72.This chapter is divided into three main sections: the first considers the impact of climate change and other environmental challenges on global and domestic UK food production. The second part considers Government guidance and action on healthy eating, and the extent to which this promotes environmental sustainability and human health, and the third section considers the content of the anticipated National Food Strategy.
73.One of the key messages of the recent EAT–Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems was that:
Transformation to healthy diets from sustainable food systems is necessary to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals [SDGs] and the Paris Agreement, and scientific targets for healthy diets and sustainable food production are needed to guide a Great Food Transformation.
74.Witnesses including Professor Andy Haines, LSHTM, and Professor Mike Davies, University College London (UCL), saw a larger role for the SDGs in measuring success. They said that: “The Government should put metrics such as the SDG indicators, which reflect sustainable progress more effectively than an exclusive focus on GDP growth, at the heart of its policies”.
75.Food systems are “the production, marketing, transformation and purchase of food, and the consumer practices, resources and institutions involved in these processes”. The British Dietetic Association told us that the global food system is “not working either for human health or for the planet. Rates of obesity and poor nutrition are growing while a significant proportion of the global population remain undernourished”. All the while:
… the food we eat contributes 15–30 per cent of total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the UK and we waste 10 million tonnes of food every year. 90 per cent of our fisheries are fully exploited or overfished. Agriculture and livestock farming are by far the biggest contributors to deforestation, biodiversity loss, and soil pollution, as well as land and water use.
76.The EAT-Lancet Commission recommended a “Great Food Transformation”: an “unprecedented range of actions taken by all food system sectors across all levels… to normalise healthy diets from sustainable food systems”.
77.During our inquiry, we heard that although the “food system is currently producing sufficient dietary energy for the expanding global population”, there has not been “sufficient emphasis on the production of nutritious foods including fruits and vegetables”. Future projections are worrying: “under a business-as-usual scenario with limited agricultural adaptation, environmental changes including global temperature increases and water scarcity will affect agricultural yields with particularly marked negative effects in tropical countries”. With further environmental change, there are “considerable concerns that vulnerable populations may face insufficiencies in dietary energy intake and in dietary quality”. Sir Charles Godfray, Oxford Martin School, explained that models suggest “by mid-century there could be in the order of 500,000 deaths that would not otherwise have occurred because of climate change”.
78.There is further concern that increased concentration of CO₂ will cause a reduction in nutritional value in many important crops. Evidence suggests that, by the end of the century, grains will contain lower amounts of protein, zinc, vitamin B and iron, reducing the micronutrient profile in major dietary sources. Yields of vegetable and legume crops could fall by 30 per cent if carbon dioxide emissions continue to grow at the current trajectory.
79.Fruit and vegetable yields may be particularly affected. Professor Godfray, told us that: “ … they will be harder to grow, they will be more expensive, and people will eat less of them with the effects on the environment”. This is particularly concerning in light of the recommendations that fruit and vegetables should be a core part of healthy and more sustainably produced diets.
80.The impact of climate-driven food changes will vary according to local determinants. For example, Dr Ivica Petrikova, Royal Holloway, wrote that
… climate–change-induced rise in temperatures in Ethiopia will make parts of the country unsuitable for the growing of teff, the traditional grain rich in protein. Farmers in affected areas may switch production to maize, which is significantly less nutritious. In contrast, farmers in areas of India adversely affected by climate change–driven reductions in rainfall have been encouraged by the Indian government to switch away from growing wheat to growing millet, a coarse cereal that is both more drought-resistant and more nutritious than wheat.
81.Research has drawn links between climate-change, food system changes and political instability. Henry McGie, University of Manchester, suggests that: “Forced migration as a result of climate change impacts will lead to growing social tensions and marginalisation of vulnerable people”. Attributing the impacts of climate change on migration via food insecurity is not straightforward, but work on the Syrian conflict has found that conflict was likely exacerbated by food insecurity: “Between 2006 and 2009, around 1.3 million inhabitants of eastern Syria were affected by agricultural failures. An estimated 800 000 people lost their livelihoods and basic food supports”. The UN International Organization for Migration (IOM) reported that “whilst there are no reliable estimates of climate change induced migration […] Future forecasts vary from 25 million to 1 billion environmental migrants by 2050, moving either within their countries or across borders, on a permanent or temporary basis”.
