Questions or ideas?
We would love to hear from you!
Long-awaited, feared, or hoped for – the European elections have finally arrived! In the coming decisive weeks, we will know in what direction our European Union will move in the next five years.
But before it will get heated here in Brussels (again), it is good to take a step back and reflect upon the last years and especially the last months that were, let’s say it this way, eventful.
Because it must be said how it is: when it comes to making our food systems more sustainable and fairer, these last five years have been a big disappointment. Starting ambitious with the European “Farm to Fork” strategy in spring 2020 – the EU Commission’s vision for a “fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system” – the debate became increasingly polarized (not to say toxic) and led by absurd fake news.
Translating the “Farm to Fork” strategy into binding law therefore turned out to be even more challenging than expected, as this overview sadly shows:
In other words: What Europe has experienced over the past year has been an outrageous ‘green roll-back’ that is recklessly playing with our future.
But let’s have a closer look at what this has been looking like in practise!
Sustainable Food Systems Law
With its long-awaited proposal on sustainable food systems (SFS), the European Commission wanted to systematically shift food production and consumption patterns for good, something that could be seen as the core of the Farm to Fork promise. For example, the SFS should have included “measures like mandatory requirements for sustainable public procurement of food or voluntary harmonised sustainability labelling systems”. But after years of work by not only the EU Commission but hundreds of civil society organisations, the proposal was not even published anymore and put back into the drawer.
Sustainable Use of Pesticides Regulation:
Following up to the Farm To Fork-Strategy, the Sustainable Use of Pesticides Regulation (SUR) proposed to reduce the use of pesticides by 50% by 2030 – a groundbreaking step. But after the EU Parliament had already watered down the proposal in November 2023, it eventually voted against the whole proposal and even decided to not work on the file anymore. At the same time, the Ministers of the EU Member States could also not reach an agreement, despite of efforts by the Spanish Presidency who presided the negotiations. EU Commission President von der Leyen then withdrew the proposal in February 2024, abandoning any target to reduce pesticides completely.
EU Nature Restoration Law:
Not our climate is danger, humanity is. The same applies to what keeps us alive every single day: our nature. But if it is our rivers, wetlands, butterflies and farmland birds, or our pollinating insects – our nature is in rapid decline. That is why the EU Commission proposed a law to restore “at least 20% of the EU’s land and sea areas by 2030, and ultimately all ecosystems in need of restoration by 2050.”
After a tough fight by progressive Members of the EU Parliament (MEPs), civil society organisations, as well as the climate movement, the EU Nature Restoration Law (NRL) was eventually passed in the EU Parliament in spring 2024. Still, conservative EPP’s boss Manfred Weber heavily divided his group by demanding everyone to vote against the law. Earlier, he even exchanged MEPs for critical votes in the Environment Committee if they indicated to be in favour of the law. Weakened, but still alive, the law was passed – only to now be in a deadlock in the Council of Ministers. Countries such as Hungary and the Netherlands block the law, and no solution is in sight as their refusal seems to be ideological and not driven by concrete wishes for amendments.
Ahead of the Council of Environment Ministers on June 17th, Ireland has coordinated an open letter signed by 11 countries and Ministers, demanding an approval of the NRL: The states that have signed up are Germany, France, Spain, Denmark, Luxembourg, the Czech Republic, Lithuania, Slovenia, Estonia and Cyprus, as well as Ireland.
Common Agricultural Policy (CAP):
Imagine, you had 386.6 billion euros in your pocket. Imagine, you could use that money to protect our climate, our biodiversity, and ensure that our farmers receive a fair remuneration. But the truth is that so far, the CAP – accounting for a third of the EU’s budget – has been systematically failing on all these dimensions.
As a matter of fact, also the last CAP reform in 2020 was a big disappointment. If there was some progress, it was – pushed for by more than 3600 scientists – the Good Agricultural and Environmental Conditions (GAECs), in other words minimum standards to comply with to receive CAP funding.
But then farmers took to the streets all over Europe in the beginning of 2024. While they were united in rightfully demanding fair incomes for their hard work, there remained a huge dispute relating to the environmental ambition of the CAP. For example, the international peasants movement Via Campesina underlined “that certain CAP conditionality rules are not adapted to the realities of farmers, requires complex and heavy bureaucracy indeed, and is insufficient to effectively support European farmers in a transition towards more sustainable agricultural models and towards agroecology. Yet this transition is essential in the face of the seriousness of the climate and biodiversity crises. It requires a strong political commitment from all European institutions to secure the income of all European farmers through fair prices and a better distribution of public aid.”
But while Via Campesina had to wait months to even get a meeting with EU Commission President von der Leyen, leading policy makers were happy to listen to the controversial and heavily criticised association COPA COGECA and largely fulfil their wish-list of rolling back green rules. In turn, 140 NGOs (including Foodrise EU) condemned what they called an “opportunistic” rollback of EU green policies to gain political support ahead of the upcoming European Parliament elections.
What this shows? Our votes matter. YOUR VOTE MATTERS.
The future of the EU’s future food policies lays in your hand!
