The report The right to an adequate diet: the agriculture-food-health nexus is to deal with the triple challenge we face today – that of the role of agrifood systems (from increasing production to ensuring sustainable diets), undernutrition and micronutrients deficiency, as well as overweight and obesity. A strong human rights approach has been applied to the framework.

““The right to food means not only access to an adequate quantity of food, but also the ability to have a balanced and nutritious diet” .”

The report examines the agriculture-food-health nexus and analyzes why undernutrition, micronutrient deficiency and overnutrition are different dimensions of malnutrition that must be addressed together through a life-course approach.

As the document states, existing food systems have failed to address hunger and, concurrently, these systems have encouraged diets that are a source of overweight and obesity (and other chronic diet-related conditions) that cause more deaths globally than does underweight.

“Faced with this public health crisis, we continue to prescribe medical remedies: nutrition pills and early-life nutrition strategies for those lacking in calories; slimming pills, lifestyle advice and calorie counting for the overweight. But we must tackle the systemic problems that generate poor nutrition in all its forms.”

A transition towards sustainable diets can be achieved only by supporting diverse farming systems (that also support livelihoods of poor farmers) that are ecologically sustainable and that ensure adequate diets accessible to all. Notably, a strong gender dimension has been employed throughout the report – women, the principal caregivers of young children, must be enabled to make informed and autonomous decisions about food and feeding so that young children can enjoy the right to a level of nutrition that supports adequate growth, health and development.

The adoption of a human rights framework can serve to ensure that short-terms answers do not preclude the changes of identifying long-term solutions.

The Special Rapporteur presented his report to the UN Human Rights Council in March 2012, where he identified five ways to tackle disastrous diets by placing nutrition at the heart of food systems in the developed and developing world:, namely (throughougly discussed in the full report):

- taxing unhealthy products;

- regulating foods high in saturated fats, salt and sugar; “We have deferred to food companies the responsibility for ensuring that a good nutritional balance emerges. Voluntary guidelines and piecemeal nutrition initiatives have failed to create a system with the right signals, and the odds remain stacked against the achievement of a healthy, balanced diet.”

- cracking down on junk food advertising;

- overhauling misguided agricultural subsidies that make certain ingredients cheaper than others; “Heavily processed foods lead to diets richer in saturated and trans-fatty acids, salt and sugars. Children become hooked on the junk foods targeted at them. In better-off countries, the poorest population groups are most affected because foods high in fats, sugar and salt are often cheaper than healthy diets as a result of misguided subsidies whose health impacts have been wholly ignored.”

- supporting local food production so that consumers have access to healthy, fresh and nutritious foods.

“We should not simply invest our hopes in medicalizing our diets with enriched products, or changing people’s choices through health warnings. We need ambitious, targeted nutrition strategies to protect the right to adequate food, and such strategies will only work if the food systems underpinning them are put right.”

For more information on the work of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food please go here.

On 29 February 2012, the European Commission proposed several Innovation Partnerships in order to meet key challenges facing our society, in areas that are crucial to growth and jobs: one of these be sustainable agricultural productivity. The Commission claims a more concerted innovation effort across the public and private sector of agriculture and food production, in order to improve quality of life and position Europe as a global leader.

The Commission’s new European Innovation Partnership (EIP) on Agricultural Productivity and Sustainability is believed to achieve these goals. What is the focus the Commission takes towards food and healthy lifestyles in the proposal?

Although the Communication contains a rather positive direction towards the agricultural productivity and sustainability, it is done in a still pre-dominant light of increasing productivity by slightly or unchanged current production methods that are among the most polluting, resource-inefficient and depleting, energy-intensive and dependent on subsidies (often promoting agricultural production contributing to ill-health conditions such as chronic diet-related diseases). Instead, the EIP should stimulate local and regional food systems based on agro-ecological models, food producers, local authorities and communities themselves to find innovative solutions to local problems.