82.Water scarcity may similarly pose a risk of increased conflict. The lack of available water has led, in some countries, to civil unrest. The Pacific Institute, a global water think tank, has recorded the contribution of water to conflict. It noted that water affects conflict in a variety of ways:
83.Climate change poses significant risks to international food and water security that may lead to hunger and undernutrition for millions of people. Some commentators have drawn links between food insecurity, political instability and conflict. Others have identified the risk of up to one billion climate refugees by 2050.
84.The Government needs to work with UN bodies and national Governments to ensure the Department for International Development budget helps to guarantee national and international food and water security, environmental protection and climate resilience.
85.During our inquiry we heard that agriculture is both affected by, and a major contributor to climate change. The Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology notes that: “Agriculture is responsible for a substantial proportion of UK (10 per cent) and global (10–12 per cent) greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that cause climate change”. It explains that “any level of climate change will affect growing conditions for fruit, vegetables, cereals and livestock, including changes to temperature and availability of water”, e.g. a rise of 1°C in mean temperature would reduce yields of wheat by 6 per cent, rice by 3 per cent and maize by 7 per cent. Crop yields would also come under pressure from an increase in pests, weeds and diseases.
86.In 2010, the World Bank Development Report provided a stark warning of the unequal impact, up to 2050, of climate change on yields of 11 major crops (wheat, rice, maize, millet, field pea, sugar beet, sweet potato, soybean, groundnut, sunflower and rapeseed). Figure 4 shows the significant impacts that climate change is predicted to have on agricultural yields by 2050, given current agricultural practices.
Figure 4: Map of predicted climate change yields in 2050
Source: World Bank, (2010) World Development Bank Report 2010: Development and Climate Change
87.In the UK, “more frequent extreme temperatures and changes to rainfall patterns will lead to overall negative impacts on production in the UK, even if a warmer UK climate may improve growing conditions for some crops”. Livestock would be vulnerable to disease, such as bluetongue (a disease affecting cattle and sheep that is transmitted by midges), and crops may be affected by water shortages following heatwaves.
88.The 2011 Government Foresight report on International Dimensions of Climate Change and the CCC’s Risk Assessment 2017, highlighted that global climate change will affect UK food security through trade networks. For example, “the UK imports 4 per cent of fruit and vegetables from highly climate vulnerable countries such as Belize and India, and a further 14 per cent from moderately vulnerable countries such as South Africa and Brazil”. This has implications for the UK’s food security in the event of leaving the EU.
89.The UK Government has ignored advice on food security from the Committee on Climate Change. In its UK Climate Change Risk Assessment 2017, the Government stated that, although it recognised the “significant risks” posed by climate change to the supply of food in the UK, it took a “more optimistic view of the levels of resilience that are achieved through functioning markets and diverse sources of supply”. It stated that the CCC’s recommendation that new policy is needed to manage risks to UK food prices does not align with the findings from its own research, including that carried out for the UK Food Security Assessment in 2009 and reviewed in 2012.
90.We are concerned that the Government is complacent about the risks to food security posed by climate breakdown. The Government is due to publish an updated UK Food Security Assessment by the end of 2019. We recommend that the Government accepts the advice from the Committee on Climate Change about food security risks and set out how it plans to maintain UK food security in a changing climate. Government should publish immediately, in advance of the food security assessment due by the end of 2019, all information relating to food security and cost risks associated with no-deal Brexit.
91.The UK externalises much of the costs of food production and its associated carbon footprint. Tim Lang, City, University of London, told us that:
We have offshored it. We have had other people do our dirty work and that has to stop. […] the food industry is acutely aware now that consumers really have a complete lack of knowledge about the enormous footprint we have in how we eat.
92.Professor Heffernan, Royal Veterinary College, suggested that the UK will need to produce more food in the future:
We need to produce more food in the UK. We are very dependent on imports, but the problem is that from 2000 to 2013, 22,000 small farms have gone out of business… Our food system is very insecure.