We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
Feedback EU is een project gestart met zes organisaties uit Europa als doel te luisteren naar wat mensen in hun omgeving nodig hebben om toegang tot en keuze voor gezond, duurzaam en rechtvaardig voedsel mogelijk te maken en om hun stemmen te mobiliseren. Om het project te lanceren organiseerden we van 24-26 april een workshop in Den Haag. Het unieke van dit door Healthy Food, Healthy Planet gefinancierde project is dat het element leren sterk vertegenwoordigd is. Hoe kunnen de stemmen en keuzes van burgers worden gemobiliseerd om beleidsmakers en supermarkten effectief te beïnvloeden? Hoe kunnen we bewegingen diverser maken en verenigen om de bestaande vooroordelen over gezond, duurzaam en betaalbaar voedsel te ontzenuwen en er een eerlijk verhaal van te maken? Deze vragen zullen een rode draad vormen gedurende de looptijd van het project (tot oktober 2025).
Deelnemende organisaties gaan samenwerken met gemeenschappen die moeite hebben met de toegang tot betaalbaar gezond voedsel. Luisteren naar wat zij nodig hebben staat centraal. Supermarkten zijn nog steeds veruit de meest dominante voedselleveranciers. Daarom richten we onze pijlen op supermarkten, om hen te bewegen hun aanbod aan te passen met betaalbare, duurzaam geproduceerde, meer plantaardige en gezonde voeding. We hopen op lokaal en nationaal niveau dit initiatief uit te breiden naar meer landen in de EU. Daarnaast zullen we met beleidsmakers in gesprek gaan om faciliterend beleid te maken. Omdat een fundamentele verandering van het voedselsysteem nodig is, zullen we alternatieve modellen voor een gezonde voedselomgeving bevorderen en gaan we de druk op supermarkten opvoeren om een aanbod van minstens 60-40% plantaardig voedsel tegen 2030 te realiseren.
De kick-off workshop vond plaats in de Utopie en de Gymzaal, beide locaties zijn gebaseerd op alternatieve modellen. De avond van 25 april organiseerden we een evenement met lokale mensen uit Den Haag die zich bezighouden met alternatieve voedselinitiatieven. Deelnemers aan de workshop en lokale bewoners gaven presentaties: Keenan Humble, van Feedback UK, vertelde over een groene bus in Liverpool die betaalbaar gezond voedsel levert in gebieden die ook wel voedselwoestijnen genoemd worden. Liane Lankreijer, van de Voedselraad van Den Haag, presenteerde haar onderzoek waaruit de structurele uitdagingen rondom voedselarmoede in bepaalde gebieden in Den Haag blijken. Ze vertelde over de eerste experimenten om de samenwerking in buurten te versterken, zowel informeel als formeel. Feedback EU ondersteunde de vertaling van haar rapport Weaving Food in het Engels. De Nederlandse versie is hier te vinden. Een vertegenwoordiger van de gemeente Den Haag vertelde hoe zij met lokale voedselinitiatieven samenwerkt.
ALTAA en CAN uit Frankrijk, CECU uit Spanje, Green REV Institute uit Polen, Terra! uit Italië, Feedback Global in UK en Feedback EU in Nederland zoeken de dialoog en samenwerking met organisaties uit verschillende sectoren, zoals met klimaat-, milieu- en landbouworganisaties, consumenten, gezondheidsorganisaties, boeren en organisaties die werken aan armoedebestrijding en sociale rechtvaardigheid, met als doel onze stemmen te verenigen in een luide vraag naar een duurzaam en rechtvaardig voedselsysteem.
Ons eten, onze keuze!
We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
Foodrise EU together with six organisations from Europe started a joint project aiming to mobilize voices to enable access and choice of healthy, sustainable, and just food for all. To launch the project, we held a workshop in The Hague from April 24-26.
The characteristic of this project funded by Healthy Food, Healthy Planet, is that the element of learning is strongly represented. How can the voices and choices of citizens be mobilized to effectively influence policy makers and retailers? How to diversify and unite movements to challenge the existing narratives on healthy, sustainable, affordable, accessible, and fair food (at local, national, EU level and within EU: North-South and East-West). These overall learning questions will be a common thread throughout the duration of the project.
Most organisations will collaborate with communities who have difficulties accessing affordable healthy food and will listen to what they need. Retailers are still by far the most dominant food suppliers in our surroundings and therefore we will target supermarkets to adjust their supply to affordable, sustainably produced, more plant-based, and healthy food. Starting at the local and national level, we hope to expand this initiative to more countries in the EU and will target policy makers at the right level to make enabling policies. Being aware that a fundamental change of the food system is needed, we will promote alternative models for healthy food environments, as well as a 60-40% plant-based supply in supermarkets by 2030.
The kick-off workshop was held in the Utopie and the Gymzaal, both locations are based on alternative models. In the evening of 25th of April, we organized an event with local people from the Hague who engage in alternative food initiatives. Participants from the workshop and local people gave presentations, for example Keenan Humble from Foodrise UK about a green bus in Liverpool providing affordable healthy food in areas that are characterized as food deserts. Liane Lankreijer, member of the Food Council of The Hague presented her survey showing the structural challenges around food poverty in certain areas in The Hague, and also the first experiments to strengthen cooperation in neighbourhoods based on positive forces that have since been set in motion and involve collaboration between formal and informal organisations. Foodrise EU supported the translation of this report Weaving Food into English (link). The city of The Hague was also represented and was telling how they support and cooperate with local food initiatives. During dinner lively discussions continued.
