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