Close Welcome writers, influencers and dreamers, make the world a greener place
Register here
Forgot password
Forgot password
or
or

Close
Close Stay Updated on Environmental Improvements And Global Innovations
Close Stay Updated on Environmental Improvements And Global Innovations
Close Reset password
your profile is 33% complete:
33%
Update profile Close
Close WhatsOrb Global Sustainability X-Change

For writers, influencers and dreamers who want to make the world a greener place.

WhatsOrb reaches monthly about 28.000 thousand visitors who want - like you - to make the world a greener place. Share your expertise and all can benefit.

Become an influencer and write and share sustainable news and innovations globally
Are you a writer or do you have ideas about sustainability which you want to share? Register and share your green knowledge and news. WhatsOrb offers you global exposure for your article.

If your article meets certain standards, you receive promotional gains like Facebook promotions and Google Ads advertising.

Agri & Gardening good food  make our food system more sustainable | Upload Vegetables

Good Food: Make Our Food System More Sustainable

by: Peter Sant
good food  make our food system more sustainable | Upload

There will be a roundtable discussion in the Lower House (Netherlands) about our food system's sustainability. Good news for anyone hoping for a more sustainable food policy, you might think. However, there is some criticism about the content of the interview.

Making Our Food More Sustainable

Good news for anyone who thinks politics should be more concerned with the sustainability of our food system. The permanent Parliamentary Committee on Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality is drawing up a whole afternoon for a roundtable discussion on 'sustainable and healthy choices for consumption.' The committee will discuss with no less than fourteen experts about the promotion of healthy choice, food waste, the role of agriculture, and food policy in general.

The hearing offers a unique opportunity to impress MPs on the need to really make a living from a sustainable food policy. But is that going to happen next Thursday? I have my doubts. I already read the speakers' position papers and noted three notable misconceptions that the committee could mistakenly see as the way forward. I will discuss them below and pay attention to the bright spots that I found in several contributions - points of light that point the way forward to an actual change.

Two people at a agricultural field

The Government Should Not Interfere Too Directly With Sustainable Food Policy.

A striking number of speakers embrace the food transition concept as the way to a more sustainable food system. Such a food transition is a 'bottom-up movement,' The government needs to do nothing more than connect food entrepreneurs, train professionals, and 'organize' transition tables.

Recommended: Regenerative Agriculture: Basics For Safe Food

Remarkably enough, PBL Netherlands Bureau for the Environment (PBL) has questioned this approach and states that 'at present, no measurable trends show that the goals will be taken from the transition agenda.' The PBL states that the trend can only be reversed if we realize that 'painful' choices are made. Sustainability is not technical, but a political problem; the government has a 'key position.'

If the consumer makes sustainable choices, then the food system will automatically become sustainable.
cucumber, tomatoes, vegetables on display
Consumption sociologist Hans Dagevos joins in and complains that political issues such as eating less meat too quickly as 'sensitive' or 'controversial' and does not dare to take effective measures. Conclusion: recognize that sustainability is a political, not a technical problem, and do not get away from the political choices that go with it.

Consumers: The Most Important Players In The Sustainable Food Chain

Many speakers have firm confidence in consumers' ability to send the food system in the right direction. If the consumer makes sustainable choices, the thought seems to be; then the food system will become sustainable. The speakers are wary of 'restricting freedom of choice' in food and state that 'sustainable and healthy choices are not programmed in the same way as with sustainable energy.'

Fortunately, among the speakers, there are also critics of this approach. For example, Lucas Simons of New Foresight states that it is an 'illusion' to think that the consumer will bring about the transition. He argues for a more active government to send the consumer in the right direction.

Anyone who seeks pleas for strong government control is strikingly not with transition experts, but with health scientists such as Maartje Poelman from Utrecht University. Poelman states that 'structural, universal (preventive) measures aimed at the entire population (for example, reducing salt content in soup, a soda tax) lead to more health gains than an approach in which the individual's own responsibility is central (e.g., individual dietary advice). "Conclusion: set the standard for the consumer's sovereignty: let companies and government restrict and control choices.

