first results from the project NAH_Gast
Transcription
first results from the project NAH_Gast
Development, testing and dissemination of concepts for sustainable production and consumption in the the field of out-of-home catering Assessing sustainable limits for meals – first results from the project NAH_Gast: Developing, Testing and Dissemination of concepts for sustainable production and consumption in the food service sector Holger Rohn, Melanie Lukas, Tobias Engelmann, Christa Liedtke Speaker: Holger Rohn Faktor 10 – Institut für nachhaltiges Wirtschaften gGmbH World Resources Forum, Davos, 12.10.2015 Sponsored by the www.nahgast.de Collaborative Research and Practical Project Partners NAH_Gast – Development, testing and dissemination of concepts for sustainable production and consumption in the field of out-of-home catering Collaborative Research Partners: In coopera:on with: Petra Teitscheid Holger Rohn Nina Langen Melanie Lukas Practical Project Partners: gefördert vom Background § Pace of modern life is leading people to eat out more often § Food offered out-of-home is often high in salt, saturated fat and / or sugar § Nutrition is responsible for a significant share of resource consumption of a society The food sector in Europe accounts for 17% of greenhouse gas emissions and 26% of natural resource use in final consumption! § Nutrition Ecology (Leitzmann 2014): “There are 4 dimensions of nutrition ecology: health, the environment, society and the economy.“ 3 Holger Rohn | www.nahgast.de | WRF Davos 11.10.15 Aim and Objective Ø Notable lack of data differentiating dietary intake and ecological or social impact of meals eaten at out-of-home catering sustainable levels Ø A comprehensive framework has to be developed, which is useful for companies in the out-of-home catering sector Ø Comparison of existing concepts and indicators is needed – with respect to todays’ needs of catering businesses 4 Holger Rohn | www.nahgast.de | WRF Davos 11.10.15 Methods § Basis for the development of new / adapted assessment method(s): comprehensive desk research Ø It offers a large variety of economic, social, environmental and health indicators as well as relevant (multi-dimensional) concepts § Expert Workshop in July 2015 § Evaluating the desk research § Providing a satisfying number of indicators and concepts Ø 7 concepts have been selected, which are already applied to kitchens or food § Next step: assessment of sustainable level for a distinct group of indicators 5 Holger Rohn | www.nahgast.de | WRF Davos 11.10.15 Selected concepts for assessing meals 1.) Carbon Footprint (Macdiarmid et al. 2011) § represents a certain amount of greenhouse gas emissions (usually quantified in tonnes of CO2e) that are relevant to climate change and associated with human production and consumption activities 6 Holger Rohn | www.nahgast.de | WRF Davos 11.10.15 Selected concepts for assessing meals 2.) Material Footprint for meals (Rohn et al. 2013) § tool to measure and optimize the resource consumption of both products and their ingredients and the production processes along the whole value chain § practical measure for assessing the resource use of meals, because all resources and ingredients used in each process are summed up § includes the direct and indirect use of abiotic and biotic resources plus soil erosion in agriculture § based on the MIPS concept 7 Holger Rohn | www.nahgast.de | WRF Davos 11.10.15 Selected concepts for assessing meals 3.) Water Footprint (Hoekstra & Mekonnen 2011) § concept to measure the direct and indirect volume of water use or pollution by a defined group like a consumer (individual, society, nation) or producer (company) Source: Waterfootprint.org 8 Holger Rohn | www.nahgast.de | WRF Davos 11.10.15 Selected concepts for assessing meals 4.) MNI “Sustainability-Index of Menus“ (Müller 2015) § developed in Switzerland to assess the sustainability of meals in the mass catering § Health dimension: 8 indicators, based on the nutritional reference values for Germany (German Nutrition Society DGE), Austria (Austrian Nutrition Society ÖGE) and Switzerland (Swiss Society for Nutrition SGE) e.g. fat, carbohydrate content à “nutritional stress points” respectively “nutritional balance points” § Environmental dimension: using Life Cycle assessment and „ecological shortage“ à“environmental impact points” 9 Holger Rohn | www.nahgast.de | WRF Davos 11.10.15 Selected concepts for assessing meals 5.) Nutritional Footprint (Lukas et al. 2015) § concept to evaluate the effects on health and environment because of nutrition § four core-indicators on health (energy (kcal), content of salt, fibre and saturated fat (g)) § four core-indicators on environment (Material Footprint (g), Carbon Footprint (g), water use (l) and land use (m2)) § à New set of indicators, where all phases of the value chain are examined Source: Wuppertal Institute § Defined Ranking level: small, medium and strong impact 10 Holger Rohn | www.nahgast.de | WRF Davos 11.10.15 Selected concepts for assessing meals 6.) FOODSCALE (Goggins & Rau 2015) § Quantifies eleven sustainability categories that cover 36 food sustainability indicators § considers the entire food system § Based on a scoring system (0 – 100) § Each category + individual indicator is weighted to reflect its relative importance to food Source: Foodscale.org 11 Holger Rohn | www.nahgast.de | WRF Davos 11.10.15 Selected concepts for assessing meals 7.) susDish (Meier et al. 2015) § Software based concept § 16 health indicators: containing 12 reference-values of the DGE Ø critical supply situations of single nourishments within the menu-line can be identified § 15 ecological indicators: including the lifecycle based concept of „ecological shortage“ § After Calculating of “eco-points“ and „health points“, dishes can be placed in a traffic colored coordinate system 12 Holger Rohn | www.nahgast.de | WRF Davos 11.10.15 Comparing and analyzing the existing concepts for assessing sustainability in the out-of-home catering 13 Holger Rohn | www.nahgast.de | WRF Davos 11.10.15 Outlook Ø Field of nutrition is an untapped potential for reducing negative impacts on health and environment Ø Just a few concepts exist so far, to measure and assess foodstuff and menus from the viewpoint of sustainability and health Ø Knowledge gained from the analysis and comparison will be used to develop integrated methods for the assessment of sustainability and health impacts of out-of-home catering Ø The developed methods will be tested in cooperation with the practical project partners in several scenarios à valuable conclusions can be drawn and will be used to develop the practical solutions Ø Therefore, the transfer potential of the project results is estimated to be extraordinarily high! 14 Holger Rohn | www.nahgast.de | WRF Davos 11.10.15 Development, testing and dissemination of concepts for sustainable production and consumption in the the field of out-of-home catering Many thanks for your attention! For further questions, please contact: Holger Rohn Holger.rohn@f10-institut.org Team of authors: Holger Rohn Faktor 10 – Institut für nachhaltiges Wirtschaften gGmbH Melanie Lukas Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment, Energy Tobias Engelmann Faktor 10 – Institut für nachhaltiges Wirtschaften gGmbH Christa Liedtke Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment, Energy Folkwang University of Arts, Essen gefördrt vom Sources and References Sources Slide 3: § Leitzmann, C. (2014): Nutrition ecology: the contribution of vegetarian diets, in: Am J Clin Nutr. 2003 Sep;78(3 Suppl):657S-659S. § Lukas, M., Rohn, H., Lettenmeier, M., Liedtke, C. & Wiesen, K. (2015): The nutritional footprint – integrated methodology using environmental and health indicators to indicate potential for absolute reduction of natural resource use in the field of food and nutrition. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.02.070. § Macdiarmid, J. I., Kyle, J., Horgan, G. W., Loe, J., Fyfe, C., & Johnstone, A. (2012). Sustainable diets for the future : can we contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by eating a healthy diet ? American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 96, 632–639. doi:10.3945/ajcn.112.038729.Two § Mancini, L., Lettenmeier, M., Rohn, H. & Liedtke, C. (2012), Application of the MIPS Method for assessing the sustainability of production-consumption systems of food. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Special Issue ‘GDP to Well-being’, 81(3), 779–793. § Foresight (2011), The Future of Food and Farming. Final Project Report. The Government Office for Science. Retrieved September 13, 2013, from http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/foresight/docs/food-and-farming/11-546-future-of-food-and-farming-report.pdf § Jungbluth, N. (2010), Die Ökobilanz von Nahrungsmittelproduktion und Konsum: Handlungsmöglichkeiten der Akteure. «Schweizer Fleisch»: 9. Symposium «Fleisch in der Ernährung», September 1, 2010. Bern: Zentrum Paul Klee. Retrieved September 13, 2013 from http://www.esu-services.ch/fileadmin/download/jungbluth-2010-oekobilanz-ernaehrung.pdf § Koerber, K. v. & Kretschmer, J. (2006), Ernährung nach den vier Dimensionen: Wechselwirkungen zwischen Ernährung und Umwelt, Wirtschaft, Gesellschaft und Wirtschaft. Ernährung und Medizin 21, 178-185 § Schmidt-Bleek, F. (2009): The Earth: Natural Resources and Human Intervention. London: Haus Pub. 16 Holger Rohn | www.nahgast.de | WRF Davos 11.10.15 Sources and References Sources Slide 5: § Lettenmeier, M., Göbel, C., Liedtke, C., Rohn, H. & Teitscheid, P. (2012): Material Footprint of a Sustainable Nutrition System in 2050 – Need for Dynamic Innovations in Production, Consumption and Politics. 