文献信息
文献标题：Viewpoint: Future of food safety and nutrition - Seeking win-wins, coping with trade-offs（观点：食品安全与营养的未来——追求双赢，权衡利弊）
文献作者：Mylona K, Maragkoudakis P, Miko L, et al.
文献出处：《Food Policy》,2018,74:143-146.
字数统计：英文2741单词，15243字符；中文5057汉字
外文文献
Viewpoint: Future of food safety and nutrition - Seeking
win-wins, coping with trade-offs
Abstract The possible implications of global trends such as climate change and resource scarcity on food curity are high on the political agendas. While the food sufficiency aspect of food curity takes centre-stage, the future of food safety and nutritional quality of diets often ems to be taken for grante
d. This paper builds on the results of a foresight study on EU food safety and nutrition towards 2050 to discuss potential future points of tension for food policy. Increasing food production while using fewer resources and reducing food waste while ensuring food safety are just two examples. Innovation at different levels in the food system will be needed to address future challenges. Fast technology uptake and the launch of new food-related products can put pressure on the ability to deliver timely risk asssments, the scope of which might also need to cover other legitimate factors. Future food policies need to be more nsitive to impacts on food safety and nutrition and health aspects. A holistic food systems approach must be taken to identify and discuss in advance possible tensions and trade-offs and to address them upfront in a systematic and transparent manner.
Keywords:Food safety; Nutrition; Foresight; Challenges; Preparedness;
Trade-offs
1. Introduction
One of the key questions dominating the turn of this century is how to cure the supply of sufficient, environmentally sustainable, nutritious, safe and accessible-to-all food. Food curity ('zero hunger') features very high among the recently agreed 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and is inti
mately linked to veral other SDGs (United Nations, 2015). Ensuring food curity and a sustainable agro-food system is not an easy task, given the impacts of climate change and the need to reduce greenhou gas emissions and to prerve key resources of particular importance for the water-energy-food nexus. The increasing global population and the transition in emerging market economies towards diets of predominantly animal origin, put additional pressure on ensuring sufficient food production (Alexandratos and Bruinsma, 2012). We have en how disruptive events and geo-political developments such as the 2008 economic crisis or the 2015 EU/Russian embargo, which resulted in a 43% decrea of EU agri-food exports to Russia, had dramatic conquences for both food producers and consumers (Szczepanski, 2015). In addition, recent developments such as the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the European Union and the repercussions this may bring to both parties, demonstrate the need to take into account uncertainty in policy design.
g r lWhile access to “safe” and “nutritious” food is integral in the definition of food curity, most studies focus on how to ensure the “sufficiency” requirement of this definition. It can be argued that the reason for this is the high level of food safety currently enjoyed in developed regions. The EU in particular takes pride in its food safety legislative framework, which is en as one of the most advanced in the world. This is achieved through science-bad risk analysis bad on the precautio
nary principle and an institutional paration of risk asssment, management and communication. But even in this environment, the occasional food 'crisis' such as the German EHEC O104:H4 outbreak (Robert Koch Institut, 2011), unearths the vulnerabilities of the system. One may also argue that ensuring safety, nutritionaliba
quality, variety and balance of foods and diets as well as the underlying social, environmental and economic determinants, do not receive the attention they derve in food curity studies, as the sufficiency aspect appears to be more pressing. Moreover, the abundant food offer and almost unrestricted access to a large variety of nutritious quality foods in most of the developed countries, result in the skewed view that it is up to the individual to make the right decisions and succeed in life and health. Making nutritious food available does not automatically lead to population-wide healthy diets (Butland et al., 2007). Despite a ries of initiatives and action plans towards the promotion of healthier diets and prevention of chronic dias (High Level Group on Nutrition and Physical activity, 2014, WHO, 2014), achieving health targets such as tho defined in the WHO Noncommunicable Dias Global Monitoring Framework 2025 (World Health Organization, 2015a) proves to be difficult already today.
To shed light on possible future challenges, we have analyd whether the EU’s regulatory and polic
y framework in the areas of food safety and nutrition can ensure “safe food” and “good nutrition” as we look ahead to 2050 (Mylona et al., 2016). Drivers of change (global trade, agro-food chain structure, technology uptake, social cohesion, food values, climate change, depletion of natural resources and world population growth) were combined to create four alternative, plausible and challenging future scenarios (Mylona et al., 2016). While the study was intended to inform EU policies and to complement the recent Fitness Check of the General Food Law (Regulation (EC) No 178/2002), its conclusions are of relevance for almost every jurisdiction.
katrina bowdenWe identified veral points of tension where policies or interventions that aim to improve food safety, the diets of populations or food sufficiency conflict with each other. We conclude that a holistic food systems approach must be taken to identify and discuss in advance such tensions, in order to find a compromi between equally important aspects of the food system and accept trade-offs in a systematic and transparent manner. And beyond trade-offs, such an approach could also identify synergies in different policy areas and lead to win-win scenarios. This opinion papertext
invites global thought leaders to critically reflect on some of the.