There are two countries, Spain and the Netherlands […] that supply 69 per cent of the fresh vegetables in the UK. That is a very risky scenario. There are four countries that produce 44 per cent of the fresh fruit. We have to be very careful, if we are not producing our own food, where we are getting it from and that puts a variety of different stresses on food systems.
93.The UK may need to look to technology to ensure that a sufficient amount of food is produced on the limited amount of farmable land available in the UK. Other than “strategic initiatives to maximise use of limited land resources (e.g. spatial planning, and protection of better-quality land”), the CCC note that there are a number of technological methods that could be adopted. Dr Philip Thornton, CGIAR Research Programme on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security, told us that there is “a whole raft of technologies that are in different stages of development”.
94.Some of the options that have been suggested include:
95.Environmental change is projected to have increasingly major impacts on global food systems which would affect the UK’s food security and ability to deliver healthy, sustainably produced diets. The development of a UK National Food Strategy is an important opportunity to link national food production, international food trade, and environmental protection. The Agriculture Bill should support this by incentivising a switch in UK agriculture towards more sustainably produced food, including agroecological farming methods, bringing about reductions in greenhouse gases associated with UK agriculture.
96.Witnesses were unanimous in their support of shifting towards healthy diets produced sustainably. The British Dietetic Association identified “common traits between sustainable and healthy diets”. It noted that: “Modelling and real consumption data studies have repeatedly demonstrated that dietary patterns of higher nutritional quality, which are based on healthy plant foods and lower intakes of meat and dairy products, also have lower GHG emissions and better overall sustainability scores. Improving our diets can be a win-win–better for us and better for the planet”.
97.There were a range of opinions on the risks and benefits of consumption of animal source foods. We were informed that reducing meat consumption would benefit health. For example, the British Dietetic Association reported that in 2011, the Scientific Advisory Council on Nutrition “ recommended that high red meat consumers (>90g per day) should reduce intakes to no more than 70g per day, to reduce colorectal cancer risk without compromising iron intakes”. The British Dietetic Association went on to say that “reduced intakes of saturated fat and salt while the inclusion of plant proteins in the diet results in an improved fat profile, lower energy density and significantly increased fibre content”. However, Professor Claire Heffernan, Royal Veterinary College, highlighted the dietary needs of different populations: “there are people in the global south who will want that animal source food because they have no other ways to get it” since “the ability to grow food in the global south is going to be extremely limited”.
98.A 2018 report from the Institute of Agriculture and Trade Policy estimated that global industrialised meat production will absorb 81 per cent of our available carbon budget in 2050. However, Professor Heffernan also pointed out that environmental impacts of livestock production might not be wholly negative:
I think that we have to get away from this notion that beef is uniformly bad for the environment. There are very many types of livestock production systems and they all have very different impacts on the environment. The kind of research that is going on now is really exciting and I think it can dramatically change the outcomes of greenhouse gas emissions from the livestock sector.
99.There are also increasing calls to recognise the importance of livestock for health, livelihoods and culture in many countries. For example, Mr. Gebregziabher Gebreyohannes (State Minister in the Ministry of Agriculture of the Government of Ethiopia) said in February this year:
Ethiopia, once a byword for hunger and want, has in recent decades become a dynamic success story, a leader in the fight against both poverty and malnutrition. In that achievement, livestock figure prominently. Our cows, sheep, goats, chickens, camels and other animals are bringing wealth to all actors in the livestock value chain, especially rural women who lack other opportunities to make money. They also create jobs for rural youth. And for our children, an egg or a cup of milk a day can make all the difference, helping to prevent stunting and the life sentence of cognitive deficits.
100.Public Health England’s Eatwell Guide provides recommendations for a healthy diet: 39 per cent of food by weight should be fruit and vegetables, 37 per cent starchy carbohydrates, 12 per cent meat, fish, eggs, beans/pulses and other protein sources, 8 per cent dairy or alternatives and very limited amounts of oils, and sweet and salty snacks. The Carbon Trust estimated that if diets in the UK met the recommendations of the Eatwell Guide there would be a 32 per cent reduction in overall environmental impacts associated with diets.
