2) inequalities in access to healthy diets and opportunities in farming and food industries, and 3) environmental degradation and climate change. The solutions could be crosscutting and provide benefits to more than one of the overarching challenges or targeted to one specific challenge. Participants were asked to share their solutions in both breakout sessions and to narrow down the top solutions as a group. In the second session, participants were asked to refine their solutions based on something new learned in the first session. This iterative process aimed to build consensus to arrive at a core set of solutions across distinct stakeholder groups. Discussion Questions: To encourage a systematic assessment of solutions, breakouts considered the following questions: • Breakout Session One: o What are two-three top solutions that address the major challenge areas identified in the first U.S. National Food Systems Dialogue and advance sustainable food systems in the United States? o Identify the top three solutions for further discussion to address the three challenges identified in the first Dialogue. Is there any overlap or divergence in the solutions? What is the most promising bucket of solutions to prioritize for discussion? o For each of the three challenge areas:  Does the group note any evidence gaps or tradeoffs related to this solution?  Does the solution respond to the three pillars of sustainability (social, economic, environmental)?  How urgent is implementation of this solution?  Is this solution applicable at a local/regional/national/international scale?  Is there consensus from the group on who would need to implement/finance the solution? What are the costs for implementation?  What are the unintended consequences that could result from this solution? • Breakout Session Two: Same questions as session one, but these solutions should reflect something new learned in the first discussion group, so please highlight what has changed/what is different about your solutions now. Скрыть

The focus of the second Dialogue was to identify solutions to improving the sustainability of food systems. While the discussion topics were organized around the three overarching challenges outlined above, some solutions addressed a single challenge while others were cross-cutting to holistically consider challenges and tradeoffs across food systems. Conversations aggregated and analyzed individual solutions to arrive at different clusters with greater consensus, or topics for further exploration. The solutions clusters that emerged in response to the challenges were: 1) Technology (including... Подробнее rural broadband) and dietary and food production choice, 2) Bolster the participation of socially disadvantaged groups, infrastructure for nutritious foods sustainably produced, and competitive markets that serve all size producers, 3) Voluntary incentives and technical support for sustainable production, and 4) Food systems policy and planning and youth involvement. • Solutions Cluster #1 (Information gaps about healthy diets and sustainably produced food): Technology (including rural broadband) and dietary and food production choice Dialogue participants identified increasing the application of technology (including rural broadband), clear definitions and standards, and dietary and food production choice as the most promising solutions to address information gaps about healthy diets and sustainably produced food. Some participants expressed that broader access to technology could eliminate information gaps and help consumers and farmers make healthy food choices and produce food in a sustainable manner. Some participants discussed information silos and noted that standardization of nutrition and sustainability definitions could assist in meeting shared goals, particularly with respect to climate and equity. Some participants noted the importance of broadening food choice through public outreach to consumers on nutrition and producers on environmental impacts. • Solutions Cluster #2 (Inequalities): Bolster the participation of socially disadvantaged groups, infrastructure for nutritious foods sustainably produced, and competitive markets that serve all size producers Dialogue participants identified bolstering the participation of socially disadvantaged groups, infrastructure for nutritious foods sustainably produced, and competitive markets that serve all size producers as the most promising solutions to address inequalities in access to healthy diets and opportunities in farming and food industries. Some participants emphasized that centering the voices of socially disadvantaged groups is vital to the success of any food system. Primary avenues identified by some participants to create the conditions for the participation of socially disadvantaged groups in the food system included community engagement, agricultural land preservation and resource access, focus on land tenure laws, public support for community-led and regional approaches, and research and extension. Some participants highlighted that better infrastructure and resilient and equitable supply chains can increase access to nutritious food. Some participants noted that competitive markets that serve all size producers are key to addressing inequalities. • Solutions Cluster #3 (Environmental Degradation and Climate Change): Voluntary incentives and technical support for sustainable production Dialogue participants identified voluntary incentives for sustainable production and technical support for sustainable production as the most promising solutions to address environmental degradation and climate change. There was consensus amongst participants that the provision of incentives for producers of all sizes is a key solution to more sustainable consumption and production. Incentives mentioned by some participants included keeping land in reserve (e.g. easements) to protect the environment, rewarding and recognizing on farm stewardship practices, recognizing the role of retailers and restaurants in reducing food/packaging waste and repurposing food, and supporting sustainable practices that may not be economically feasible in the short-term. Some participants shared support for aligning incentives with national conservation goals. In setting environmental goals, some participants noted the importance of addressing environmental impacts beyond carbon footprints by including issues such as nitrogen, water quality, and waste reduction. • Solutions Cluster #4 (Cross-Cutting): Food systems policy and planning and youth involvement Dialogue participants agreed that cross-cutting solutions require participatory and adaptive food systems policy and planning and the involvement of youth across food systems. Participants agreed that food systems policy and planning should be science and evidence-based, and support inclusive, diverse, and integrated approaches that address all three challenges identified in the first U.S. National Food Systems Dialogue. Some participants elaborated on the approaches needed to achieve sustainable food systems, highlighting voluntary, adaptive, and participatory approaches. Participants agreed that involvement of youth in food systems was a cross-cutting requirement for solutions in all three challenges. One group reached agreement that through additional training on healthy foods, youth will fill information gaps and solve problems affecting food systems. Скрыть

