In much of Europe, as in the US, public concern is growing due to the disastrous effects of diet on the health of people and the planet. Rates of obesity and diabetes, especially among children, are growing rapidly. Pesticides and GMOs are increasingly seen as unwelcome guests. More and more citizens are seeing the link between food systems and climate change.
As we think about how food policy in the US can help us achieve ambitious goals for health and sustainability, it’s worth taking a look at developments in the UK and the rest of Europe, where many cities and countries are moving aggressively to improve the quality of what we eat and to reduce its impact on the planet.
In this edition of Vegetables of Mass Destruction, let’s take a very quick tour of Europe to see what we can learn from our friends across the sea. Rather than focus on one topic only, we’ll do it brunch-style and offer a sampling of several things, mostly related to the public health side of the food debates: school meals in Rome, public sector food policy in the UK, food policy within the European Union, and junk food policies in several nations.
Around the world, and especially in the US and Europe, the health of the general public is declining not because of too little food, but because of too much food—and too much poor quality food. Rates of obesity and diabetes among children have reached epidemic proportions, posing a serious, and seriously expensive, threat to public health. Global agriculture, still heavily reliant on fossil fuels and chemical inputs, unduly stresses farms and farmers, too often depleting the soil and impoverishing those who work it.
In this context, food—especially food served in the public schools—is a health issue and an environmental issue, but also a social justice issue. Numerous studies have shown that nutrition is tied to academic success; other research shows that rates of obesity are much higher among poor children.
There is growing pressure, then, on public institutions such as schools and hospitals to improve the quality of their food service. And there is perhaps no better example of the dramatic change that’s possible than public school food service in Rome.
SCHOOL FOOD IN ROME. In only seven years, the city of Rome has transformed its school food service from mediocre to outstanding. Dr. Toni Liquori of Teachers College, Columbia, who has studied Rome’s success and is hoping to help bring similar change to New York City, writes:
Six years ago, most of the food in Roman school meals was conventionally produced, little was organic, and scant attention was paid to seasonality, variety, and balance between caloric and nutritional content. Now, organic food comprises 70% of all food served. Frozen fish fillets have replaced processed fish products, and fair trade chocolate and bananas have been introduced. Contracting firms must guarantee that quality and safety are assured at all stages of the food chain—from farming and breeding practices to processing, packaging and preparation.
Contracting companies also agreed to decrease food miles to decrease pollution, replace plastic knives and forks with silverware and dishwashers, increase recycling by distributing non-utilized foods to facilities that feed the poor, distribute partially-utilized foods to animal shelters and reduce production of waste throughout process.
That’s amazing progress in a very large system in only a few years. Several factors appear to be at the heart of Rome’s success. Among them are the visionary leadership of Dr. Silvana Sari, director of the city’s school food service system, and her use of very clear purchasing standards (Rome hires private companies to prepare and serve its meals) and very close monitoring (ten times as many inspections as was the norm before) to ensure that the standards are followed.
However, Dr. Sari’s success was only possible within an environment in which school officials were able to not simply hire the low bidder, as most US schools are forced to do because of severely limited budgets, but to hire the bidder offering the best value. In Rome, price accounts for 51 of 100 points, with the remainder awarded to bidders whose low price is balanced with things like organic production, bio-dedicated food chains, fair trade, foods with protected denomination of origin (to preserve regional cultural identity), and infrastructural support.
Even more important, perhaps, is a supportive national policy environment, particularly a 1999 law stating that “public institutions that operate school and hospital cafeterias will provide organic, typical and traditional products …taking into account the guidelines and other recommendations of the
National Institute of Nutrition.” Last I checked, such language had not yet worked its way into the Farm Bill being considered by Congress.
Do read Toni Liquori’s brief report on Rome’s success. Over at the Sustainable Food Lab’s blog, we’ll be reporting on her progress in helping to bring change to the food used in US school systems. For a nice summary of the state of school lunches in the US, by the way, check out this piece on the Recipe for America site.
FOOD POLICY IN THE UK. There’s no denying the fact that the UK has for many decades been operating under poorly conceived food policy. Tim Lang, Professor of Food Policy at City University in London and inventor of the food miles concept, has written extensively on the topic, including in a wonderful 2005 lecture in which he said, “in arguing that British food culture is mad, I am not making a cheap point. I ask you: what other conclusion can we draw?”