This – although little ambitious – shift towards more resource efficient farming is welcome, but it is essential that the recommendations made in the 3rd SCAR foresight report, regarding the concepts of productivity and sufficiency, are emphasised more in the implementation of this EIP. The EIP must considers the whole – integrated – food system, including public procurement, retailing, marketing and consumption. Moreover, it is essential to focus on truly sustainable food and farming systems with proven social and environmental benefits.

In our position on the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), EPHA stated that the EU agriculture policy can – and should – contribute to meeting increasing global demand for food. In order to achieve this, not only technology that increases food production will be required but an equal effort will have to be put into challenging current consumption patterns and providing incentives to move production and consumption towards increasingly plant-based diets. CAP must support investment in innovation in agriculture and food production, and support a balanced research agenda that not only invests in new technology, but agro-ecological and human ecological models of research.

Key points of the EIP on Agricultural Productivity and Sustainability

- European agriculture to respond to the major societal challenges of increased food demand through the productivity narrative while accounting for the constrained natural resources and environmental problems;

- huge potential seen in small and traditional farms, as well as diversified food supply chaines (long vs. short) in which “consumers are put at heart of these diversed food chains so as to steer production towards safe, high quality and sustaianbly produced food”;

- gap between relevant research and applied results to farming practices on the ground belived to be narrowed by investment in improved resource efficiency, increased use of renewable energy sources, reduction of waste; these is to be achieved by increased cross-sectoral and multi-level cooperation; in particular synergies are sought in the CAP, Union Research and Innovation Policy, Cohesion Policy, Environmental and Climate Change Policy, Consumer and Health Policy, as well as Education; (Social, Employment and Equal Opportunities policy should be added though, given their current work on Social Innovation and Social Change, equity and gender mainstreaming, poverty and social exclusion, among others);

- the EIP is to strenghten the role of farmers in the supply chain, re-balance the power towards the local and regional food systems, mainly by speeding up and promoting changes in consumer demand towards safe, healthy and high quality food to be found in local markets; this in turn is expected to provide economic development, employment and possibility for social innovation;

- themes (already pre-defined in general terms) are to be defined by Joint Programming Initiatives, the Standing Committee on Agricultural Research (SCAR), ERA-Nets, and European Technology Platforms;

- the EIP to serve as a platform for cooperation between farmers, researchers and stakeholders, including NGOs (however, it is up to MS to put such composition in place);

Areas for innovative actions (in line with a bottom-up approach combined with effective networking):

- increased agricultural productivity, output and resource efficiency (described above);

- innovation in support of the bio-based economy (in line with the EC Communication on Bio-based Economy): focus on higher quality of final products, especially better nutritional profiles, bio-fuels, bio-mass, GMOs and cloning;

- biodiversity, ecosystem services and soil functionality: focus could be put on integrated agro-ecological systems, low input organic systems, natural ecosystem conservation methods;

- innovative products and services for the integrated supply chain: better information systems and risk management tools, f.e. sustainability standards, farmers’ role in food supply chains, shortening of food supply chains, tracking environmental and social performance of farms;

- food quality, food safety and healthy lifestyles: the EIP emphasises the role informed consumer choices play as incenticising the whole supply chain towards safe, secure and healthy food production; the main focus is placed on food quality schemes and livestock health care, medical flora, biological qualities of food; from a public health perspective the most important will be tools for changing consumption patterns and education, information, and learning tools “in order to help improve public health, accompanied by healthy ingredients in products achieved by further developing nutrients and through animal breeding”; also, the consumers’ role in reducing food waste could be addressed by “intelligent packaging” approaches as well as education and information;

To conclude with, nothing has been said about healthy and nutritious diets, such as increased fruit and vegetables, affordability, accessibility and availability of healthy and sustainable diets, equity or social objectives of agriculture and rural development – known to be important if any research and innovation to truly reflect societal concerns.

The Danish Presidency strongly supports Europe promoting the transition to a green economy and enhanced European focus on the issue of sustainability. In order to achieve these, environmentally harmful methods of production, over-reliance and over-use of natural resources along with comprehensive approach towards climate change, will be worked on. This would comprise an effective and green transport policy, green standards in the Single Market (eg. public procurement), and the adoption of sustainable production and consumption patterns. Agriculture that fulfils the environmental requirements of nature and climate-friendly farming practices in order to provide for healthy and nutritious food, should be a part of the solution.