101.A more ambitious recommendation for a healthy diet that would not exceed planetary boundaries was presented in the EAT-Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. This set out to establish the impact on the environment from a global population of 10 billion people eating a healthy diet.
102.Professor Tim Lang, City, University of London, described the diet to us: “if we want to feed 10 billion people by 2050 we are going to have to eat very differently […] with much less meat, much more fruit and vegetables, much more plant growth at the farm level without using up more land, direct to humans, cutting down the waste”. Dr Sonja Vermeulen, Hoffmann Centre for Sustainable Resource Economy, Chatham House, told us that it is “a health-based diet, which we then tested against environmental parameters”.
103.Dietary change is not easy. Cost is a significant barrier, with people from lower socio-economic groups typically being less able to afford healthy, sustainable diets. Analysis of the affordability of the UK’s Eatwell Guide by The Food Foundation found that the poorest fifth of the UK population would need to spend 42 per cent of their disposable income (after housing costs) to follow the Government recommended diet. This mirrors contributions to our inquiry on the Sustainable Development Goals in the UK follow up: Hunger, malnutrition and food insecurity in the UK. Adam Smith, founder of The Real Junk Food Project, an organisation that produces meals at low prices from discarded food, told us how working people were having to “choose between heating their own homes and going out and getting food”. He explained:
We come across a lot of people who fit into that bracket who are forgotten about in this country—people who are suffering right now, who are actually going hungry, who are working, not in receipt of benefits, and cannot access foodbanks. […]People should not be in a situation where they cannot afford to feed their own children, while they are going to work and earning an honest living.
104.Councillor Paulette Hamilton, Holyhead Ward, Birmingham City Council reflected on the challenges in her city:
We are finding that because of food poverty within the home many of our young people are eating high calorific foods but the foods are not very good quality. We are finding that our young people are not having their five a day, but it is not just our young people. Also our adults are not having the five a day. You can go along many streets in the city where you do not see fruit and vegetables.
105.Professor Chris Whitty, Chief Scientific Advisor, Department of Health and Social Care, noted the benefits of the Eatwell Guide but pointed out:
If it was adopted it would have a significant positive impact on health and a significant positive impact on environmental issues. However, it would not deal with any of the problems of disparities in health that we currently face and I am not guaranteeing that every child would eat it.
106.While supporting the benefits to the environment of the Eatwell Guide, Professor Ian Boyd, then Chief Scientific Advisor, DEFRA, noted the importance of including other stakeholders in these discussions:
There are very good reasons for saying that if we all ate the Eatwell Guide diet we would do a lot more good to the environment. The question is how do we get that diet to people and how do we make sure we are doing it in a way that is congruent with developing a good industrial process, a good economic process for the food industry.
107.Evidence was provided of the benefits to public finances of population-level shifts towards healthier diets. Professor Tim Benton, School of Biology, University of Leeds, wrote that the over-consumption of commodity crops, and “cheap calories” was putting pressure on the NHS:
The externalised costs on the health system are considerable. For example, the costs of obesity to the UK economy is estimated at ~£27bn, which is approximately three times the economic value of the UK’s agricultural production.
108.Healthier, more sustainable diets can deliver co-benefits for people and the environment. The Government has a responsibility to raise public awareness of the Eatwell Guide and identify ways to promote the consumption of healthy and sustainable diets, including how they will achieve at least a 20 per cent reduction in meat and dairy consumption as recommended by the Committee on Climate Change’s Net Zero report, and a shift away from intensive livestock production systems. There is a need to coordinate efforts across Government to ensure that healthy and sustainable diets are available and affordable to all in the UK. This should be reflected in the Government’s procurement policies and in the next set of Greening Government Commitments. Food provided by the Government should be “sustainable by default” and comply with the Eatwell Guide recommendations. This could lead to an estimated reduction of 30 per cent in the carbon footprint of the Government’s purchased food. This is an important step in achieving net zero emissions by 2050.