ALTAA and CAN from France, CECU from Spain, Green Rev Institute from Poland, Terra! from Italy, Foodrise UK and Foodrise EU will also reach out to organisations from different sectors. We will search dialogue with climate, environmental and agricultural organisations, health organisations, farmers, consumers, and organisations working on poverty reduction and social justice aiming to bring our voices together in a loud demand for a sustainable and just food system.
Our Food, Our Choice!

We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
In het recente verkiezingsdebat over landbouw en handel kwamen alle kandidaat Europarlementariërs (MEPs) van de negen aanwezige partijen samen. Het debat werd georganiseerd door Feedback EU in samenwerking met Platform ABC, de Nederlandse Akkerbouw Vakbond, en de Nederlandse Melkveehouders Vakbond. Hoewel er een consensus leek te zijn over enkele hoofdpunten, zoals het verbeteren van het inkomen van boeren en het tegengaan van oneerlijke concurrentie en handelsverdragen, waren de meningen over de invulling en aanpak van deze doelen sterk verdeeld.
Consensus en Controverse
Alle partijen spraken zich uit voor een beter inkomen voor boeren en tegen oneerlijke handelspraktijken. De meeste partijen steunen ook de vergroening van het Gemeenschappelijk Landbouwbeleid (GLB). Echter, rechtse partijen willen de hectarepremie behouden als buffer voor slechte tijden. Er waren uiteenlopende meningen over wat eerlijk en beter is voor de boer en het milieu, en over de rol van Europa hierin.
Monique Ansink (Volt) vatte het treffend samen: “Als je achter de kudde aanrent, loop je altijd in de stront.” Hiermee benadrukte ze de noodzaak voor progressieve verandering en leiderschap.
Milieu en Mest
Anja Hazekamp (PvdD) bracht de omvang van het mestprobleem in Nederland onder de aandacht: “We produceren 70 miljoen ton mest per jaar, dat is 1000 kg per inwoner, ofwel 33 badkuipen per jaar per persoon.” Dit beeldende voorbeeld stuitte op kritiek van de BoerBurgerBeweging (BBB) en de SGP, die vonden dat de cijfers overdreven waren.
Hans Geurts (BBB) pleitte tegen de afschaffing van de derogatie is, waardoor hij minder dierlijke mest en meer kunstmest moet gaan verbruiken, terwijl de SGP een kringlooplandbouw voorstelde waarin ook menselijke mest wordt gebruikt.
Subsidies en Duurzaamheid
Anja Hazekamp (PvdD) stelde dat alle GLB-subsidies moeten worden ingezet voor verduurzaming en vermindering van externe kosten. Ze bekritiseerde het huidige systeem, waarbij de meeste subsidies naar grote bedrijven in de veehouderij gaan vanwege de hectarepremie.
Lara Sibbink (GroenLinks/PvdA) benadrukte het belang van biologische landbouw, waar veel minder in is geïnvesteerd dan in conventionele landbouw. Ze pleitten voor GLB-ondersteuning voor biologische landbouw vanwege de lagere externe kosten.
Hendri Nortier (D66) stelde dat eerlijke beprijzing cruciaal is en dat potentiële klimaatschade in de prijs moet worden meegenomen. Hij betoogde dat Nederland, door in te spelen op deze ontwikkelingen, de concurrentiekracht van de boeren kan versterken.
Wetenschappelijke Feiten en Polarisatie
Een boer uit het publiek klaagde dat tegenwoordig alle wetenschap subjectief lijkt. De wetenschappelijke feiten over klimaat, stikstof en landbouw werden door sommige boeren en rechtse partijen ter discussie gesteld.
Lara Sibbink (GroenLinks/PvdA) was verbaasd over het gebrek aan feitenkennis van sommige kandidaten. Ze werd door een boer uit het publiek neergezet als theatermaker, wat ze beaamde naast haar rol als voedselexpert.
Monique Ansink (Volt) riep op om de links-rechts discussie en polarisatie te vermijden en samen te werken aan een duurzame toekomst. Hans Geurts (BBB) sloot zich hierbij aan en benadrukte het belang van communicatie over gewasbeschermingsmiddelen zonder angstzaaien.
Handel en Vrijhandelsverdragen
Fenna Feenstra (SP) stelde dat wat we hier niet willen, we ook niet in Indonesië en Brazilië moeten willen.
Anja Hazekamp (PvdD) benadrukte het belang van het uitsluiten van landbouw uit vrijhandelsverdragen. Lara Sibbink (GroenLinks/PvdA) benadrukte de noodzaak van voedselsoevereiniteit.
De SGP en BBB stemden tegen het Mercosur-verdrag vanwege oneerlijke concurrentie en lagere duurzaamheidsnormen voor importproducten. Lambert Polinder (SGP) benadrukte dat de import van buiten de EU aan dezelfde productiemethoden moet voldoen als binnen de EU.
Lara Sibbink (GroenLinks/PvdA) pleitte voor mirror measures in handelsverdragen, die wederkerig moeten worden toegepast, bijvoorbeeld bij de export van pesticiden uit de EU.