Priorities in the field of agriculture

• in light of the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), strengthening of agricultural and rural areas of the European Union to meet new challenges of environment, nature and climate change would be in focus; promoting sustainable agriculture, ensuring stable food supplies by focusing on research, development and innovation within the agri-food sector;

• European competitiveness on the global market by market orientation;

• continued discussions on the proposals on the Direct Payments (views exchanged in the EP AGRI Committee on 23 January 2012), the Rural Development Policy, the Single Common Market Organisation (views exchanged in the EP Agri Comm on 23 Janauary 2012) and the Horizontal Regulation (the EP and the Council level); the Presidency will prepare a progress report on the reform legislative package in June 2012;

• the Commission will present a Communication on promotion of agricultural products (EPHAC has developed and submitted its response to the Commission consultation);

• the Commission organised a conference (7 March 2012) to discuss research and innovation in the agricultural sector, along with launching a Communication on the European Innovation Partnership “Agricultural productivity and sustainability”;

Priorities in the field of food

• health and animal welfare will be in a continued focus for the Danish Presidency; moreover, further improvements of the high food safety standards and adequate information to consumers will be worked on; in particular, the Presidency will aim to reach an agreement with the EP on the proposal on food intended for infants and young children and on food for special medical purposes; ;

• the Presidency will work on the Commission package of Food Quality with the purpose of reaching an agreement with the EP;

• the Presidency will be also working on the issue of antimicrobial resisitance (AMR) with regard to both human and animal issues; a conference on the challenges of tackling antimicrobial resistance in a European and international context was planned for 14-15 March 2012.

During its February 2012 plenary session, the European Parliament endorsed the Council position, in order to allow the entry into force of the new rules as soon as possible. Regulation (EU) No 121/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards distribution of food products to the most deprived persons in the Union was adopted on 15 February 2012.

The main provisions of the revised programme are the following:

• The scheme remains fully funded out of the EU budget with a ceiling of €500 million per budget year.
• The current scheme ends following a phasing-out period, which would terminate with the completion of the 2013 annual plan.
• The legal basis of the Most Deprived Programme of the EU remains unchanged (Articles 42 and 43(2)) for the duration of the phasing-out period.
• Market purchases are made a regular source of supply for the programme to complement intervention stocks. However, priority would be given to the use of suitable intervention stocks where these are available.
• Member States choose the food products on the basis of objective criteria including nutritional values and suitability for distribution.
• Member States may give preference to food products of Union origin.
• The storage costs born by the charities become eligible for reimbursement.
• Retroactive applicability as from 1 January 2012.

The EU funding of € 90 million will be allocated to the 24 participating Member States as proposed by the Commission, based on the population of 6-10 year old children and the needs expressed by each participating Member State. Sweden, Finland and UK have again opted not to participate.

The main beneficiaries of the Scheme in 2012/2013 will be Italy, who is set to receive over € 20.5 million, followed by Germany (€ 11.6 million), Romania (€ 9.8 million), Poland (€ 9.2 million), France (€ 5.6 million) and Spain (€ 4.8 million).

These EU funds need to be co-financed at rates between 50% and 75%, i.e. they must be matched by national and/or private contributions.

Launched in 2009, school year 2012/2013 will be the 4th year of the School Fruit Scheme whose main objective is to increase the low consumption of fruit and vegetables among schoolchildren by durably increasing the share of those products in their diets when their eating habits are being formed. Figures for 2010/2011 show that more than 8 million children benefitted from the Scheme by receiving portions of fruit and vegetables in schools.

The document is to deal with the triple challenge we face today – that of the role of agrifood systems (from increasing production to ensuring sustainable diets), undernutrition and micronutrients deficiency, as well as overweight and obesity. A strong human rights approach has been applied to the framework.

“Our food systems are making people sick.”