Solutions Cluster #1 (Information gaps about healthy diets and sustainably produced food): Technology (including rural broadband), clear definitions and standards, and dietary and food production choice Participants identified increasing the application of technology (including rural broadband), clear definitions and standards, and dietary and food production choice as the most promising solutions to address information gaps about healthy diets and sustainably produced food. Some participants highlighted that broader access to technology could eliminate information gaps and help consumers and ... Подробнееfarmers make healthy food choices and produce food in a sustainable manner. There was consensus amongst participants on the importance of rural broadband. Some participants noted that increased access to rural broadband and smartphones could improve information flows as well as increase adoption of novel digital technologies and data management systems. Some participants also noted that rural broadband would serve food system stakeholders ranging from rural communities to the seafood industry who could better monitor environmental conditions on cargo ships. Some participants highlighted that technology should be accessible to diverse users and appropriate for linguistic and cultural differences. Access to technology could address issues such as climate change, some participants noted, along with improving food security. Some participants noted that sustainable, resilient food systems are both a food security and national security issue. The absence of clear and shared definitions of nutrition and sustainability generated concern amongst some participants. Some participants suggested that while nutrition or traceability labels exist, such as in the seafood industry, consistency in labeling would improve public knowledge and information gaps. Some participants noted that components of sustainability including recycling and food waste lacked a common definition. Some participants recommended standardization of nutrition and sustainability definitions and clarity around expectations, goals, measurement, and best practices. Some participants elaborated that information gaps exist because distinct regulatory structures oversee different food products, resulting in a “silo-ing” that produces information gaps. Some participants suggested the creation of an interdepartmental U.S. government task force on food systems to alleviate the gaps in information flows. Some participants noted the importance of food choice. Some participants posited that public outreach is needed to educate consumers about food labels, nutrition, and the environmental impacts of food production so they can make informed choices. Some participants noted the goal of providing consumers and producers with more autonomy to choose what, where, and how their food is grown. Some participants noted the importance of building nutrition literacy, teaching not only the “what” but the “how” and additional awareness around nutritious foods and healthy choices that are tasty. The nutritional needs of different populations were noted by some participants, and as was the need to communicate information to help people better understand the importance of fruits and vegetables and whole grains and share cooking methods and recipes. Some participants noted that culture and tastes should be included in discussions of nutrition and dietary guidelines, and that food choice could be broadened through increased focus on nutrient dense culturally appropriate foods. Regarding health and nutrition, some participants mentioned that we need new partnerships catalyzed by many groups including state, local, and federal government to promote healthy eating to prevent disease. Some participants mentioned that prevention and discussion of nutrition is not currently mainstreamed in the health field, which could potentially generate savings in healthcare costs. Скрыть

