General comments
- The sustainable diets definition made by FAO in 2010 should be cited too somewhere as a key reference (FAO 2010)
- As an actor in the field of agriculture, nutrition and health, I would like to underline that HEALTH (one health ie of eco-systems as a whole and for all theirs different elements including humans) should more appear as a key objective for agroecology and SFS: with eco-system and climate protection, it is the other outstanding matter to handle : this is clear from reports from WHO (double or triple burden of malnutrition) due to the present unsatisfactory world situation (linked to both under-nutrition and malnutrition all over the world) and projections for obesity and major NC disease trends. It is key for the coming generation. In numerous parts of the report , I suggest that most emphasis is put on various Health aspects. For general public (at least in economically rich countries), the vast majority of people asking for agroecolgy are willing more environment and climate protection as well as heath protection.
- On organic food system. Based on my 30 years experience and expertise in that field, and present activities (one over 7 coordinators of the Organic Food System Programme (see below), I would like to share my views.
The strength of organics is a clearly defined basis and principles (ecology, health, ethics and care), regulations in most countries in the world, continental regulation in European Union, and control for production, processing and distribution of foods, a well identified market and consumer growing movement. indeed, all ecological/sustainbale aspects related to the 4 IFOAM 3.0 pillars as above are not obviously within. The future should be to reinforce these dimensions in the doctrine, regulations and practices … to move towards a broader « agroecological" approach.
The strength of agroecology is its broad approach and covering of most sustainable aspects, facility of understanding the wording and goals but its weaknesses are the unprecision of every item, the lack of any common rules, regulations, standards, labels and so on, as it could be for « sustainable »: all methods used in conventional methods and banned in organics could find some place in present agroecology in fact ! As an example, we learned form the past Minister of Agriculture in France that one can speak frequently about agroecology as a positive view, take some decision in favour of that direction and take more decisions in the opposite direction in favour of industrial agriculture ! Thus, If agroecology actors and institutions collaboratively better clarify what it means and what is sounded or not, … we can guess that they will integrate organics as a reliable basis for agroecology principles and actions. If not, lots of people feel that it will stay as a fine but weak concept, to be used essentially in reports and politics, or as a scientific approach for some researchers. When reading several high level-reports on food and nutrition security, sustainability, food security, etc, I red more and more frequently the term « agroecology », indeed it is an impressive progress during last yers at that level, but it is essential to give it a clear meaning, and very unfrequently only the term « organic ».
The present Minister ofAgriculture in France has clearly stated that organic agriculture is an irreversible development and should be markedly supported and developed (from 6.5% of agricultural land now to 15% in 2022, with 1.1 billion Euros to support transition). Clearly, in pratical terms for production, processing, consumption and market, the basis of agroecology and SFS is organic almost everywhere in the world. In addition most knowledge on such agroecological systems is coming from studies on organic agriculture or consumption. This should be considered in revising the draft to better account of its importance as a key part of agroecology approach.
At present in the V0 draft, organics, agroforestry, conservation, etc are put outside agroecology as other innovative approaches. Clearly, organics is the practical and comprehensive basis of agroecology while other approaches (agroforestry, conservation, etc) that do not exclude chemical fertilisers, herbicides or pesticides and have no defined regulations can indeed be considered as other approaches and methods to make progress towards SFS. - Organic should be associated with agro-ecological spelling in order to be clear on the general direction of change, to stress priorities and long-term objectivesfor changes in agricultural practices, consumers behaviours and politic decisions.
Specific comments
vs e) L1 p10
it is the case of the OFSP (Organic Food System Programme (see www. organicfoodsystem.net), has already 70 partners (few academics, most local centers), net in 5 continents : it is one of the first 6 core initiative selected and included in the UN 10Y SFS programme in 2015.
vs f) L3 p10
: it is one of the main goals of the OFSP
on b) to add after a) L21 p11
urban nutrition is an increasing problem that needs to more largely tackled . Cities sustainable food systems should be raised and developed to ensure sustainable and appropriate feeding and nutrition of urban people with more local and agro-ecologically/organically grown foods, for better autonomy, security and health.
vs L8-20P14
to add a Point (better) or to put into Point 3 Utiization, on food safety in agreement with the sustainable diets definition made by FAO in 2010 : this is a crucial point in relation to health, that takes part to the SFS concept : reducing at most all risks linked to food production and storage (toxic chemical products) and food consumption (fungus and derived toxic moieties, toxic chemical pesticides residues, endocrine disruptors, water pollution) based on available scientific knowledge and reports. Refers to healthy and safe diet.
The sustainable diets definition made by FAO in 2010 should be cited somewhere as a key reference ()
p20 : surprising that organic agriculture methods (since the 40’s are not cited here are as a practical, defined, well-known, certified and worldwide approach to develop such agroecological principles and tools.
P36 table 3. Regarding some items and also organic agriculture, some revision should be made due to present biais and unsuitable marks
p46 L 5-13 :
More recent and key publications have markedly extended knowledge on health- or resources/environment-related aspects associated to organic food consumption. These are the following :
- vs L8-9 : "that children and adults who consume organically produced foods have lower levels of organophosphate and pyrethynoïd pesticide metabolites in their urine (Reganold and Wachter, 2016). (2 refs: Oates et al, Environ Res 2014 ; Baudry et al, JESEE 2018)
p45-46 Organic agriculture : Important data and references to add
- Three meta-analyses of comparative scientific studies on nutrient contents in plant-foods, dairies and meats have shown that organic foods generally contain more antioxidants et beneficial fatty acids (Baransky et al, Br J Nutr 2014; Średnicka-Tober et al, Br J Nutr 2016 and 2016).
- 13 original publications in international reputed journals have been published since 2013 from the data of a unique very large adult cohort (more than 100 000) comparing regular organic food consumers with non-organic consumers (I am one of the senior scientists involved and co-author). The most important results are as follows: organic consumers vs non have ( based on multivariate analyses and adjustments on confoundings) :
- a healthier lifestyle (Kesse-Guyot et al, PLosOne 2013 and others)
- a healthier dietary pattern (more plant-foods, less refined foods, less animal foods, less fat/sugared foods), better fitting recommendations (Kesse-Guyot et al, PLosOne 2013 and others)
- a better awareness for sustainability and long-term matters (Baudry et al, Nutrients 2017, Benard et al, Nutr J 2018)
- better daily nutrients intakes for numerous nutrients and fibres (PLosOne 2013, Baudry et al, Public Health Nutr 2016)
- a reduced urine contamination by pesticides residues (Baudry et al, JESSE 2017)
- a markedly reduced probability (- 31 & - 50% to be overweight or obese, 2 studies: Kesse-Guyot et al, Plosone 2013 and Br J Nutr 2017)
- a markedly reduced probability of having a metabolic syndrome, an important cardio-vascular risk factor (Baudry et al , Eur J Nutr, 2017)
- a significantly reduced probability of having a cancer (overall - 25%), with - 34% for breast cancer in menopausal women and 76% for lymphomas ( Baudry et al, JAMA int Med 2018, confirming a - 21% reduction in another epidemiological study)
- a combined effect with plant-based dietary pattern on reducing resources uses and GHGEs (Lacour et al, Front Nutr2018, Seconda et al , Climatic Change 2018 and J Cleaner Prod 2018).
Unfortunately, due to family problems, I have been unable to go forwards in commenting this V0 Draft in due time . I apologize for that.
I can be contacted for further exchanges if useful upon revision of this v0 draft.
Denis Lairon