Global forum on food security and nutrition

Raghavendra Guru Srinivasan, Independent, India

Foundations of tax policy:  Current health related food tax is a product of both medical science (Allopathy/western medicine) and economics. With obesity and other non-communicable diseases being one of the biggest market failure, there is an urgent need to look at healthy people like yoga (Indian medicine) practitioners for lessons in management of food consumption and for taxation.

The Governments around the world have proposed to tax various food products to stop obesity, diabetes and other non-communicable diseases (NCDs), and they include soda tax, candy tax, sugar tax, high salt and high sugar tax, junk food tax, pastry tax, etc. Even after taxing food products there is still discussion on food supplied in large quantities, and on promotions to children in the form of gifts and toys. There is a need for comprehensive global framework for health related food taxation and it is addressed by the attached work.

Attachment:

http://www.fao.org/fsnforum/sites/default/files/discussions/contributions/Efficient-Tax-Framework%20cam_0.pdf

Christine Campeau, facilitator of the discussion, UNSCN

Thank you to everyone who has contributed so far. This is a great start to the discussion.

There was overwhelming support for the opportunity provided by the UN Decade of Action on Nutrition to enhance coordination and cooperation amongst all actors, and drive integrated action across multiple sectors. With this, however, several asked for the lines of responsibility to be better defined, and for more explicit information about who is expected to do what. 

Some contributors suggested structural changes to make the work programme more coherent and efficient, including the need to better distinguish between aspirations and concrete goals (i.e. “our ends and means”) to avoid confusion. This dynamic was also challenged with questions about what is achievable, such as our ability to end hunger and all forms of malnutrition. Others pointed to essential sectors that are missing, such as water, hygiene and sanitation, the nexus between humanitarian and development, and the challenges posed by climate change on food variability and nutrition security. 

A strong case was made for a transparent, inclusive, open-ended participatory processes throughout the Decade to ensure that all actors feel a sense of ownership, togetherness and to ensure that the voices and commitments of all actors are heard. Online consultations were given as an example, as was a publically accessible repository of commitments to strengthen accountability. An online dashboard would allow for targets and performance to be tracked. It would also help to ensure that double counting of nutrition sensitive actions are avoided. 

Today in Rome, the Committee on World Food Security’s Open Ended Working Group on Nutrition is meeting at FAO HQ to discuss its contribution to the Decade. We welcome you to consider an answer to that in the contributions to follow, and on broader observations on the Decade. 

Thank you again for the thoughtful input and the commitments made to the Decade through this forum. 

I look forward to continuing the conversation. 

Christine 

Mark Lawrence, Deakin University, Australia

Dear FSN Moderator

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on on the first draft work programme of the UN Decade of Action on Nutrition. I write to comment specifically on the second posed question, ‘What are your general comments to help strengthen the presented elements of the first draft work programme of the UN Decade of Action on Nutrition?’

I fully endorse the programme’s Action area 1: Sustainable, resilient food systems for healthy diets and its recognition in points #19 and #20 of the need for sustainable food systems that promote healthy and safe diets. However, it is a concern that the programme also includes in certain places a focus on a reductionist approach to nutrition science, i.e. a focus on nutrient-based interventions, in potential conflict with the systems and dietary patterns approach emphasised in Action area 1. For example, Table 1: Potential topics for the development of commitments and the establishment of action networks, lists ‘Food reformulation’ as one of its first mentioned topics.  In this context, food reformulation, an intervention in which the nutrient profile of food products is manipulated, is being proposed as a solution to nutrition problems that are predominantly a consequence of dietary excesses and imbalances and which in turn are predominantly determined by social and ecological circumstances. Such an intervention is a simplistic response to complex food and nutrition problems.

Also, food reformulation has risks because it has the potential to undermine the promotion of food systems and food-based dietary guidelines. Not only does it risk diverting attention away from dietary pattern, and food systems approaches, but also it risks framing potential solutions to the benefit of ultraprocessed (junk) foods and to the detriment of nutritious whole foods. For instance, in Australia we have a flawed front-of-pack labelling system (the ‘Health Star Rating’ system) that inappropriately rewards the reformulation of ultra-processed foods with so-called health stars. Here the problem is that the manufacturers of ultraprocessed foods such as high-sugar snack foods can reformulate their products by moderately reducing the product’s sugar content to attract a relatively high star rating despite the product remaining an ultraprocessed food.

Perversely, whole foods such as fresh fruits and vegetables which the Programme highlights as core components of a healthy diet, are less able to be reformulated and as a consequence, less able to compete against ultraprocessed foods in the implementation of many food reformulation interventions. In certain circumstances food reformulation may have a limited role, e.g. supporting the reduction on the salt content of bread, but it is a relatively low priority intervention and requires careful management to avoid being exploited for non-nutrition agendas.

Professor Mark Lawrence
Deakin University
Australia