109.Witnesses emphasised the potential to influence consumer choices towards healthy and sustainable diets. The British Dietetic Association wrote that: “Marketing strategies typically used to encourage consumption can also be geared to encourage healthier choices”. Judith Batchelar, J Sainsbury’s PLC, told us about initiatives that Sainsbury’s were taking to help consumers make healthier more sustainable food choices:
We are trialling […] displaying meat-free alternatives, things like mushroom burgers and other meat-type products in the meat aisle for customers to actively switch out. […]. We are also looking at our online shop, so if someone searches “burger”, putting the meat-free burger top of the search list. We are looking at those kinds of nudges to understand whether customers are receptive to that.
110.There was widespread support for changing the way that food is marketed: The Ellen McArthur Foundation’s report on Cities and Circular Economy for Food, recommended changing food design and marketing to reshape preferences and habits”.
111.One action to change the way food is marketed is to ban the advertising of high fat, salt and sugar (HFSS) foods. There has been a ban on the marketing of HFSS products in children’s television programmes since 2007. This was estimated to have led to a “37 per cent reduction in children’s TV HFSS food ad exposure” in the first five years of operation. The emergence of social media platforms have brought new challenges to regulating advertising. In June 2019 the Government closed a consultation on the introduction of further advertising restrictions on TV and online for HFSS products. We await its response.
112.In February 2019 Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, introduced a ban on all HFSS food advertising across the public Transport for London (TfL) network. TfL’s advertising space is considered the most valuable out-of-home advertising estate in the world.
113.Food labels can provide information so consumers can make more informed decisions about the food they buy. David Rutley, former Minister, DEFRA, noted the Government’s intention, in the event of leaving the EU, to have “a full review of labelling of food and that will be thinking about how we do that from a health perspective, a sustainability perspective and a welfare perspective”.
114.However, Judith Batchelar, J Sainsbury’s PLC, told us that the average time someone looks at the label of a product was just six seconds. Professor Tim Lang, City, University of London, pointed out that labelling might only be able to convey limited information:
It is very useful to have information, not least because it makes the producers, the manufacturers and the retailers declare what is in the food, but no label tells you what the biodiversity impact is, no label tells you what the embedded water in your food is, no label says how this has been grown.
115.Professor Frumkin, Wellcome Trust, noted that there was limited evidence of the success of labels in shifting behaviours:
it turns out there is quite a mixed record when the impact of environmental labelling is studied. People profess in interviews and in surveys that they care about environmental purchasing, but the labelling does not make much of a difference.
He suggested instead that “price signals do have a big impact, [and] celebrity endorsements matter a lot in our popular culture-oriented world and powerful media presentations like Sir David Attenborough’s films make a big difference”.
116.Contributors tended to agree that marketing, “nudging” (the use of indirect suggestions as ways to influence the behaviour and decision making of groups or individuals) and other methods were needed to stimulate changes in dietary behaviours, but there was disagreement about how much Government involvement was needed. When we asked Ms Batchelar whether taxes and subsidies might assist in encouraging dietary change, she said “I am not sure [that] is the answer, because a lot of these things are around economies of scale and what is the norm. The things that we are developing now are pretty small scale. While the trend is there, they are not mainstream. The challenge is to make those things more mainstream”, although she thought that the “pace of change” in consumer choices was “unprecedented”.
117.However, Simon Billing, Eating Better, disagreed, suggesting that “he would not discourage us thinking about incentives”, to increase the accessibility and affordability of vegetable and plant-based diets. He also suggested: “Potentially looking at different fiscal measures. Tax is one way that has been discussed quite a lot”, including the pricing of meat. The EAT-Lancet Commission supported this, stating “taxes and subsidies should encourage healthy and sustainable diets”. In its submission to us, the Government noted the success of the soft drinks levy which has led to “the equivalent of removing 45 million kg of sugar every year, some products in the sugar reduction programme exceeding their first year targets, for example yoghurts are achieving a 6 per cent reduction in sugar, and significant investments being made in schools to promote physical activity and healthy eating”. The British Dietetic Association encouraged this policy: “Reformulation, restrictions on advertising and measures like the soft drinks industry levy need to be implemented or expanded where they are already in place”.