Hans Geurts (BBB) gaf aan dat de BBB, ondanks hun eerdere tegenstand tegen Mercosur, nu zullen deelnemen aan de EVP-fractie en pragmatischer zullen zijn in hun stemgedrag, wat door de VVD wordt bevestigd.
Oneerlijke concurrentie en Mirror Measures
Frank Mechielsen, directeur van Feedback EU gaf een presentatie over oneerlijke concurrentie voor Europese boeren van boeren uit landen buiten de EU en presenteerde ook de beleidsnota die recent is uitgebracht door Feedback EU over dit wetgevingsinstrument. De beleidsnota is hier terug te lezen.
Samenvatting
Het verkiezingsdebat over landbouw en handel toonde een brede eensgezindheid over de noodzaak van eerlijke inkomens voor boeren en de strijd tegen oneerlijke concurrentie en handelsverdragen. Echter, de visies op hoe deze doelen te bereiken verschilden sterk tussen de partijen. Linkse partijen benadrukten de noodzaak van duurzaamheid en biologische landbouw, terwijl rechtse partijen pleitten voor behoud van de hectarepremie en pragmatische benaderingen in handelsverdragen. De discussie over mest en wetenschappelijke feiten illustreerde de polarisatie binnen het debat, met oproepen van Volt en BBB om gezamenlijk naar een duurzame toekomst te werken. Het was duidelijk dat, hoewel de doelen overeenkomen, de wegen naar die doelen sterk uiteenlopen.
We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
In late April, the Regional Partnership for the Conservation of the Coastal and Marine Zone hosted the 11th edition of the Marine and Coastal Forum in Guinea-Bissau, bringing together a host of actors working for the protection and restoration of the oceans and the safeguarding of populations negatively impacted by the blue economy. Apart from scientists and civil society, decision makers also attended, among whom the President of Guinea-Bissau and several ministers from countries across the region.
The conference hosted various events spanning a wide range of topics, and although only reserved a small space in the overall agenda, we made sure to address the problems of fish farming and this industry’s rapid global expansion. It baffles us how the role of aquaculture keeps being portrayed as a spotless solution in the transition to a sustainable food system. A former Fisheries Minister from Mauritania, invited to speak of his countries role in conservation efforts and sustainable fisheries, almost got away with not mentioning his country’s massive expansion of fishmeal and fish oil factories over the past decade until put on the spot by a Mauritanian CSO referring to this industry’s devastating impacts on marine life and coastal communities. Unfortunately, this intervention was left without comment by the official.
We did not miss the opportunity to present our work along with the partners of the Our Fish project at a dedicated side event. Our coalition made sure to highlight the dramatic decline in small pelagic fish stocks in the region, illustrate the problems this causes for local communities and how the global fish farming industry, at the example of salmon farming in Europe, is driving the needless destruction of marine life and people’s livelihoods. The audience’s reactions supported our message and appreciated the facts and figures we shared as they allow them to spread the message and join our advocacy efforts.

Venturing out to Bissau’s fishing port, we see a familiar sight from across the West African coast: Chinese funded and built infrastructure as well as a refrigerated storage facility taking up a sizeable portion of the small port, and placards displaying the support of the EU in the context of the EU-Guinea-Bissau fisheries partnership agreement in force since 2019 which gives access to EU member states to fish in Bissau-Guinean waters for around 15 million euros a year. The agreement includes the fishing of small pelagics.
Although disappointed by the uncritical embracing of aquaculture by institutions like the World Bank during the conference, we left Bissau encouraged by the Forum’s Declaration issued after the conference as well as the myriad initiatives labouring to protect marine ecosystems and the people who depend on them, making sure that producing aquatic foods does not harm people or the planet.

We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
Vandaag is het zover: onze nieuwste policy brief over mirror measures en hun rol in het bevorderen van rechtvaardige handel wordt gepubliceerd. Deze beleidsnota biedt een diepgaande analyse van de huidige stand van zaken en geeft beleidsaanbevelingen die bijdragen aan een eerlijker en duurzamer handelssysteem.
In onze policy brief hebben we niet geschroomd om kritisch te kijken naar de huidige handelspraktijken. Wij constateren dat er op diverse vlakken nog aanzienlijke verbeteringen mogelijk zijn. Dit leidt tot oneerlijke concurrentie en ondermijnt duurzame productiemethoden. Een specifiek punt van kritiek is dat de huidige handelsregels vaak niet bijdragen aan een gelijk speelveld. In onze aanbevelingen pleiten wij dan ook voor een meer rechtvaardige benadering, waarbij duurzaamheid en eerlijke concurrentie centraal staan. We moedigen beleidsmakers aan om niet alleen te kijken naar de directe economische voordelen, maar ook naar de bredere maatschappelijke en ecologische impact van hun handelsbesluiten.
De implementatie van mirror measures, waarbij importproducten aan dezelfde eisen moeten voldoen als binnenlandse producten, kunnen een rol spelen in de verbetering van deze situatie. Door te zorgen dat geïmporteerde producten voldoen aan dezelfde standaarden als binnenlandse producten, kunnen we niet alleen oneerlijke concurrentie voorkomen, maar ook duurzame productiemethoden wereldwijd stimuleren. Maar we roepen op ook kritisch te kijken naar mirror measures, en hun effectiviteit te monitoren.