Solutions Cluster #2 (Inequalities): Bolster participation of socially disadvantaged groups, infrastructure for nutritious foods sustainably produced, and competitive markets that serve all size producers Participants identified increasing the participation of socially disadvantaged groups in the food system as one of the most promising solutions to address inequalities in access to healthy diets and opportunities in farming and food industries. Some participants noted that innovation does not only happen with machines and methods of production, there can be innovations in power structure. As ... Подробнееsuch, some participants noted that creating the conditions for socially disadvantaged groups to have voice and thrive in the food system is a critical part of any solution. Some participants considered that barriers to local and regional food system solutions constitute discrimination, leaving underserved populations without access to healthy and culturally appropriate foods. Primary avenues to increase participation of socially disadvantaged groups in the food system mentioned by some participants included community engagement, agricultural land preservation and resource access, focus on land tenure, public support for community-led and regional approaches, and research and extension. Community engagement was a central focus of discussion, with some participants noting the importance of asking the people who are impacted rather than prescribing solutions using a top down approach. Some participants also noted that programs should center the needs of farmers and producers. Some participants agreed that land tenure and ownership are important to address historical inequities regarding land access. Some participants noted that expanding land access opportunities and succession planning options to ensure longevity are important to assisting with a land transition to next generation and minority farmers. Some participants noted the importance of re-examining and re-aligning public support for agriculture and food systems through regional, community-led approaches that focus on enabling land use and food sovereignty (this term was used but not defined in group discussion) for disadvantaged communities and youth. Some participants mentioned the importance of supporting Indigenous-led systems in Indigenous communities. One form this public support could take, mentioned by some participants, is providing resources to next generation and minority farmers, and leveraging existing programs to enable climate change mitigation. Some participants posited that the impact of public support could be maximized through a regional food systems approach with an emphasis on regional food sovereignty, and a systematic approach to strategic land conservation and tenure policies in generational turnover. Some participants noted the importance of proven, evidence-based practices to address local food system challenges, along with research and extension focused on hard-to-reach small producers and low-income populations. For example, some participants mentioned the model of churches providing land for communities to grow and produce foods to address the problem of food deserts. Specific ideas mentioned by some participants included investment to ensure equitable access to food and technology, support for small and medium sized businesses, regional networks, and urban agriculture, and extension services to produce higher-value products and supply chains that support a diversified workforce. The extension capability of research institutions and land grant universities to support small and medium-sized enterprises, young farmers, and Indigenous farmers was highlighted by some participants. The need to raise wages for food production workers and innovate policies to empower workers, as well as incentivize food worker protection through unions to improve the safety of workers in the entire food chain, was also mentioned by some participants. Скрыть

Solutions Cluster #3 (Inequalities): Infrastructure for nutritious foods sustainably produced and competitive markets that serve all size producers Participants identified infrastructure to increase nutritious food access and competitive markets that serve all size producers as ways to address inequalities in access to healthy diets and opportunities in farming and food industries. Some participants highlighted using infrastructure to increase nutritious food access. Some participants suggested using the Biden Administration’s transportation infrastructure approach to rebuild the infrastruct... Подробнееure of U.S. food systems, and to begin comprehensive food system planning that could include regional food sovereignty, access to fresh foods, or retail available to certain communities. Some participants mentioned food hubs as an example of infrastructure, which bring together local producers with consumers to build resiliency. Some participants mentioned the need to rethink our supply networks, reorienting them so they are adaptable and accessible to assure reliability and equity. Some participants noted that local and regional food systems should focus on processing as well as production. Some participants noted that improved healthy food access goes beyond transportation to food pricing. Some participants mentioned reconsidering the Food Box program to support local and regional food systems and provide nutritious, culturally appropriate foods. Food production suggestions mentioned by some participants included increasing the variety of crops for core consumption beyond staple crops and increasing the contribution of blue and aquatic foods to diets. Some participants suggested that philanthropic organizations could do more to produce, process, and distribute food. Some participants called for more work to ensure markets are competitive and serve all size producers to address inequalities (see further discussion in “Divergences” section of this report). Some participants noted that existing regulations and policies may be harmful for some small producers, highlighting the need to internalize the externalities of food production and consumption, anti-trust, and public investment in local infrastructure. Further, some highlighted the potential for free markets around the world to increase efficiency and a rules-based trading system which is resilient to meet global demand. Some participants noted the importance of removing access barriers to technology and funding technology transfer globally. Some participants elaborated that this could include facilitating trade agreements requiring harmonization and regulation to create environments for technology and innovation to flourish. Additionally, some participants highlighted that not every jurisdiction is equal in terms of what they can produce or export. Some participants posited that improving communities’ access to trade, including global markets, lowers risks and can therefore address this challenge. Some participants hypothesized that this would include reinforcing and establishing key partnerships that include local farmers and global trading players and to open new markets domestically and internationally. Some participants suggested acknowledging that the United States and the rest of the world are interconnected and noted that sustainable U.S. food systems support sustainable food systems across the globe. Скрыть

