first results from the project NAH_Gast

Transcription

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
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
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
11.10.15
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
11.10.15
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
11.10.15
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
11.10.15
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
11.10.15
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
11.10.15
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
11.10.15
Comparing and analyzing the existing concepts for
assessing sustainability in the out-of-home catering
13
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
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
[email protected]
Team of authors:
Holger Rohn
Melanie Lukas
Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment, Energy
Tobias Engelmann
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
11.10.15
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.
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
11.10.15
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.
§  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:
§  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
11.10.15
Sources Slide 9
§  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.
§  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
11.10.15

first results from the project NAH_Gast

Transcription

Similar documents

Vorprogramm als PDF herunterladen

Creglinger Hartweizen für schwäbische Spätzle und Nudeln - Alb-Gold

fairfield inn marion

Nationaler Nachhaltigkeitskompass - Bundesministerium für Umwelt

Aktuelle Kostform im Heim und Spital – Fingerfood und

F_CC_500_d, Version 01.11.2005

Medienmitteilung