November 2021 was characterized by a strong increase in the price of fine wines, with several records broken. The trends already observed in previous months: rising sales prices, rising costs, and falling production volumes are confirmed. Political issues, both external with several forms of protectionism, and internal with a shifting legislative framework remain important to monitor.
What Europeans eat cannot be left to an opaque and misleading algorithm. During a question time at the French Senate, French Minister for agriculture J. Denormandie confirmed his hesitations on Nutriscore, pointing out that its algorithm should be changed to be more inclusive of the nutritional complexity of food, and readapt the portion-base volume. He also added that France will not make this tool mandatory unless it is decided so at the European level, and shared the doubts on this tool already expressed by Italy and Spain, two Member States that share the same values as far as food culture is concerned.
Farm Europe cannot agree more with the words of the French Minister. In fact, after thorough consultations with the scientific community, it seems clear that, in its current form, the Nutriscore Front-of-pack-label cannot be considered a finished public health tool. The algorithm on which it is based, favours more processed foods and does not consider the dietary balance. These are two key public health issues! It would be irresponsible to conduct a continent-wide experiment with labelling that would lead consumers to make risky choices for their health.
Therefore, Farm Europe suggests the establishment of a decision grid to move towards effective and useful nutrition labelling for public health. This could be based on the following cumulative criteria:
It is truly European: only European solutions can face the challenge of malnutrition and address the silent epidemic of Non-Communicable-Diseases. That means that the design of the label should be common. At the same time, the evaluation system should be flexible enough to consider national sensibilities in the approach to food (as such, already-existing National Dietary Guidelines should be used as a base on which such tool can be built).
It informs, does not judge: Nutrition labelling should guide consumers in their choice, not do it for them. It should better inform, not misinform. At this stage, the Nutriscore takes already the decision for the consumer, by implicitly sending the message for some food to be ‘good’ or ‘bad’. Wary and well-informed consumers should be in a position to evaluate by themselves which food best suits their diet.
It does not use reductionist approaches: Nutriscore extremely simplifies the information, leading consumers not to further delve into the food composition (list of ingredients, calories, sugars, salt etc.). The aim of package labelling should be to lead the consumer’s attention to the back of the package, where more complete information on the product that they are about to buy can be found. Reductionists approaches create a barrier between the front and the back of the package and should, therefore, be avoided.
Portions are plausible: the quantity evaluated should represent likely portions of food consumed to have a closer-to-reality approach and keep the principle that balanced diets is key or a healthy one. The rationale should be based on consumed quantity, not on a general ‘100 gr’ measure that very rarely represents the actual quantity consumed, and push product optimisation towards industrial chemicals palliative.
It considers the processing of food: it is paramount for a public health to guide people away from ultra-processed foods, given the scientifically-proven correlation with the level of processing and non-communicable Diseases. An FOP should thus take into account the level of processing for food, favouring the less processed ones and warning about the health risks of a diet high in ultra-processed foods.
EFSA gives its scientific evaluation
Education is part of the equation: whatever it would be, labelling would still be a temporary tool, a ‘patch’, unless the key issue on nutritional habits is tackled. Diseases linked to diet are consequences of more holistic unbalances. Public education policies, notably in schools targeting youth, is the true solution of the health crisis of Non-Communicable Diseases in Europe. Schools programmes have to be integrated with courses on nutrition, cooking, diet and lifestyle. Young students should be accompanied in the learning process of what a heathy diet, and, more in general, a healthy lifestyle is, and see it applied in the canteens.
October has marked the first step in the opening of the revision of the European legislation on GMOs, with the European Commission’s feedback period opened to receive the opinion of the European stakeholders on the matter. More than 70 000 feedbacks have reached the Commission offices, mainly for German and French citizens.
Also, the European Parliament approved the Farm to Fork Strategy (agricultural branch of the Green Deal) with a paragraph on NGTs.
During the morning of November 3rd, European Commissioner for Agriculture Janusz Wojciechowski and US Secretary for Agriculture Tom Vilsack announced the launching of a « new chapter » in the EU/US relation during a VIP event in Brussels co-organised by Farm Europe & the Forum for the Future of Agriculture. The occasion was to re-launch the Transatlantic partnership, which links the two continents together to face the challenges of climate change and the transition to sustainable agri-food systems.
MEP Paolo de Castro, US Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack & EU Agricultural Commissioner Janusz Wojciechowski
The event was opened by João Pacheco Senior Fellow at Farm Europe, who touched on the challenges raised by climate change, and the fact that both the EU and the US share the urgency of mitigating its effects. He stressed that the main question is the how to get there, opening for different paths that can bring us to the same targets, but with divergent consequences. He also pointed out that the pathways chosen by the US and the EU would have a strong impact worldwide, given the two are major world food suppliers. He then summarized the US and EU approaches to climate change: while the US is investing on innovation & technology to foster sustainable productivity growth, the EU is betting on its Green Deal (Farm to Fork & Biodiversity Strategies) and on binding reduction targets. Nevertheless, the European action might be undermined given the studies that have analysed the impacts of the F2F & BDS strategies, notably on their unsustainably economic consequences (increased dependency from imports from third countries, increased food prices, lower farmer’s incomes, etc).
In his opening remarks, US Secretary for agriculture Tom Vilsack underlined that the US & the EU have different paths to reach the same objective of a more sustainable and more productive agricultural system. In order to do that, the US are investing in innovation & science, based on technology solutions. He touched upon trade barriers that, besides slowing down trade, also have an effect on knowledge exchange, which is vital for reaching the target both continents are aiming at. Effective communication is as important as innovation, Vilsack said, stressing that partnerships are essential.
Commissioner JanuszWojciechowski opened his remarks by underlying the common challenges and opportunities that the two counterparts share and face, pointing out that, sometimes, differences out-shadow the common traits (depopulation in rural areas, small holdings producers, etc.). He pointed out that the pandemic showed the vulnerability of the food systems and underlined the fact that they have to be transformed towards more sustainable models. The Farm to Fork strategy aims at increasing the three aspects of sustainability (environmental, economic, social), but the path to get there is not easy, the Commissioner said, and some efforts have to be made.
He shared with his US colleague the commitment to invest in the promotion of digital technologies, research and innovation, knowledge sharing.
Paolo De Castro, MEP (S&D) and former Italian Minister for agriculture said that regardless of the entity of the problems that we have to deal with or the ambition of the goals that we need to reach, the real challenge is the how to get there. He advocated, therefore, to dedicate more time to the development and the study of innovative solutions. He mentioned genetics, precision agriculture, data analysis as tools that are useful to put into practice the sustainability targets, but that they only represent one piece of the puzzle. Farmers need public support in the form of time & money to make sure that the Farm to Fork strategy does not turn into a de-growth strategy.
Question & Answer session from journalists and one from a farmer, Benjamin Lammert, followed the opening statements
During her intervention in front of the plenary session of the European Parliament, Health Commissioner Kyriakides stated that the Commission has not yet taken a decision on front-of-packaging labelling, refusing rumours that the Nutri-Score is the favoured option. Member Stated have decided to ban, starting in 2022, food additive E171 after consistent studies have underlined its dangers to human health.
In the Baltic countries, after lab-grown meat, start-ups are exploring the possibilities to create cell-based seafood.
October marked the adoption of the Farm to Fork strategy as a shared European strategy, and not only a European Commission’s initiative. In fact, the vote of the European Parliament on the texted agreed by the joint ComEnvi & ComAgri Committees confirmed most of the Commission’s vision of the future of European agriculture and the targets set by 2030.