Solutions Cluster #4 (Environmental Degradation and Climate Change): Voluntary incentives and technical support for sustainable production Participants identified voluntary incentives for sustainable production, reducing food loss and waste, and technical support for conservation as the most promising solutions to address environmental degradation and climate change. There was consensus amongst participants that the provision of incentives for producers of all sizes is a key solution for consumers and farmers to adopt more sustainable consumption and production behaviors. Incentives mentioned ... Подробнееby some participants included sparing land for conservation purposes, rewarding and recognizing practices that protect farmland (including climate smart agriculture and crop rotation, no till, and cover crops), recognizing retailers and restaurants for reducing food waste and repurposing food, and supporting sustainable practices that may not be economically feasible in the short-term. Some participants highlighted the solution of reducing food loss and waste, noting that 30-40% of calories harvested are wasted or destroyed, creating an environmental burden. Some participants noted that use of innovative tools and technologies, such as biotechnology, crop protection products, and precision agriculture technologies could improve sustainability outcomes in agricultural production. Some participants agreed that increasing adoption of the latest technology interventions, such as biotechnology, could address the environmental sustainability and nutrition problems of commodity crops. However, some participants noted that international regulations on biotechnology/biosafety need attention to facilitate free trade. Some participants noted that use of innovative technologies in food production including lab-based meat and fish could improve sustainability outcomes in food production. Some participants noted that targeted investment could help to reach goals with respect to nutrition and sustainability, and the importance of transparency and access to existing incentives, particularly amongst socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers. Repurposing public support to align with conservation goals was a second solution on which some participants agreed. Some participants posited that repurposing existing public support could better achieve environmental outcomes, including making crop insurance more conservation friendly and reallocating domestic support from large to small farms. Some participants noted that an increased conservation budget would be important and could fund goals such as climate smart agriculture, access to key inputs of land, water, and labor, and the climate resiliency of domestic fisheries. Some participants noted that additional research is needed on the sustainability of regenerative and sustainable feeds, and the nuanced differences between animal production systems that are not fully recognized or considered in the marketplace. Some participants posited that the pathway forward could include the creation of technical and financial support for diversified farming, food processing, outreach and education programs, and food business communities. In setting environmental goals, some participants noted the importance of addressing environmental impacts beyond carbon footprints by solving for issues such as nitrogen, water quality, and waste. Some participants suggested that USDA itself could apply standards in environmental impacts, labor requirements, and equity as it does in procurement and providing funds to farmers or eligibility to various programs. Скрыть

Solutions Cluster (Cross-Cutting): Food systems policy, planning, and approaches Participants agreed that a cross-cutting solution that addresses all three challenge areas is participatory and adaptive food systems policy and planning. Participants agreed that food systems policy and planning should be science and evidence-based, and support inclusive, diverse, and integrated approaches that address all three challenges identified in the first U.S. National Food Systems Dialogue. Some participants agreed that the goal for food systems is to ensure access to safe and nutritious food that is sus... Подробнееtainably produced and contributes to resiliency. Some participants suggested that rethinking our framework for food safety, security, stability, and resiliency is critical to responding to climate change, demographic shifts, and landscape changes. Some participants noted that the cross-cutting nature of the food system and its tradeoffs requires comprehensive planning. One example cited by some participants was that nutritious food affordability is a key component to healthy diets, but low-priced food creates challenges for safe worker conditions and sustainable livelihoods. Another example cited by some participants was the lack of synergy between the dietary guidelines and production incentives, which contribute to high rates of diet related illnesses. An additional consideration noted by some participants is the need to adjust for new consumption and population and growth trends, and scale food systems planning regionally. One of the outcomes of food systems planning mentioned by some participants could be the evaluation of research funding, with some participants noting research should be directed to areas that solve food system challenges. Some participants elaborated on the approaches needed to achieve sustainable food systems, highlighting voluntary, adaptive, and participatory approaches. Some participants noted that solutions are not “one size fits all” and should not pit one thing against another. Some participants highlighted that challenges should be addressed through the creation of targeted incentives that move us towards goals, combined with the removal of incentives that work against goals. Some participants noted that solutions should be adaptive and developed through iteration before reaching scale. Some participants stressed that all stakeholders need to have equitable voice and that solutions should be responsive to needs on the ground. Some participants elaborated that community-centered solutions could include factors such as knowledge systems, innovation, ecological and systems change, and valuing localized approaches. One group reached the following consensus on approaches to sustainable food systems: “integrated, inclusive, and intercultural approach based on science, incentives and innovation to support and advance local change and connect with holistic systems to create common understandings in our language, address inequalities in access to healthy diets, food production, mitigate and adapt for environmental degradation and climate change.” Скрыть