Wij roepen beleidsmakers, stakeholders en alle geïnteresseerden op om onze policy brief grondig door te nemen en de discussie met ons aan te gaan. Wij geloven dat een open dialoog en kritische reflectie essentieel zijn om tot effectieve en toekomstgerichte beleidsoplossingen te komen.
Lees de policy brief hier.
We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
An estimated 40% of food is wasted globally, which causes an estimated 8–10% of global emissions, and uses an estimated 28% of the world’s agricultural land area, larger than China and India combined. In 2021, the EU wasted at least 58.4 million tonnes of food – with even more currently going unmeasured at primary production level. Food waste costs EU businesses and households an estimated €143bn a year. Yet left to voluntary measures, EU progress to reduce food waste has been slow.
Now, the EU faces a historic opportunity. The Council of the European Union is currently in the process of negotiating proposals for legally binding EU targets to reduce food waste – a historic move. However, everything is still at stake: targets may be set too low, and whole parts of the supply chain like farms might be excluded. The European Commission’s proposal is for household/retail/restaurant/food service food waste to be reduced by 30% by 2030, for manufacturing/processing food waste to be reduced by only 10% by 2030, and for no targets to be set for primary production at all. The European Parliament has backed more ambitious targets – 40% for household/retail/restaurant/food service and 20% for manufacturing/processing – but the Council currently seems to be on track to back less ambitious targets.
Luckily, a movement is building around Europe for ambitious action on food waste. 65 organisations ranging from NGOs to businesses and research institutions have signed a joint-statement calling on the EU to set legally binding targets to reduce food waste by 50% from farm to fork by 2030. But it will be vital to get policymakers from across Europe backing the fight for regulation to end food waste too. We’ve also created a policy briefing to explain how higher food waste targets are feasible.
That’s why the Prevent Waste Coalition – Foodrise EU, European Environmental Bureau, Zero Waste Europe, Safe Food Advocacy Europe and Too Good To Go have collaborated to create a short survey asking EU member states for their views on EU legally binding food waste targets. We’ve also created a policy briefing to explain how higher food waste targets are feasible. As we show in our briefing, already featured by the EU media outlets Politico and Euractiv recently, there is just no excuse for low ambition. On the contrary, there is much to gain – not only for the environment and consumers, but also food businesses themselves. We targeted the Ministries for the Environment and Agriculture for each country, via email – and received responses between April – May 2024. The results are presented below.
The support of these Ministries will be essential for achieving an agreement on (more) ambitious targets, through member state representatives (and ultimately the national ministers) at the Council of the European Union. If you would like to raise pressure on your country’s government to back ambitious EU food waste targets, please contact maximilian@foodrise.org.uk for more info and support. If you’re an EU-based organisation who’d like to support our joint-statement, please sign up here.

We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
Our society’s relationship with the nature that sustains it is fundamentally broken. Despite the growing evidence of looming ecological collapse and the alarming acceleration of the climate crisis, European governments and EU politicians are currently blocking new measures to protect nature and tearing up ones already in place.
Healthy nature underpins our ability to feed ourselves, to have clean water to drink, clean air to breathe and a safe climate to live in. We are horrified that so many politicians across Europe are threatening the basis of life on this planet to provide false solutions to farmers’ hardships, while doing nothing to address farmers’ complaints of abusive practices in the supply chain or unfair competition and cheap imports from trade deals. And all this as an opportunistic attempt to gather a few more votes in the upcoming elections.
The European Environment Agency has warned that the continent is woefully underprepared for the impacts of a changing climate. Natural ecosystems that protect us from the worst of extreme weather, drought, heatwaves and floods are disappearing when we should be restoring them.
In recent months, Ursula von der Leyen’s European Commission has loosened pollution rules for industrial farms, dropped plans for sustainable food production, abandoned targets to reduce pesticides and shelved efforts to ensure a resilient water supply. Some national governments have frozen EU plans to restore nature in Europe and compromised corporate due diligence rules protecting human rights and the environment. Now, the European Commission wants to scrap basic environmental standards for farms to appease industry lobbyists, and agriculture ministers are threatening the EU’s new rules to fight global deforestation.
Nature is not in conflict with our society’s ability to thrive, it is the very foundation of it. But some politicians in European capitals, and in the EU institutions in Brussels, are accelerating the nature and climate crisis, and risking the lives of the people they represent. We urge you to stop before it is too late.
We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
With the European farmers’ protests and the looming excess of manure in the Netherlands, agriculture will play a significant role leading up to the European elections on June 6th. How do we balance farmers’ livelihoods with the protection of nature and the environment?
On Thursday, May 23rd at 7:45 PM, Foodrise EU, in collaboration with Platform Earth Farmer Consumer, is organizing an election debate at De Schakel in Nijkerk, addressing crucial issues regarding EU agricultural and trade policy.
Candidates include: Hans Geurts (BoerBurgerBeweging), Arjan Tolkamp (CDA), Hendri Nortier (D66), Lara Vita Sibbing (GroenLinks-PvdA), Fenna Feenstra (Socialistische Partij), Hans van de Wind (SGP), and Bart Millenaar (VVD). Pending confirmation: Anja Hazekamp (Partij voor de Dieren) and the EP candidate from NSC.
