Food’s Impact on the Planet: Europe’s Appetite for Change Dwindles

Hello, Champions of Net Zero!

In a world grappling with the dire consequences of climate change, a recent report has revealed an alarming reality: our food systems are wreaking havoc on the planet. Published by the EAT-Lancet Commission, a coalition of over 70 esteemed scientists from around the globe, this landmark study underscores the urgent need for transformative change in our dietary habits and agricultural practices.

Despite the global commitment to curtail fossil fuel emissions, the truth remains stark: even if we ceased all coal, oil, and gas consumption today, the food we consume would still push global temperatures beyond the crucial threshold of 1.5 degrees Celsius. This finding raises critical questions about our collective responsibility in addressing climate change and the sustainability of our food systems.

The Role of Food in Climate Change

According to the EAT-Lancet Commission, nearly a third of all greenhouse gas emissions can be traced back to our food systems. The factors contributing to this staggering statistic include methane emissions from livestock, deforestation for animal feed, and the fossil energy required for fertiliser production. This multifaceted problem extends beyond mere emissions; our current food systems are the leading cause of humanity’s overshoot of the Earth’s ecological limits, commonly referred to as planetary boundaries. These boundaries are critical for maintaining biodiversity, preserving land, ensuring freshwater availability, and limiting fertiliser pollution.

Johan Rockström, a prominent Swedish scientist and co-chair of the commission, aptly summarised the findings: “The results are sobering. Food alone could push us beyond 1.5C — but food can also help bring us back.” This dual potential emphasises the pivotal role that our dietary choices play in either exacerbating or alleviating climate change.

A Roadmap for Sustainable Change

The commission’s central argument is that it remains possible to feed a growing global population — projected to reach around 10 billion by 2050 — a healthy diet within the confines of the Earth’s ecological limits. However, the current food systems are failing to meet this challenge even with the present population levels.

The proposed solution is a “planetary health diet” that prioritises an abundance of fruits, vegetables, legumes, and nuts, while significantly reducing the consumption of red and processed meat. This dietary shift, the authors estimate, could prevent up to 15 million premature deaths annually and slash food-related emissions by more than half. Furthermore, the annual cost of implementing this transformative dietary shift is projected to be between $200 billion and $500 billion, a figure that pales in comparison to the trillions of pounds in health and environmental savings that would follow.

Walter Willett, a Harvard epidemiologist and co-chair of the panel, emphasised that this isn’t about enforcing a “quasi-vegan lifestyle.” Instead, the dietary recommendations can be adapted to local culinary traditions worldwide, from Mediterranean to Asian cuisines. The overarching message is clear: we must embrace more plant-based foods while reducing our intake of meat and sugar.

The Challenge of Political Will

Much of this information may not be new; the original 2019 EAT-Lancet report called for similar sweeping dietary changes, particularly in regions like Europe and North America, where meat and dairy consumption far exceeds global averages. However, the political landscape has shifted in the opposite direction, raising concerns about the feasibility of such changes.

The initial EAT-Lancet findings captured global attention, sparking a fierce backlash from meat and dairy industries. Critics labelled the proposals as elitist and unrealistic, leading to an “orchestrated attempt” to undermine the current report’s findings, according to Willett. This raises critical questions about the influence of industry lobbying on public health recommendations and the future of sustainable food systems.

Europe’s Broken Promise

The situation in Europe serves as a case study of both ambition and retreat. The original EAT-Lancet report directly informed the European Union’s ambitious Farm to Fork Strategy, launched in 2020 as part of President Ursula von der Leyen’s Green Deal. This strategy aimed to transform Europe’s food system into one that is equitable, healthy, and environmentally sustainable, with goals to halve pesticide use, reduce fertiliser dependency, expand organic farming, and promote healthier diets.

Fast forward five years, and the Farm to Fork Strategy is effectively moribund. In the face of farmer protests, industry lobbying, and the geopolitical fallout from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the EU has quietly abandoned its most ambitious food reforms. Instead, the bloc is embroiled in familiar debates over farm subsidies, import policies, and how to placate aggrieved farmers across France, Germany, and Poland. Alarmingly, the EU’s own scientists have warned that agriculture remains the leading driver of biodiversity loss, soil degradation, and water scarcity.

While Europe has stepped back from its commitments, it bears a significant share of the environmental damage caused by food systems. The report highlights that the wealthiest 30% of the global population generates over 70% of these environmental pressures. If rapidly developing economies adopt Western-style, meat-heavy diets, Willett warns, “that is the path to environmental and health disaster.” These regions present lucrative growth opportunities for the livestock industry, risking the entrenchment of high emissions and ecological degradation at a time when a downward trajectory is essential.

Food as a Positive Force

Despite these challenges, the EAT-Lancet panel argues that food can serve as a powerful lever for change rather than merely a source of liability. Rapid transformations in dietary habits, agricultural practices, and waste management could yield health and environmental benefits exceeding $5 trillion annually. Shakuntala Thilsted, co-chair of the commission, emphasised, “Food is at the heart of both human well-being and planetary health. Transformation must go beyond producing enough calories; it must guarantee the right to food, fair work, and a healthy environment for all.”

As we move forward, it is imperative that we recognise the profound impact of our food choices on both the planet and our health. It is not just about what we eat, but how we produce, distribute, and waste food. The time for change is now, and it is incumbent upon all of us to advocate for a system that prioritises sustainability, equity, and health.

In conclusion, the EAT-Lancet Commission’s findings serve as a clarion call for individuals, policymakers, and industry leaders alike. We must not only reconsider our dietary choices but also advocate for a food system that respects planetary boundaries and promotes the health of both people and the environment. Together, we can forge a path toward a sustainable future, where food nourishes both our bodies and the Earth.

Lucia Mackenzie contributed to this report.