Solutions Cluster (Cross-Cutting): Involvement of youth Participants agreed that a cross-cutting solution that addresses all three challenge areas is the involvement of youth across food systems. Participants agreed that involvement of youth in food systems is a cross-cutting solution to all food systems challenges. Some participants highlighted the importance of building a sense of agency in youth, and suggested that policies, discussions, and possible solutions need to be discussed with future leaders in high school and college. Some participants noted the necessity of increasing youth educa... Подробнееtion and training in food systems with a focus on nutrition, economics, science, and technology. Some participants agreed that engaging youth through school and programs such as 4H could promote healthy food messages, and that children and young people are agents of change that can spread awareness about food safety, food loss and waste, new methods of production, and the interconnectivity of food systems. One group reached agreement that through additional training on healthy foods, youth will fill information gaps and solve problems affecting food systems. Regarding youth currently employed in food systems, some participants noted that young people are committed to farming and there was an increase in young farmers in the last census. Some participants noted that programs to bring youth into the agriculture, fisheries, and aquaculture sectors (analogous to AmeriCorps) could be a way to increase youth engagement. Скрыть

Participants expressed divergent views on the role of consolidation and global, regional, and local food systems. Some participants expressed that smaller scale food systems are more sustainable while others countered that smaller is not always more sustainable, as smaller operations cannot always afford to support workers or achieve the efficiency of larger operations. Facilitators flagged this as an area requiring further exploration. One dimension of this divergence focused on modern technologies, including biotechnology. One participant noted the importance of biotechnology to contribute t... Подробнееo nutrition, production, worker health and safety, and the importance of science-based agriculture and use of science-based risk assessments as a foundation of food systems for the future. In response, another participant expressed that new technologies could negatively impact the ability of people to feed themselves, concluding that local ownership of the food system and promoting ecological diversity to ensure soil health is also important. Some participants stressed that food production should emphasize quality over quantity and soil health, with fortification of foods an interim solution while soil health practices become more widespread. Participants agreed that the tradeoffs of using modern technologies in agriculture need to be considered and weighed. Another dimension of this discussion focused on resilience. Some participants noted the tradeoffs between sourcing food locally versus externally during emergency situations. Some participants noted that sourcing food locally during emergency situations could stabilize the food supply. For example, in response to COVID19, one organization paid restaurants and community centers to support meals for the public, a model which was initially funded by philanthropy and requires longer term investment to sustain. On the other hand, one participant noted that some local and regional markets are highly dependent on external food sources, citing the example of Hawaii whose entire food supply could be disrupted if ports and airports are shut down. Participants agreed that the United States has an opportunity to lead in producing and providing access to nutrient dense foods at all scales, and that the UN Food Systems Summit should take into account the vulnerabilities and gaps in investment or tools of entry to create market access for all size producers. Скрыть

The food environment Our food environment, the way in which food is presented and the proximity of places where food can be bought, has a strong influence on consumers’ food choices. Aspects include, but are not limited to, product range, promotions and advertisements, and the visibility of food. The current food environment regularly seduces consumers into making unhealthy and unsustainable choices, even though many people are open to making the better choice. In this sub-dialogue, participants discussed how we can make it easier for consumers to make healthy and sustainable choices, and ho... Подробнееw we can adjust the food environment. The main findings of this session are as follows: - Food providers can change the food environment to encourage more sustainable and healthy options, for instance, by adjusting their product range, store design and setup, and nudging. In this way supermarkets seek to inform, inspire and activate consumers to make healthier and more sustainable choices. - The process is not easy as food buyers are guided by their routines and habits. To accelerate change, some stakeholders suggest introducing marketing and pricing measures. The healthy and sustainable choice must be the easier choice, and must also be affordable. In City Deals local governments are working on pilots to shape the local food environment. Скрыть