Introductions by Keimpe van der Heide of the Dutch Arable Farming Union and Frank Mechielsen of Foodrise EU.
We cordially invite you to participate and contribute to this important discussion. It is crucial that we engage in dialogue together about the future of our agricultural sector. Your voice and contribution are invaluable to this critical discussion.
We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
Not so long ago, in November 2023, final negotiations on the Gas and hydrogen markets Regulation came to an end. A hotly debated topic during these negotiations was the introduction of a binding target of 35 billion cubic metres (bcm) of annual biomethane production by 2030 (in comparison, currently, only 4.2 bcm are produced per year).
As we demonstrated in our substantial report, a 35 bcm target (originating from an industry report and then included in the REPowerEU plan by the EU Commission) lacked and still lacks any independent scientific grounding. Furthermore, no impact assessment has been carried out with regards to its environmental impact. In fact, an own study by the European Commission’s Joint Research Center highlighted that only a much lower level of 24 bcm of biomethane could be produced sustainably by 2030.
Even though a binding biomethane target was eventually rejected following strong public pressure by Foodrise EU and 15 other organisations, the industry-led push for unhinged biomethane production is ongoing. This is reflected in a new report commissioned by the European Biogas Association (EBA) that goes far beyond previous projections for EU biomethane.
EBA’s latest figures are highly questionable for a number of reasons:
Firstly, other than assumed by the report authors, no direct connection can be drawn between biomethane production and emissions savings as a contribution to the EU’s proposed 2040 climate target. Merely substituting part fossil fuels’ use with biomethane does not inherently guarantee sustainability. Rather, it is essential to address the potential for emission reductions together with the feasibility of biomethane production from each feedstock. Independent research and impact assessments taking into account not only the impacts of biomethane production on climate change in terms of GHG emissions but also environmental impacts related to different planetary boundaries are therefore urgently needed.
Secondly, EBA’s projections completely ignore the necessity to drastically lower the production of livestock in Europe – to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increase food security, and promote healthier diets – as called for by the EU Commission’s Chief Scientific Advisors. In fact, manure should not just be seen as a waste product and means to produce biomethane but as a byproduct of livestock (over)production which causes substantial methane emission. Likewise, the projections pay no heed to the EU’s commitment to reduce food waste as reaffirmed in the current revision of the waste framework directive. Unarguably, EBA’s projections are based on failing on major EU environmental targets including dietary changes and reductions in food waste that are indispensable to achieve the sustainability transition.
Thirdly and lastly, the EBA’s reliance on a massive increase in “sequential crops” to create feedstock availability for biomethane is alarming. The total disregard of significant environmental risks associated with pesticide use, water usage, soil health, and primary crop yields is yet another confirmation that the current biomethane rush is essentially one for profit based on ongoing plunder of the planet.
This is why today, we have published our newest open letter and sent it to key decision-makers throughout the EU. Together with 15 independent not-for-profit organisations, we condemn the current political and industrial push for biomethane production and – based on our report that was published in 2023 – point out that even 35 bcm of biomethane cannot be produced sustainably in the EU.
In light of the coming European elections and thus a new EU Parliament as well as a new cabinet of EU Commissioners, we therefore urgently demand a review of high biomethane targets together with sustainable food and land use experts to ensure that EU biomethane production helps rather than hinders climate and sustainability goals.

We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
Demand trade justice politics from your candidates in the 2024 European Parliament elections. European trade and investment agreements are still not in line with EU´s climate and sustainable development ambitions. Trade policy and the European Green Deal are in stark contradiction. We, as EU citizens, want to put the planet and people before profit. And for this to happen, the next EU parliament must vote for a fundamental shift in trade politics. Together we can make this happen!
Ask your candidates for the EU parliament to make EU trade policy fit for the 21st century and its challenges. Ask them to sign the pledge by sending them an email (see below)!
By making the pledge on trade justice, candidates promise to promote 5 key commitments for changing the track of the EU trade policy in the next legislative cycle.
This means we all together have the best chance to stop detrimental trade deals and develop a globally just and climate and environmental friendly trade policy which respects human and workers rights, fosters the creation of decent jobs and promotes animal welfare. Send out the mail and ask your candidates to make the pledge for a new EU trade policy.
We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
Alle grote supermarkten hebben de ambitie uitgesproken om meer plantaardige producten aan te bieden. Helaas bieden zij nog steeds veel vlees en zuivel producten in de aanbieding aan. Maar Jumbo is de eerste die aanbiedingen op vers vlees volledig afzweert.
Topman Ton van Veen in de Volkskrant: ´Met het stopzetten van vleespromoties zetten we een belangrijke stap in de richting van onze bijdrage aan de eiwittransitie van dierlijke naar meer plantaardige voeding’. ‘We realiseren ons dat versnelling hierin nodig is.’ Maatschappelijke druk heeft een rol gespeeld in het besluit, erkent Jumbo.