118.We asked Professor Cosford, Director of Health Protection and Medical Care, Public Health England, about subsidies for fruit and vegetables, particularly to increase their consumption by children. He agreed:
We know that children really like free fruit in schools … and they took that back to their families and that helped to stimulate changes in adult diets as well. We have work going on in our social marketing campaigns, on One You and Change4Life and so on, that support the change in people’s diets to go along with that.
119.Consumer information, including clear labelling, can help shift diets. The Government should expand the restriction of advertising on high fat, sugar and salt products and consider using financial incentives to promote access to, and consumption of, healthy and sustainably produced food.
The Government has begun working on a National Food Strategy, led by Henry Dimbleby, lead non-executive board member at DEFRA, and Director of the Sustainable Restaurant Association. David Rutley, then Minister, DEFRA, told us:
We need to do more to promote [balanced diets] and one of the things we are going to be looking to do within the national food strategy, which is very embryonic at this stage, is to make sure that we look at the whole of the food supply chain from end to end, see how we can move that forward, looking at it from a healthiness perspective but also about sustainability and from a welfare perspective, which I know is a huge issue for you as well.
Mr Rutley highlighted that to deliver the National Food Strategy “there is greater need for closer co-operation between Government Departments”.
120.Professor Sir Patrick Vallance, Government Chief Scientific Adviser, provided useful guidance on the National Food Strategy:
It seems to me that a food strategy should absolutely cover issues of consumption and how that consumption is modified. It should cover nutritional quality, production sustainability, transport and delivery and the environment. Any food strategy needs to cover those areas in order to be a holistic, systems-based food strategy for the future.
121.Others suggested that in order deliver holistic change to the food system what is needed is a much more collaborative approach to nutrition guidance. Professor Tim Lang, City, University of London, stated:
We should have a food policy council. We should have a national council that provides expert advice on this holism and what is missing in it. We do not have that at the moment. The Nordic countries have that. No wonder they are streets ahead. They are taking it seriously. They are bringing together data, they are calling together people … Some co-ordination mechanism the British Government should lead.
122.The Nordic Council hosts inter-parliamentary co-operation among the Nordic countries. It consists of five countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden) and three territories (Faroe Islands, Greenland and the Åland Islands) who cooperate on policy issues including growth and development, welfare and climate change and the environment. The Council has also provided a forum for sharing expertise and setting guidelines for healthy diets and nutrition, producing guidance on food labelling and nutrition intake that is shared across its members.
123.Judith Batchelar, J Sainsbury’s PLC, supported Professor Lang’s calls for a food policy council. She suggested that this should learn from the shortcomings of the now defunct Council of Food Policy Advisors established by DEFRA in 2008. She added that improvements in knowledge and data on food systems and diets since then mean that a collaborative council could have greater chance of success if the right parameters were set:
We did not know anything like the information that we know now around the environment and the impact of our food system on the environment. We are in a very different place and there is that sense of urgency. The biggest thing that group would have to address, in a very intelligent and data-informed way, is, “What does that transition programme look like?” I think we all know where we are trying to get to. The question is how we get there in the most efficient and least disruptive way.
124.We recommend that the Government establish a National Council for Food Policy similar to the work of the Nordic Council of Ministers - to bring together the bodies responsible for food production, nutrition, public health, citizens representatives, and environmental experts to share data and expertise, and ensure greater alignment around promoting healthy diets from sustainable production.
125.The National Food Strategy and other Government policy actions relating to food and diets, must place equal emphasis on the importance of healthy diets produced sustainably and national food security. Public Health England’s Eatwell Guide should be revised to emphasise foods with lower environmental footprints and make clear recommendations to help the public choose healthy and sustainable diets. To deliver the transformational changes necessary in UK diets the Government should establish a National Food Council as part of its upcoming Environment (Principles and Governance) Bill. It should lead on the roll out of the National Food Strategy.
a)Recognises the risks to national food security from the UK importing 40 per cent of the food we consume, and explores policies to mitigate these risks and ensure that the UK delivers healthy diets to all, especially in the event of a no-deal Brexit.
c)Sets out annual targets to reduce food waste at every level of the food supply chain consistent with the Government’s aim to achieve net zero emissions by 2050 at the very latest. This target should be consistent with SDG 12.3 (reduce food waste) to halve food waste by 2030.
d)Recommends policies made by the Committee on Climate Change including shifts towards lower meat and dairy consumption, to achieve the net zero target. The Strategy should set out how public procurement teams, as well as the food and agriculture industry can deliver this goal.