But now, having followed policies that (among other things) have separated people from farms and led to huge rates of diet-related disease, the UK government seems to be changing its ways. The public sector in England, for example, spends billions of pounds a year on food services, and the government announced last month that it will use this buying power to support its strategies for sustainable farming and food.
The Sustainable Procurement Action plan’s five objectives are to:
• Raise production and process standards
• Increase procurement from small and local producers
• Increase consumption of healthy and nutritious food
• Reduce adverse environmental impacts of production and supply
• Increase capacity of small and local suppliers to meet demand
Similarly, the School Food Trust was established by the Department of Education and Skills to “transform school food and food skills, promote the education and health of children and young people and improve the quality of food in schools.”
New standards for school lunches require at least two servings of fruit and vegetables a day, “oily” fish served at least once every three weeks, and the availability of bread and healthy drinks. Sweets and savory snacks (such as chips) are banned, fried foods are limited to two servings a week, and the use of highly processed foods such as chicken nuggets is severely limited as well. “Certain types of offal” are off-limits as well. (Mmmm, offal.)
An ambitious, lottery-funded Food for Life campaign is helping schools meet the new standards, achieve excellence in food service, and use things such as school gardens to help kids learn more about healthy eating.
Time will tell how well these policies are implemented in the UK, but it’s pretty impressive (if long overdue) to see national school meal guidelines that recognize that children deserve to be served healthy meals. I came home from a recent conference in London feeling that the UK – both its citizens and its government leaders – is serious about transforming its whole approach to food policy.
I should add that at the same time the UK is moving toward more local and organic foods, they recognize that the UK and EU markets are critical to the livelihoods of millions of poor farmers in sub-Saharan Africa and other places. Hilary Benn, Secretary of State for International Development, pointed out in a February speech that roses shipped from Kenya for Valentine’s Day carry a fifth of the carbon output as those grown in Holland. His point: while we should in general be reducing food (and flower) miles, we should not turn our backs on poor farmers in developing nations who rely on our markets to survive.
EUROPEAN UNION FOOD POLICY. The Common Agriculture Policy (CAP), which is similar in impact to our US Farm Bill, is up for review in 2008-09. A recent study has found that there is a link between CAP and the development of major diseases such as type II diabetes, obesity, high blood pressure, and coronary disease. This is largely, say the authors, because the CAP does not sufficiently support healthy crops, such as the fruit and vegetable sector, but over supports others like meat, sugar, and dairy products (CAP also provides subsidies for tobacco growers and wine producers). The result is a shortage of fruit and vegetables, which make them expensive and unaffordable to low-income families.
The European Commission recently announced plans to provide more support for fruits and vegetables in the revised CAP. The European Public Health Alliance, while generally applauding the plan, has asked for a reduction in sugar subsidies so more funds go toward fruit and vegetable markets. A Swiss report has called for other measures, including the end of subsidies for high-fat dairy products and tobacco and wine production.
At present, as in the US, hugely expensive subsidies in the EU are largely supporting the meat, confectionary, and dairy industries at the expense of public health. It will be interesting to see the degree to which health and environmental concerns get written into the next CAP review.
JUNK FOOD POLICY. Up above I described some of the banned substances in UK school meals. Elsewhere across the continent, there are some interesting developments related to junk food in and out of school.
In France, school vending machines can’t sell soft drinks or chocolate bars, and (as of last month) all ads for unhealthy food and beverages must carry health warnings.
Ireland has imposed a ban on TV ads for sweets and fast food, and has prohibited the use of celebrities and sports stars to promote junk food to children.
In 2006, Latvia became the first EU country to completely ban the sale of junk food in schools. This means mo artificial color and no sweeteners, preservatives, amino-acids, or caffeine.
Sweden long ago banned advertising aimed at children; both Sweden and Norway have banned the advertising of junk food aimed at children under 12.
Finally, beginning this month in the UK, junk food ads will not be allowed on or near TV shows that target children. Next year, the ban extends to magazines aimed at kids.
SUMMARY. While the US and Europe share many of the same food-related problems, public consciousness ad activism are higher there than here. This is partly due to mad cow and other diseases that have scared European consumers over the last decade or so, partly due to a reverance for local and traditional foods that is not shared here (but that is eroding there as well).
Advocates for better, healthier, saner food policy would do well to keep in touch with developments in Europe, where many very good things are being cooked up.