Sustainable Food Is A Niche Product 

Perhaps it is because no lawyers have been invited, but I find little sense of how competition law makes sustainability more difficult in the position papers. Competition law is based on an economic worldview in which consumers and producers always find each other in a perfectly competitive market with complete information.

Recommended: Sustainable Food: How Eco Friendly Is Your Diet?

This has led to the current situation. Sustainable food is a niche product for a limited group of consumers, who pay a bit more for a product that is often only a bit more sustainable ('fair trade,' 'better life,' etc.).

Who wants the market to do more, agreements between companies must be allowed.

However, competition law is mainly concerned with consumers, not about the environment or animal welfare. The government sent a bill to the Council of State two weeks ago to circumvent the competition rules through a generally binding declaration of sustainability agreements between companies. But the bar for this is high, and it is questionable whether such legal measures will not meet Brussels' objections. Conclusion: Our food's sustainability requires a review of competition law and its interpretation by the national and European cartel watchdogs.

Recommended: Hurting The Environment: The Palm Oil Paradox

Let's take stock: this hearing offers a unique opportunity to get the Lower House to understand the need to change our food system. But I think that most participants in the conversation have too great faith in the invisible hand of the market, the opportunities for new technology, and the possibilities of a 'bottom-up' food transition. This brings the danger that the committee members see this hearing as an encouragement to lean back and let society do the work.

However, those looking at the position papers with a sharp eye will see an undercurrent that does not go along with this discourse. These people argue for an agricultural policy towards a food policy, which shows that market parties are trapped in profit-driven behavior. That shows that most consumers do not come to a healthy choice on their own. It is also the people who argue most clearly for a government that actively and compellingly acts where necessary, and steering and facilitating where possible. For such an active attitude, we need MPs who sit on the edge of their seats and realize that they themselves have the key to a better food system.
Yellow combain mowing a cornfield

Before you go!

Recommended: Climate Change: Water Scarcity, Hunger, Agriculture, And Food

Like to write and publish your article about sustainable food?
Send your writing & scribble with a photo to [email protected], and we will write an interesting article based on your input.

Messange
You
Share this post

Being involved in sustainability activities has changed my view on this subject a lot. Climate change and pollution are borderless and thus solutions and information has to be shared globally. Rich, 'developed' countries have to start supporting countries that don't have the means and knowledge to improve their situation. Sustainability movement is as strong as its weakest link - whatsorb.com is a helpful platform to speed up the X-Change of Global Sustainability.

 

Being involved in sustainability activities has changed my view on this subject a lot. Climate change and pollution are borderless and thus solutions and information has to be shared globally. Rich, 'developed' countries have to start supporting countries that don't have the means and knowledge to improve their situation. Sustainability movement is as strong as its weakest link - whatsorb.com is a helpful platform to speed up the X-Change of Global Sustainability.

 

Stay Updated on Environmental Improvements And Global Innovations
SIGN UP FOR MONTHLY TIPS & TRICKS
More like this:

Good Food: Make Our Food System More Sustainable

There will be a roundtable discussion in the Lower House (Netherlands) about our food system's sustainability. Good news for anyone hoping for a more sustainable food policy, you might think. However, there is some criticism about the content of the interview. Making Our Food More Sustainable Good news for anyone who thinks politics should be more concerned with the sustainability of our food system. The permanent Parliamentary Committee on Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality is drawing up a whole afternoon for a roundtable discussion on 'sustainable and healthy choices for consumption.' The committee will discuss with no less than fourteen experts about the promotion of healthy choice, food waste, the role of agriculture, and food policy in general. The hearing offers a unique opportunity to impress MPs on the need to really make a living from a sustainable food policy. But is that going to happen next Thursday? I have my doubts. I already read the speakers' position papers and noted three notable misconceptions that the committee could mistakenly see as the way forward. I will discuss them below and pay attention to the bright spots that I found in several contributions - points of light that point the way forward to an actual change. The Government Should Not Interfere Too Directly With Sustainable Food Policy. A striking number of speakers embrace the food transition concept as the way to a more sustainable food system. Such a food transition is a 'bottom-up movement,' The government needs to do nothing more than connect food entrepreneurs, train professionals, and 'organize' transition tables. Recommended:  Regenerative Agriculture: Basics For Safe Food Remarkably enough, PBL Netherlands Bureau for the Environment (PBL) has questioned this approach and states that 'at present, no measurable trends show that the goals will be taken from the transition agenda.' The PBL states that the trend can only be reversed if we realize that 'painful' choices are made. Sustainability is not technical, but a political problem; the government has a 'key position.' If the consumer makes sustainable choices, then the food system will automatically become sustainable. Consumption sociologist Hans Dagevos joins in and complains that political issues such as eating less meat too quickly as 'sensitive' or 'controversial' and does not dare to take effective measures. Conclusion: recognize that sustainability is a political, not a technical problem, and do not get away from the political choices that go with it. Consumers: The Most Important Players In The Sustainable Food Chain Many speakers have firm confidence in consumers' ability to send the food system in the right direction. If the consumer makes sustainable choices, the thought seems to be; then the food system will become sustainable. The speakers are wary of 'restricting freedom of choice' in food and state that 'sustainable and healthy choices are not programmed in the same way as with sustainable energy.' Fortunately, among the speakers, there are also critics of this approach. For example, Lucas Simons of New Foresight states that it is an 'illusion' to think that the consumer will bring about the transition. He argues for a more active government to send the consumer in the right direction. Anyone who seeks pleas for strong government control is strikingly not with transition experts, but with health scientists such as Maartje Poelman from Utrecht University. Poelman states that 'structural, universal (preventive) measures aimed at the entire population (for example, reducing salt content in soup, a soda tax) lead to more health gains than an approach in which the individual's own responsibility is central (e.g., individual dietary advice). "Conclusion: set the standard for the consumer's sovereignty: let companies and government restrict and control choices. Sustainable Food Is A Niche Product  Perhaps it is because no lawyers have been invited, but I find little sense of how competition law makes sustainability more difficult in the position papers. Competition law is based on an economic worldview in which consumers and producers always find each other in a perfectly competitive market with complete information. Recommended:  Sustainable Food: How Eco Friendly Is Your Diet? This has led to the current situation. Sustainable food is a niche product for a limited group of consumers, who pay a bit more for a product that is often only a bit more sustainable ('fair trade,' 'better life,' etc.). Who wants the market to do more, agreements between companies must be allowed. However, competition law is mainly concerned with consumers, not about the environment or animal welfare. The government sent a bill to the Council of State two weeks ago to circumvent the competition rules through a generally binding declaration of sustainability agreements between companies. But the bar for this is high, and it is questionable whether such legal measures will not meet Brussels' objections. Conclusion: Our food's sustainability requires a review of competition law and its interpretation by the national and European cartel watchdogs. Recommended:  Hurting The Environment: The Palm Oil Paradox Let's take stock: this hearing offers a unique opportunity to get the Lower House to understand the need to change our food system. But I think that most participants in the conversation have too great faith in the invisible hand of the market, the opportunities for new technology, and the possibilities of a 'bottom-up' food transition. This brings the danger that the committee members see this hearing as an encouragement to lean back and let society do the work. However, those looking at the position papers with a sharp eye will see an undercurrent that does not go along with this discourse. These people argue for an agricultural policy towards a food policy, which shows that market parties are trapped in profit-driven behavior. That shows that most consumers do not come to a healthy choice on their own. It is also the people who argue most clearly for a government that actively and compellingly acts where necessary, and steering and facilitating where possible. For such an active attitude, we need MPs who sit on the edge of their seats and realize that they themselves have the key to a better food system. Before you go! Recommended:  Climate Change: Water Scarcity, Hunger, Agriculture, And Food Like to write and publish your article about sustainable food? Send your writing & scribble with a photo to  [email protected] , and we will write an interesting article based on your input.
Stay Updated on Environmental Improvements And Global Innovations