True price The social benefits and environmental costs of production and consumption are to a limited extent reflected in food prices. Including these benefits and costs in prices can act as an incentive for more sustainable and healthier production and consumption. In this sub-dialogue, participants discussed how we can arrive at a ‘true price’. The Netherlands has a Community of Practice on True Pricing that is experimenting with this. Recent studies were carried out into the potential of several methods of true pricing. The discussion built on these experiences. Key question was to iden... Подробнееtify the most suitable methods, in terms of reaching both consumers and producers, to reflect the cost of sustainable production. The main findings of this session are as follows: - Key performance indicators (KPIs) can be used as a proxy for true cost/true price. Recognised indicators can be linked to rewards for more sustainable and healthier production methods, like water storage and carbon capture and eco-arrangements in the Common Agricultural Policy. - Quality label initiatives already exist in the market, but these are usually focused on more visible aspects (like animal welfare, hours of pasturing for cattle) or consumer health (such as calories). The steps taken are generally small, as consumers’ willingness to pay for more sustainable or healthier food is limited. - If acceleration is desired, the government can set minimum requirements for sustainability and quality, especially for less tangible ecological outcomes such as soil fertility and CO2 emissions. - In addition, both the Netherlands and other importing and exporting countries will have to embrace more established sustainability standards (key performance indicators) and include them in pricing and (bilateral) trade agreements. Progress with the transition can and must then be assessed on the basis of these international agreements and ambitions at European level. - Additionally, local empowerment and local amenities will help foster social change and social innovation. Скрыть

Food-feed competition To reduce CO2 emissions, cope with drought and variable precipitation, and reduce nitrogen deposition, livestock production in the Netherlands needs to change. The energy transition and increasing demand for housing put yet more pressure on farmland. Coupled with a growing population and increasing demand for food, we need new solutions to the food-feed competition. Currently, crops that would also be fit for human consumption are often used as feed, or feed is grown on lands suitable for growing food. In this sub-dialogue, participants discussed how we can arrive at a su... Подробнееstainable distribution of land use, and what we would have to change. The main findings of this session are as follows: - It is envisioned that agricultural land will in the future be used as much as possible to produce food for human consumption. - Another top priority is preventing food waste and food loss, as well as high-value reuse of residual flows, for which European Union regulations now offer more scope. - Strict requirements for food safety and animal health will be upheld. Change can be stimulated by frontrunners and leading by example. - Finally, greater transparency for consumers, for instance by using quality marks, will improve their awareness about production methods. Скрыть

There were no specific areas of divergence, but several points of attention can be formulated. The message on the speed of change needs to be realistic. Radical changes may result, for example, in a loss of consumer involvement. Furthermore, it is necessary to adapt legislation, such as on the reuse of residual flows, without compromising food safety. To maintain a satisfactory rate of progress, good examples and frontrunners may help to show the way with small steps. With regard to formulating goals in order to boost the development of key performance indicators, it is important to consider i... Подробнееnternational arrangements and keep an eye on trade-offs. Key performance indicators need to be complemented with arrangements that link them to rewards, including from consumers. Скрыть

The focus of this dialogue was on bringing the different aspects and stakeholders together in a comprehensive approach based on systems thinking. This approach included a broad range of stakeholders with direct and indirect involvement in the food system in order to address the interlinkages in the system. The key questions discussed in the dialogue were: which further steps are desirable and conceivable in order to achieve a more sustainable and healthy food system that produces affordable food, is more nature-inclusive and has fair production conditions; and what do stakeholders need from ea... Подробнееch other in order to take the necessary steps towards this goal. The dialogue was broken down into thematic discussions on sustainable and healthy diets, the food environment, finance, true pricing, food-feed competition, the Dutch food system in an international context, and new scientific developments. Скрыть

