World Food Policy Volume 2, Number 1, Spring 2015 | Page 114

Advancing Health Promoting Food Systems

are further driving the liberalization
of agricultural trade which can
have unexpected outcomes for food
producers;
• the rise of counter movements—
comprising knowledgeable consumers and civil society organizations—which are opposed to the lack
of health, equity, sustainability, and
democratic control over food systems.

At the same time, governments
face political challenges in intervening in
food security at household and community
levels. A reluctance to intervene follows
from acceptance of political philosophy’s
dichotomization between public and
private interests, with the private sphere
encompassing household and individual
lifestyle decisions. Central to neoliberal orthodoxy is the principle that
cultural customs are perceived to be
“untouchable” except in extreme cases
(e.g., hunting of seals for meat). Support
for household and individual level selfregulation is reinforced continuously
through heavy lobbying by what has been
termed “Big Food”, companies which use
rationales of consumer choice to defend
themselves against regulation in terms of
product marketing and advertising (PLoS
Medicine Editors 2012).

Given that no single agency is
in charge of food systems at either the
national or global levels, contestation over

food security is set to intensify within
nations and between nations7 (Tansey
2013; SCAR 2011).

IV - What is the way forward?
What building blocks are needed
to advance health promoting food
systems?

A health promoting food system
guarantees food and nutrition security—
understood broadly as the uninterrupted
delivery of sufficient energy and micronutrients to lead a healthy and productive
life—while promoting the health of the
environment so that future generations
can be guaranteed their food security.

The UN System High Level Task
Force on Global Food Security (2012)
describes policies that enable food
and nutrition security to be “nutrition
sensitive”. However, nutrition-sensitive
policies are only half of the equation.
As Kickbusch (2010, 19) has noted,
malnutrition is “closely linked to the
standard of living, the environmental
conditions, and whether a population is
able to meet its basic needs such as food,
housing and health care. Malnutrition is
thus a health outcome as well as a risk
factor”.

Following this reasoning, it
becomes important to introduce human
development and security to the food and
nutrition security equation. In this paper,

7

Thailand is an exception. In 2008, the government introduced the National Food Commission Act
creating a National Food Committee (NFC) charged with coordinating policies and actions across all
aspects of Thai Food Policy. Chaired by the Thai Prime Minister, the body has representatives from the
Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Ministry of Public Health and the Ministry of Agriculture
as co-Secretaries. The Commission has four main concerns: Food security, food quality and safety, food
sector management, and food research. In 2010 the NFC produced a comprehensive Thailand Food
Strategy document.
113