2. Compromising food safety for achieving sufficiency?
honeymoonIntensive production systems have soared under the pressure to increa yield. This has been further facilitated by the continuous concentration of the food industry into bigger entities and the economies of scale to reduce production costs. Should this intensification and industrialisation continue – driven by population growth and offtting loss caud by a worning climate – many issues may ari.
大专生出国留学条件Beyond the biodiversity and environmental effects of the u of a limited number of high-yield species or varieties in intensive farming, the crops themlves are also more susceptible to dia and pests. Fertilirs must be supplied regularly to ensure the necessary high crop yield and the supply and access to the is also finite and complex. Take phosphate (P) as an example; the amount of accessible high quality phosphate rock is low and diminishing fast; risks to animal and human health are associated with the u of low quality P-fertilirs containing worrying levels of heavy metals such as arnic, cadmium and lead (Jiao et al., 2012). Similarly, the increasing u of antimicrobials in animal farming to prevent the spread of dias has led to the development of resistant animal and zoonotic pathogens. This resistance may even compromi the effectiveness of antibiotic treatments for different human dias (ECDC/EFSA/EMA, 2015). The global consumption of antimicrobials in livestock farming is nonetheless projected to ri by 67% by 2030,
衣服店摆设due to the growing number of animals raid and the continuous shift towards intensive farming systems (Van Boeckel et al., 2015). All the issues need to be looked at cloly.
Curbing antimicrobial resistance, for example, is already a priority globally (World Health Organization, 2015b) and in the EU as well (European Commission, 2017). Actions taken or being discusd include banning the u of antimicrobial feed additives, rethinking the currently practiced animal husbandry system, enhancing prevention, u of alternative treatments, surveillance and cooperation at international level.
3. Stretching the limits to ensure food safety -compromising local food sufficiency?
Yet, while efforts to increa food production as described above are most likely to continue, it has been estimated that, worldwide, at least one third of the food produced is wasted (FAO, 2011). This is a crucial issue that is being addresd through the SDGs and also in the EU, with a shift towards a circular economy that has placed waste reduction, recycling and reu at centre-stage. Technological innovation such as intelligent packaging (time-temperature indicators, freshness indicators) can help supply chain operators to optimi logistics to reduce waste in other steps of the food chain. More can be done at consumer level, as, at least in the EU, more than half of food waste
originates at houhold level (Stenmarck et al., 2016). There may be tensions here too though; population and individual knowledge are crucial for reducing food waste without compromising food safety. And beyond consumers, food and feed safety-related measures should not be placing unnecessary burden on food producers, food chain operators, trade and eventually on food curity. Low maximum levels for residues and contaminants ensure a high level of food safety but could be linked to food waste and food curity issues at a local level by “legally” limiting the availability of food. Will a time come when such levels of “waste” become unacceptable and trade-offs need to be discusd?
In what regards recycling and waste reduction more generally, it is worth noting that (re-)introduction of either food or organic side stream products in the food chain may also lead to food and feed safety concerns and again a balance must be sought. The Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) outbreak is a good reminder of this kind of unintended conquences. Regional food systems, bad on a circular economy and lf-sufficiency, where 'do-it-yourlf' food production and processing niches may be more widespread, appear more vulnerable in this regard. This niche reality may indeed grow further, triggered by factors such as rising food prices or trends for regional or organic products. In such a scenario, emphasis must be placed on the communication of associat
ed risks and the provision of education and best practice guidance to the “prosumers”, and official controls may need to be revisited.
导游培训机构On the other hand, novel technologies, ingredients and products can contribute to keeping the system competitive and make it sustainable in times of resource scarcity. However, they could harbour new food safety risks. Risks can also ari from the way food is retailed (e- and m-commerce) and food adulteration. Fast technology uptake can challenge the ability to perform efficient and timely risk asssments. Applying the precautionary principle can eventually cau delays in the approval of novel technologies and products for u in the EU. Establishing preparedness mechanisms that could be ud to facilitate product approval in emergency situations could be beneficial for ensuring food sufficiency.
4. Can consumer scepticism compromi innovation and food sufficiency?
While rigorous asssment of risks are undoubtedly bad on the best science, more emphasis on other legitimate factors such as socio-economic and ethical aspects is needed in order to asss new technologies and, most importantly, involve citizens. In addition to a legitimate need for citizens to be satisfied about the issues before accepting novel foods or technologies, there is currently a
byulworrying trend towards distrusting science. Such scepticism about the impact of different technologies could prevent the uptake of promising innovations, even though safety may not be compromid at all, unless transparency and citizen engagement is sought early on in the process.
雨伞的英语This could be achieved by applying the Responsible Rearch and Innovation (RRI) concept which provides for a (still developing) approach to ensure that rearch and innovation is socially desirable. In particular the direct involvement of citizens throughout all stages of rearch is an important element. While the concept is being included and advanced in public rearch (e.g. EU funded projects such as Engage 2020, RRI Tools, INPROFOOD or CIMULACT, the RRI concept still needs to be further integrated into corporate management (Stahl et al., 2017). However, also the food industry has identified the involvement of citizens in food innovation and production as an important challenge to tackle (European Technology Platform (ETP) “Food for Life,” 2016). Different levels of citizen engagement are currently developed
