On the eve of summer recess we have received the news of Good Food Nation progress. The government released “The Proposed National Good Food Nation Plan” for parliamentary scrutiny.
In terms of the broad direction of travel, here is a lot to celebrate.
Those following the Good Food Nation journey will not be surprised to see the Scottish Government’s vision of a fairer, more sustainable, healthier food system set out in the outcomes. Little has changed there since the public consultation and for a good reason – the public and stakeholders supported the long-term vision.
There is a clear alignment with the right to food in anticipation of legal incorporation in due course. The population health-related outcomes, targets and indicators are particularly well developed. They pay attention to nutrition as well as diet-related health conditions, have specific focus on inequalities and include measures for infants, older children and adults alike. In the broader picture there are some interesting indicators, including one looking at the total agricultural land area used to produce fruit and vegetables for human consumption.
There big-ticket items are, of course, the metrics that could not be ignored: greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture, food insecurity levels, diet-related illness. We have work to do on all those fronts. But it is uncanny how many of the other indicators are ones where the available metrics are already trending in the positive direction. There are also several that have little impact on the overall food system – such as the indicators which relate to consumer perceptions and self-reported behavioural changes, as opposed to measurable changes in the food system and environment.
There are of course many gaps – some of them fundamental. While the document references food environment extensively, it makes no attempt to measure or track trends. There are no indicators related to food deserts, concentration of takeaways per head of population, or fast-food ads in either physical or digital space. There is a glaring omission of sustainability in relation to the food and drink sector, apparently ignoring the work of Scotland Food & Drink Net Zero Programme. There is no mention of trying to track worker safety on sea and on land – occupations which gained notoriety for the disproportionate number of deaths and life-changing injuries.
And then there are surprises. One particularly eyebrow-raising example is the inclusion of the production volume of salmon under the climate and biodiversity outcome. Could it be the government is looking to bring that volume down, based on the troubling environmental practices and mass mortality events that plague the industry? More likely it’s an economic indicator in the wrong place – an apt illustration of the disjointed approach between growth and sustainability.
In short, the Government picked up pieces of the existing metrics and policies and tried to convince us this makes for a good plan. One would be justified in wondering why this policy took 3 years to develop. To this end it’s not a Good Food Nation Plan; it’s The Treachery of a Plan.
But there is a glimmer of hope. Outcome 5 speaks of people and communities being empowered to participate in, and shape, their food system. Why it proposes to measure it by the number of people growing fruit and veg is anyone’s guess. Instead, we shall measure it by the number of people who respond to this document. The plan is now undergoing a period of parliamentary scrutiny, with opportunities to engage with MSP and committees. We will be setting out more details about opportunities for input in due course.
The transition to a Good Food Nation will not happen overnight – but if it is to happen at all, it will require leadership. Thus far the government has missed the opportunity to lead from the front – and so it creates a space for the MSPs, Committees, civil society and citizens to lead from behind.