123 Walter Willett. et al., , The Lancet Commissions, Vol. 393 (2019), pp.447–492
124 Professor Michael Davies, Professor Sir Andy Haines, Professor Paul Wilkinson, Professor Tony Capon and Dr Melanie Crane ()
125 Global Panel on Agriculture and Food Systems for Nutrition, , (2014)
126 British Dietetic Association ()
127 Food Standards Agency, , (2015)
128 WRAP, , (2017)
129 World Economic Forum, , (2018)
130 British Dietetic Association ()
131 Walter Willett. et al., , The Lancet Commissions, Vol. 393 (2019), pp.447–492
132 London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine ()
136 Chunwu Zhu et al., , Science Advances, Vol. 4 (2018)
137 Medact ()
138 PFD Scheelbeek et al., , NCBI, Vol. 115 (2018), pp.6804–6809
140 Dr. Ivica Petrikova ()
141 Mr Henry McGhie ()
142 Peter H. Gleick, , Pacific Institute, (2014)
143 UN International Organization for Migration, [Accessed 01 July 2019]
144 Pacific Institute, [Accessed 01 July 2019]
145 Pacific Institute, [Accessed 01 July 2019]
146 Pacific Institute, [Accessed 01 July 2019]
147 UN International Organization for Migration, [Accessed 01 July 2019]
148 Climate Change and Agriculture, , Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, (May 2019)
150 World Bank, , (2010)
151 Committee on Climate Change, , (2018); Climate Change and Agriculture, , Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, (May 2019)
152 Climate Change and Agriculture, , Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, (May 2019)
154 HM Government, , (2017)
159 Committee on Climate Change ()
161 Nigel Maxted and Shelagh Kell, , Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, (2009); Climate Change and Agriculture, , Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, (May 2019)
162 Delia Grace et al., , CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS), (2015)
163 AHDB Beef and Lamb, , (2015); Climate Change and Agriculture, , Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, (May 2019)
164 Climate Change and Agriculture, , Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, (May 2019)
166 Sustainable Food Trust ()
167 British Dietetic Association ()
170 British Dietetic Association (); Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition, , (2011)
173 Feedback ()
174 Gebregziabher Gebreyohannes, , Thompson Reuters Foundation News, (2019)
175 Public Health England, , (2016)
176 The Carbon Trust, , (2016)
177 Walter Willett. et al., , The Lancet Commissions, Vol. 393 (2019), pp.447–492
180 London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (); Courtney Scott, Jennifer Sutherland and Anna Taylor, . The Food Foundation, (2018)
181 Environmental Audit Committee (2019) . HC 1491.
182 Environmental Audit Committee (2019) Sustainable Development Goals in the UK follow up: Hunger, malnutrition and food insecurity in the UK, [Adam Smith]
183 Environmental Audit Committee (2019) Sustainable Development Goals in the UK follow up: Hunger, malnutrition and food insecurity in the UK, [Adam Smith]
187 Professor Tim Benton ()
188 The Carbon Trust, , (2016)
189 British Dietetic Association ()
191 Ellen McArthur Foundation, , (2019)
192 Advertising to Children, Briefing Paper , House of Commons Library, (June 2019)
193 Department of Health and Social Care and Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport, , (2019)
194 Mayor of London, , (2018) [Accessed 01 July 2019]
204 ML Niebylski et al., . Nutrition, Vol. 31 (2015), pp.787–95; Marco Springmann et al., . Nature Climate Change, Vol. 7 (2017), pp.69–74
205 DEFRA ()
206 British Dietetic Association ()
212 The Nordic Council: [Accessed 01 July 2019]
213 Nordic Council of Ministers, , (2004)
214 Nordic Council of Ministers, , (2014)
216 UN, , accessed 5 September 2019: “ By 2030, halve per capita global food waste at the retail and consumer levels and reduce food losses along production and supply chains, including post-harvest losses”.
Published: 17 September 2019