De uitstoot van Jumbo
Jumbo stoot 10,5 megaton aan CO2 uit in haar hele keten. Naar schatting zit 40% van deze uitstoot in de verkoop van vlees en zuivel. Daar is dus flinke klimaatwinst te behalen. Sinds 2021 voeren wij bij Foodrise EU campagne op supermarkten. Wij willen dat ze actie ondernemen op klimaat, en hun vlees en zuivelverkoop verminderen. We voerden campagne op Jumbo waarin de supermarkt werd opgeroepen om 1) transparant te worden over hun klimaatimpact en de verkoop van vlees en zuivel, 2) de eiwittransitie naar meer plantaardig en 3) minder dierlijk te omarmen en te stoppen met aanbiedingen van vlees. Jumbo hoorde bij de laagste groep in onze scorecard uit 2022 (zie ´de Minder Vlees Race´).
In 2023 kwamen Jumbo en de andere grote supermarkten met toezeggingen om transparant te worden over hun broeikasgasuitstoot, hun eiwitverhouding en de ambitie voor een eiwittransitie naar 50/50 dierlijk/plantaardig in 2025 of 2030. Maar geen van de supermarkten stopte met aanbiedingen voor vlees en zuivel. Zodat in de praktijk nog klanten verleid worden om meer vlees te komen dan goed is voor hun gezondheid en het milieu.
Ons rapport ´ ´, gelanceerd in het midden van 2023, belichtte de greenwashing tactieken, twijfelachtige gegevensrapportage en winstbejag met betrekking tot de klimaatcrisis binnen supermarkten. Onze bevindingen onthullen een gebrek aan duidelijkheid en toewijding van retailers met betrekking tot hoe ze hun klimaatambities willen realiseren. Supermarkten gebruiken greenwashtactieken om zich duurzamer voor te doen en nog steeds door te gaan met het vlees en zuivelreclames.
Marktleider Albert Heijn is kampioen aanbiedingen. We sporen Albert Heijn dan ook aan om het voorbeeld van Jumbo te volgen en te stoppen met de promotie van stapelkorting van vlees- en zuivelproducten.
We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
All major Dutch supermarkets have expressed the ambition to offer more plant-based products. Unfortunately, they still heavily promote meat and dairy products. However, Jumbo is the first to completely abandon promotions on fresh meat.
CEO Ton van Veen in de Volkskrant: “With the cessation of meat promotions, we are taking a significant step towards our contribution to the protein transition from animal to more plant-based food. We realize that acceleration is needed in this regard.” Jumbo acknowledges that societal pressure has played a role in the decision.
Jumbo emits 10.5 megatons of CO2 throughout its entire chain. An estimated 40% of this emission comes from the sale of meat and dairy products. Hence, there is substantial climate improvement to be made. Since 2021, Foodrise EU has been campaigning supermarkets. We want them to take action on climate change and reduce their meat and dairy sales. We ran a campaign targeting Jumbo, urging the supermarket to: 1) be transparent about their climate impact and the sale of meat and dairy, 2) embrace the protein transition towards more plant-based options, and 3) reduce the promotion of meat. Jumbo was among the lowest-scoring supermarkets in our 2022 scorecard (see ´de Minder Vlees Race´).
In 2023, Jumbo and other major supermarkets made commitments to transparency regarding their greenhouse gas emissions, their protein ratios, and their ambition for a protein transition to a 50/50 animal/plant-based ratio by 2025 or 2030. However, none of the supermarkets ceased offering promotions on meat and dairy products. This means that in practice, customers are still tempted to purchase more meat than is beneficial for their health and the environment.
Our report ´ , launched mid-2023, highlighted the greenwashing tactics, questionable data reporting, and profit-driven approaches regarding the climate crisis within supermarkets. Our findings reveal a lack of clarity and commitment from retailers regarding how they intend to achieve their climate ambitions. Supermarkets employ greenwashing tactics to appear more sustainable while continuing to promote meat and dairy products
Market leader Albert Heijn is renowned for its abundance of promotions. Therefore, we strongly urge Albert Heijn to follow Jumbo’s example and cease promoting bulk discounts on meat and dairy products
We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
Brussels, 13 March 2024 – Members of the European Parliament voted on the Waste Framework Directive to raise legally-binding food waste reduction targets to 20% for processing and manufacturing, and 40% for retail, restaurants, and households.
The Prevent Waste Coalition on food waste remarked that setting the first EU-wide food waste reduction targets confirms political commitment to tackle the environmental and social impacts of food waste. However, the result is at odds with the European Parliament’s previous commitments to slash food waste by 50% from farm to fork; a commitment expressed in the EU Green Deal and UN Sustainable Development Goals. The Coalition is part of a wider group of 65 organisations from 22 countries that signed a joint statement calling EU policymakers to support the 50% reduction target.
Theresa Mörsen, Waste & Resources Policy Officer, Zero Waste Europe, states:
“Almost 10 years ago, the EU and its Member States committed to the UN Sustainable Development Goals, including 50% reduction of food waste across the entire supply chain as outlined by SDG 12.3, but now that the proposal is on the table, decision-makers shy away from decisive action. This is happening against the backdrop of recent reports by the European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change that warn against the huge impact food waste has on climate change.”