584-598. § Lukas, M., Rohn, H., Lettenmeier, M., Liedtke, C. & Wiesen, K. (2015): The nutritional footprint – integrated methodology using environmental and health indicators to indicate potential for absolute reduction of natural resource use in the field of food and nutrition. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.02.070. Sources Slide 6: § Deutsche Gesellschaft für Ernährung (DGE), Österreichische Gesellschaft für Ernährung (ÖGE), Schweizerische Gesellschaft für Ernährung (SGE) (2013): Referenzwerte für die Nährstoffzufuhr. Neustadt a. d. Weinstraße. § Hoekstra, A.Y.,Chapagain, A.K.,Aldaya, M.M. & Mekonnen M.M. (2011): The Water Footprint Assessment ManualSetting the Global Standard. London. § Hoekstra, A. Y. (2008): The water footprint of food. In: Water for Food. 48-61.(Problemstellung; Methodik) § Müller, C. (2015): Menü-Nachhaltigkeis-Index. Ein benutzerfreundliches Tool zur Nachhaltigkeitsbeurteilung von Menüs in der Gemeinschaftsgastronomie. Internal presentation. Zürich. § Waterfootprint.org, Product Gallery, from http://waterfootprint.org/en/resources/interactive-tools/product-gallery/ 17 Holger Rohn | www.nahgast.de | WRF Davos 11.10.15 Sources and References Sources Slide 7 § Goggins, G., Rau, H. (2015), Beyond calorie counting: Assessing the sustainability of food provided for public consumption. Journal of Cleaner Production. § Liedtke, C., Bienge, K., Wiesen, K., Teubler, J., Greiff, K., Lettenmeier, M. & Rohn, H. (2014): Resource Use in the Production and Consumption System—The MIPS Approach. Resources 2014, 3(3), 544-574; doi:10.3390/ resources3030544. § Lukas, M., Rohn, H., Lettenmeier, M., Liedtke, C. & Wiesen, K. (2015): The nutritional footprint – integrated methodology using environmental and health indicators to indicate potential for absolute reduction of natural resource use in the field of food and nutrition. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.02.070. § Schmidt-Bleek, F. (1994): Wieviel Umwelt braucht der Mensch? MIPS — Das Maß für ökologisches Wirtschaften. Basel. § Wuppertal Institute, Beef Menu, from http://wupperinst.org/en/info/details/wi/a/s/ad/2951/ Sources Slide 8: § Goggins, G., Rau, H. (2015), Beyond calorie counting: Assessing the sustainability of food provided for public consumption. Journal of Cleaner Production. § Meier, T., Gärtner, C. & Christen, Olaf (2015): Bilanzierungsmethode susDISH: Nachhaltigkeit in der Gastronomie- Gesundheits- und Umweltaspekte in der Rezepturplanung gleichermaßen berücksichtigen. Halle-Wittenberg. § FOODSCALE (2015), creating a more sustainable food system, from http://www.foodscale.org 18 Holger Rohn | www.nahgast.de | WRF Davos 11.10.15 Sources and References Sources Slide 9 § Goggins, G., Rau, H. (2015), Beyond calorie counting: Assessing the sustainability of food provided for public consumption. Journal of Cleaner Production. § Hoekstra, A.Y.,Chapagain, A.K.,Aldaya, M.M. & Mekonnen M.M. (2011): The Water Footprint Assessment ManualSetting the Global Standard. London. § Liedtke, C., Bienge, K., Wiesen, K., Teubler, J., Greiff, K., Lettenmeier, M. & Rohn, H. (2014): Resource Use in the Production and Consumption System—The MIPS Approach. Resources 2014, 3(3), 544-574; doi:10.3390/ resources3030544. § Lukas, M., Rohn, H., Lettenmeier, M., Liedtke, C. & Wiesen, K. (2015): The nutritional footprint – integrated methodology using environmental and health indicators to indicate potential for absolute reduction of natural resource use in the field of food and nutrition. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.02.070. § Macdiarmid, J. I., Kyle, J., Horgan, G. W., Loe, J., Fyfe, C., & Johnstone, A. (2012). Sustainable diets for the future : can we contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by eating a healthy diet ? American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 96, 632–639. doi:10.3945/ajcn.112.038729.Two § Meier, T., Gärtner, C. & Christen, Olaf (2015): Bilanzierungsmethode susDISH: Nachhaltigkeit in der Gastronomie- Gesundheits- und Umweltaspekte in der Rezepturplanung gleichermaßen berücksichtigen. Halle-Wittenberg. § Müller, C. (2015): Menü-Nachhaltigkeis-Index. Ein benutzerfreundliches Tool zur Nachhaltigkeitsbeurteilung von Menüs in der Gemeinschaftsgastronomie. Internal presentation. Zürich. § Rohn, H., Lettenmeier, M., Leismann, K., Veuro, S. & Bowry, J. (2013): Reducing the Material Footprint of Meals. WRF conference preceedings. 19 Holger Rohn | www.nahgast.de | WRF Davos 11.10.15