The main findings of the dialogue are as follows: Policy gaps between the international, agricultural and health agendas need to be identified and bridged. This was underpinned by the role of the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality; the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport; and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as joint convenors. Together, they advocated bringing together actions from different domains to help ensure coherence. Participants expressed the hope that combining the results from the Global Food Systems Dialogues will led to agreement on common goals and a way forward a... Подробнееt the Food Systems Summit. The climate agenda and the Paris Agreement were mentioned as examples of such goals and action agendas. To raise awareness and increase involvement, the wide gap between food producers and food consumers must be closed. A growing number of initiatives aimed at improving mutual understanding already exist in the Netherlands, ranging from joint investment in and management of farmland to primary production. The involvement of young people and frontrunners is also necessary in order to break established patterns and help set inspiring examples. Collaboration between science and policy is crucial for impact. The science-policy interface needs to be strengthened to raise awareness and reach agreement on the impact of policies and technologies on food system outcomes at national and international levels, and to arrive at scalable solutions and performance indicators for sustainability. Technology should be designed to work with nature, to improve environmental outcomes. The close cooperation between knowledge institutions, companies and governments in the Netherlands offers a good basis for jointly developing and testing new social and technological models for the food system. The Netherlands can serve as a living lab, with its wide-ranging influence on food systems worldwide (e.g. 40% of all plant seeds worldwide come from the Netherlands). The Netherlands’ experience and global connections can be used to help other countries develop their own independent food production system. The importance of exporting knowledge is expected to grow, relative to exporting products. Скрыть

Sustainable and healthy diets For many Dutch consumers, shifting to a more sustainable and healthy diet requires an adjustment in their diet. However, daily food choices are not necessarily individual and conscious choices, as they tend to be determined by the food environment (see below), habits and culture, as well as by food-related skills, including knowledge about buying, preparing and conserving food. The Netherlands Nutrition Centre provides public information on healthy eating, and there are also several national and regional food education programmes for children as well as regional i... Подробнееnitiatives involving citizen participation. Furthermore, a number of CSOs provide information and transparency on nutritional values and production methods and provide examples of attractive, sustainable and healthy meals. In 2022, the Nutri-Score front-of-pack nutrition label is to be introduced to make the nutritional value of food more easily available. Nevertheless, a growing number of people in the Netherlands are overweight and make little use of information about the footprint of their meal, which often consists of ingredients from all over the world. In this sub-dialogue, participants discussed how we can help and encourage consumers to make more healthy and sustainable food choices. The main findings of this session are as follows: - Research shows that social norms greatly influence the choices people make. Existing programmes can be supplemented with further education and information activities, including giving examples, aimed at changing the social norm. - Role models who lead by example could be very effective. - Companies with a mainstream outreach can play an important role by setting attractive examples. - - Changes to the promotion of and advertisements for products that do not fit well in a sustainable and healthy diet can also have an effect, by changing the social norm while leaving consumers freedom of choice. - The effectiveness of communication can be increased by focusing on providing information at times of major life events, such as when a young person leaves the parental home. These are times when people are open to adopting new norms. To avoid the risk of losing the connection with consumers, it is important to use a positive message instead of emphasising what should not be done. - Companies themselves can also change the social norm by making healthy and sustainable options the default option. - Finally it is important to realise that changing a social norm takes time and requires a step-by-step approach. Скрыть

Finance Until now, the main focus in the Netherlands was on making production more sustainable with the help of defined measures. To leave more scope for entrepreneurship and long-term investment, a shift to a goal-driven approach is desirable. The main findings of this session are as follows: - To make the desired shift towards a goal-driven approach, farmers, the banking sector, CSOs and the government are working on a coherent set of key performance indicators (KPIs). A number of KPIs are already being used, e.g. the biodiversity monitor. Such indicators can be helpful in setting a pathway ... Подробнееfor progress. - KPIs offer clarity for farmers and financiers considering longer term joint investments, as they enable benchmarking and monitoring of progress. - For further progress, KPIs must be integrated into the whole food production and supply chain, including supermarkets, where they can serve as a tool for informing consumers. Furthermore, it is of the utmost importance to reach agreement at European level on a coherent set of KPIs in order to ensure a level playing field. - Finally, a reliable measurement system is required to verify performance. Скрыть