The report examines the agriculture-food-health nexus and analyzes why undernutrition, micronutrient deficiency and overnutrition are different dimensions of malnutrition that must be addressed together through a life-course approach. As the document states, existing food systems have failed to address hunger and, concurrently, these systems have encouraged diets that are a source of overweight and obesity (and other chronic diet-related conditions) that cause more deaths globally than does underweight.

“Faced with this public health crisis, we continue to prescribe medical remedies: nutrition pills and early-life nutrition strategies for those lacking in calories; slimming pills, lifestyle advice and calorie counting for the overweight. But we must tackle the systemic problems that generate poor nutrition in all its forms.”

A transition towards sustainable diets can be achieved only by supporting diverse farming systems (that also support livelihoods of poor farmers) that are ecologically sustainable and that ensure adequate diets accessible to all. Notably, a strong gender dimension has been employed throughout the report – women, the principal caregivers of young children, must be enabled to make informed and autonomous decisions about food and feeding so that young children can enjoy the right to a level of nutrition that supports adequate growth, health and development. The adoption of a human rights framework can serve to ensure that short-terms answers do not preclude the changes of identifying long-term solutions.

The Special Rapporteur presented his report to the UN Human Rights Council in March 2012, where he identified five ways to tackle disastrous diets by placing nutrition at the heart of food systems in the developed and developing world:, namely (throughougly discussed in the full report):

- taxing unhealthy products;

- regulating foods high in saturated fats, salt and sugar; “We have deferred to food companies the responsibility for ensuring that a good nutritional balance emerges. Voluntary guidelines and piecemeal nutrition initiatives have failed to create a system with the right signals, and the odds remain stacked against the achievement of a healthy, balanced diet.”

- cracking down on junk food advertising;

- overhauling misguided agricultural subsidies that make certain ingredients cheaper than others; “Heavily processed foods lead to diets richer in saturated and trans-fatty acids, salt and sugars. Children become hooked on the junk foods targeted at them. In better-off countries, the poorest population groups are most affected because foods high in fats, sugar and salt are often cheaper than healthy diets as a result of misguided subsidies whose health impacts have been wholly ignored.”

- supporting local food production so that consumers have access to healthy, fresh and nutritious foods.

“We should not simply invest our hopes in medicalizing our diets with enriched products, or changing people’s choices through health warnings. We need ambitious, targeted nutrition strategies to protect the right to adequate food, and such strategies will only work if the food systems underpinning them are put right.”

For more information on the work of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food please go here.

Firstly, the Commission published a Green Paper on 14 July 2011 (COM(2011)436), launching a debate on a new promotion and information strategy. This took the form of an online consultation process which ran from 14 July to 7 October 2011.

In this light, EPHAC seized the opportunity to express its concerns on the matter.

EPHAC believes the main focus of promotion funds shoud be to promote foods and themes that are in line with the EU 2020 strategy for sustainable and inclusive growth, and to use promotion funds to promote healthy diets and to promote local and regional foods and food systems as part of this strategy.

The primary role of EU agriculture is, and should remain on guaranteeing sustainable production of safe, nutritious, accessible and affordable food and increasingly focus on providing public goods – health, environment, climate, employment, social inclusion and security. Modern European agriculture must be capable of responding to environmental, health and societal challenges, including inequalities in health, chronic diet-related diseases, poverty and demographic change in the EU.

The main outcome of the report point to “a re-inforced value-added European strategy for promoting the tastes of Europe”. You can access the summary report here: CAP. The reform of promotion policy for agricultural products.

Although the consultation highlights the traditional areas of difference among stakeholders, there are a number of issues where clear majority views emerge:
“- Reinforce the key promotion messages of quality, health, sustainability, responsible consumption of resources, value for money, animal welfare;
- Maintain the generic promotion of the ‘EU brand’ as the primary tool on the internal market but with more flexibility for origin and products. There is no consensus on how far this flexibility should go;
- Use freshness, direct sales, short supply chains, local products, contribution to rural economy as key messages in local/regional markets;
- Widen the range of eligible products, particularly on external markets;
- Facilitate participation in programmes (e.g. actions targeted at small companies/organisations or financing market studies);
- Simplify and/or shorten administrative procedures for application, evaluation and implementation
of programmes;
- Review the respective responsibilities of the Commission and Member States;
- Enhance and finance the exchange of best practice using different communications platforms
(websites, seminars, etc.)”

