The EAT-Lancet Commission 2.0 publishes a new report that provides an update on healthy eating and sustainable food system goals for the global community.

The first EAT-Lancet Commission report was published in 2019. The EAT-Lancet 2.0 report will launch in 2024 and will focus on various dietary guidelines, local diets and food justice. In addition, the report includes a 12-month global consultation for the public and other interested global food system stakeholders to share their thoughts on transitioning to sustainable food systems, and several Includes Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) modeling efforts to assess pathways. Towards a sustainable food system.

The 2nd EAT-Lancet Commission brings together 25 scientists from 19 countries and 5 continents. The committee includes the Stockholm Resilience Center (SRC), the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Harvard University, and the EAT, a science-based non-profit organization working with the One Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). will be

EAT-Lancet 2.0 Commission Co-Chair and 2021 World Food Prize Laureate Shakuntala Chilsted said the commission’s research “takes into account the role that sustainable and nutritious food plays in culture. Thilsted added that the commission hopes to “consolidate the latest scientific evidence with the traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples.”

At the committee press conference at Stockholm+50, EAT-Lancet 2.0 committee co-chairman and PIK director Johan Rockström said the EAT-Lancet 2.0 report includes a regenerative carbon sequestration farming system. said it would include guidance on investing in Walter Willett, co-chair of the panel and professor of epidemiology and nutrition at the Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, said capturing carbon will keep the temperature “below 1.5 or 2 degrees Celsius” by the end of the century. It adds that it will be an important part of the solution to maintain. ”

The policy proposals contained in the 2019 report appear to be a “magic bullet,” Matthias Kaiser, emeritus professor at the Center for Science and Humanities Research at Norway’s University of Bergen, told Food Tank. He believes the simplified recommendations presented in the 2019 report are not globally available. Kaiser also said the 2019 report did not address the uncertainty and complexity of the global food chain. He said the next report should consider “different food identities, food cultures and traditions.”

Kaiser notes that while it is possible to reduce red meat consumption or production, guidance needs to address idiosyncrasies in “different regions and cultures.” of protein” may come from seafood and less from red meat. On the other hand, low-income areas or areas far from the ocean “have no supply chain” to support a seafood-rich diet. .

Stineke Oenema, Executive Director of the United Nations Office for Nutrition, told Food Tank, “It’s important to look at the context” when making dietary recommendations. In low-income countries, it may be beneficial for consumers to consume more animal protein.

At the EAT-Lancet 2.0 press conference, Willett said the committee would “reexamine” the impact of red meat on a healthy diet, among “many other diet-health relationships.”

The 2019 report also expressed skepticism about the private food industry’s involvement in the 2019 EAT-Lancet report. Scientist Nina Teikolts writes:[EAT’s] The backing of large companies raises serious questions about the interest behind this report. Specifically, EAT’s Food Reform for Sustainability and Health (FReSH) initiative includes multi-billion dollar food industry giants such as PepsiCo, Danone, Syngenta and Unilever.

The EAT-Lancet 2.0 committee told Food Tank: Reflecting diverse perspectives and plausible pathways, we believe that coordination among actors is important to support change, and in particular to create a forum for dialogue and discussion among different voices. . ”

Kaiser told Food Tank that dynamics within the food industry could implicitly influence the commission’s recommendations. If you find out it’s from, it’s not necessarily,” Kaiser says. [in] Big corporate interest that represents the reality of the food system we have.

The 2019 report was written by experts from the “rich and developed countries of the global North,” Kaiser said. Kaiser advocates a more bottom-up approach for the next report. This should include a framework for “local, regional and cultural food identities that improve the sustainability of food consumption,” rather than top-down guidelines from wealthy developed countries, he said. increase.

Kaiser also suggested that the commission not only focus on the areas of nutrition and health sciences, but also include social sciences “such as anthropology, sociology and political science related to power structures” within the food system. Recommended. “What they have to do is make an appeal, not a recipe,” Kaiser says. Socioeconomic relations or power structures. ”

Articles like the one you just read are made possible by the generosity of Food Tank members. Can we expect you to join our growing movement? Click here to become a member now.

Photo credit: Alexander Schimmeck, Unsplash