Having said this, a strong push for external market promotion of EU-branded agricultural products has been observed. EPHAC answers were of an added-value in terms of public health considerations, social equity and policy coherence in internal and external EU policies.

A report summarizing the contributions was presented at the conference “Promotion of European agriculture: a new approach” organised by the Polish Presidency in Warsaw on 29 November 2011 (in which EPHAC particpated as well).Also, various inter-institutional actions were developed:

- The Council provided political orientations in December 2011 with Council Conclusions;

- The Economic and Social Committee made recommendations in its opinion of 7 December 2011;

- The Committee of the Regions made recommendations in its opinion of 15 December 2011.

Next steps: The summary report will pave the way for a presentation of concrete option(s) in a Communication in mid-2012 followed by regulatory proposals by the end of 2012.

The report shows that:

- the cost of CVD in the EU is estimated at 192 billion Euros.
- 12 000 Europeans die every day due to heart attacks, strokes, and other cardiovascular diseases.

It highlights proposals for changes in the whole food, retailing and advertising business, including suggested changes to the European Common Agricultural Policy that would help farmers and industry to bring healthier, more nutritionally valuable, local foods to the table of Europe’s families.

It sets out detailed recommendations for European, national and local policy makers, along with proposals for economic operators, health professionals and heart foundations – including fiscal incentives, ban of advertising of unhealthy foods, particularly to children

We propose two sets of population goals for European countries to work towards in the medium and long term. The intermediate targets are set at a level which governments could realistically aim for within the next five to ten years. The second, more ambitious goals highlight diet and activity levels to aim towards in the longer term.

Thegoals set out, as a result of this two-year-long project, represent a recommended average intake or level for the population as a whole, and are provided as a tool for policy makers to use in settings and monitoring strategy. The goals need to be translated into meaningful food-based dietary guidelines at the country level, taking local eating habits, activity patterns and cultural factors into account.

With regards to the area of agriculture, the European Parliament wants to restore the Council’s cuts and it considers the Commission’s estimates of budgetary needs as more realistic than the Council’s proposals, in particular against the current background of great economic uncertainty and of instability in the markets. EP urges the Commission to increase its efforts in defining clear priorities in favour of sustainable farming systems, which preserve biodiversity, protect water resources and soil fertility, respect animal welfare and employment. In this move, the Parliament agreed to add €250 million to emergency funds for fruit and vegetable producers. This money is meant to prevent future crises like the E.Coli-bacteria outbreak earlier this year and to compensate farmers for the financial consequences of further crises. They emphasised that the prevention and response mechanisms with relation to crises in this sector are clearly insufficient and therefore an immediate solution needs to be found until the new CAP is in place.

Although no concrete numbers were put on the table, the EP called for the continued support for the EU School Fruit Scheme and to provides for an increased support for the school milk programme. In a similar vein, MEPs want maintaining the budget allocation dedicated to the Food Distribution Programme for the Most Deprived Persons in the Union that supports 18 million people with problems of malnutrition within the Union. The recent effort of the Commission (see the amended Commission proposal of 3 October 2011 for a regulation on this subject (COM(2011)0634)) was widely applauded by MEPs. It is to find a political and legal solution to avoid any drastic cuts in the implementation of the programme in 2012 and 2013. Also, they strongly called on the Council to endorse without any delay this proposal (however, see the recent still unsolved blocking minority at the Council level), especially in view of the difficult social situation in many Member States following the financial and economic crisis.

A 21-day conciliation period starts in November, with meetings foreseen on 8 and 18 November. Furthermore, there are budget trilogues foreseen on 3, 10 and 14 November. If Parliament and Council can agree, the final budget could be approved at the December session in Brussels.