Christophe Diercxsens, Global Public Affairs Director, Too Good To Go, underlines:
“Although the European Parliament’s vote today moves us in the right direction, the adopted targets are significantly lower than the EU’s prior commitment to UN SDG 12.3. Ambitious legally-binding food waste reduction targets are essential to bring all countries and all food businesses on board in the fight against food waste, not just a few.”
The targets do not apply equally to all steps of the food supply chain. Both the Commission proposal and the Parliament position set a far lower target for manufacturing and processing, and completely omit taking action against food losses and waste at farm level. With evidence from Kellogg’s showing that fast reductions are possible in the processing sector, this unequal treatment is not justified. Moreover, Eurostat data shows that at least 11% of food is lost at primary production level. Meanwhile, the majority of food loss has been excluded from the EU measurement of food waste. This urgently needs to be rectified as current best estimates suggest that up to 90 million tonnes – 60% of EU food waste – could occur on farms.
Antonio De Carluccio, Policy & Project Officer, Safe Food Advocacy Europe, states:
“It is inconsistent and unfair for processing and manufacturing to be assigned far lower targets than other sectors, especially given the ample evidence that manufacturers are equally capable of food waste reduction. We therefore recommend that the targets for the manufacturing sector be raised to match those of other sectors. This adjustment ensures that manufacturers contribute equitably to the EU’s efforts to combat food waste. That being said, we saw a strong political statement by some groups today who lent their support to a 50% target, signalling a promising alignment with SDG 12.3.”
Frank Mechielsen, Director, Foodrise EU, points out:
“Excluding primary production from binding food waste targets is harmful not only to sustainability efforts, but also farmers. This will only increase the likelihood that food waste will be pushed onto farmers via cosmetic rejections, unfair contracts, and order cancellations, at a time when many farmers suffer crippling costs due to food waste caused by retailer practices. Including farms in the targets, and expanding the scope of measurement to cover unharvested food waste, would raise pressure to reform these practices so farms can get more of their produce to market.”
Members of the Prevent Waste Coalition on food waste now put their hopes on Member States to honour their previous commitment to the SGD 12.3 and support a binding target of 50% reduction from farm to fork.
Notes to Editors
A group of NGOs and progressive businesses, the Prevent Waste Coalition, consisting of Zero Waste Europe, the European Environmental Bureau, Too Good To Go, Foodrise EU, and Safe Food Advocacy Europe, has campaigned jointly over the past months and raised awareness with policymakers about the importance of aligning EU targets with the Sustainable Development Goal 12.3.
Champions 12.3, an international coalition of executives from governments, businesses, and civil society leading global food waste action, recommends that states should interpret the SDG 12.3 target as a 50% reduction in all food losses and waste from farm to fork, including ‘food losses’ [i.e. pre-retail food waste], not just food waste at the retail/consumer-level.
In 2017, the European Parliament voted consistently with this Champions 12.3 recommendation when it called on Member States to “take the measures required to achieve a Union food waste reduction target of 30% by 2025 and 50% by 2030”, covering “the whole supply chain, including in primary production, transportation, and storage”. The recent Parliament vote therefore represents a significant watering down of the Parliament’s position.
Zero Waste Europe ENVI Committee vote press release: “Waste Framework Directive: proposal to tackle food and textile waste only slightly improved by European Parliament’s committee” [Published 14 February 2024]:
ZWE feedback to the proposal for a targeted revision of the Waste Framework Directive [Published 30 November 2023]:
Foodrise EU’s briefing on food waste [Published September 2022]: https://foodrise.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Feedback-EU-2022-No-Time-To-Waste-report.pdf
Joint statement from Prevent Waste Coalition: “Statement on EU legally binding targets to reduce food waste” [Published 20 September 2022]:
Proposal for a targeted revision of the Waste Framework Directive [Published 5 July 2023]: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/publications/proposal-targeted-revision-waste-framework-directive_en
Press contacts
Sean Flynn, Media Outreach & Communications Officer at Zero Waste Europe, sean@zerowasteeurope.eu or news@zerowasteeurope.eu / +32 471 96 55 93
Theresa Mörsen, Waste & Resources Policy Officer, theresa.morsen@zerowasteeurope.eu
Christophe Diercxsens, Global Public Affairs Director at Too Good To Go, cdiercxsens@toogoodtogo.com
Daemon Ortega, Policy & Project Officer at Safe Food Advocacy Europe, campaigns@safefoodadvocacy.eu
Maximilian Herzog, EU Advocacy Officer, Foodrise EU, maximilian@foodrise.org.uk
About Zero Waste Europe
Zero Waste Europe is a European network of communities, local leaders, experts, and change agents working towards the elimination of waste in our society. Advocating for sustainable systems and the redesign of mankind’s relationship with resources, they accelerate a just transition towards zero waste for the benefit of people and the planet. www.zerowasteeurope.eu
About Too Good To Go
Too Good To Go is a certified B Corp social impact company that connects users with partners to rescue unsold food and stop it from going to waste. With 90 million registered users and 155,000 active partners across 17 countries, Too Good To Go operates the world’s largest marketplace for surplus food. Since its launch in 2016, Too Good To Go has helped to save over 300 million meals from going to waste, the equivalent to 810,000 tonnes of CO2e avoided.
About Foodrise EU
Already in 2013, Foodrise was founded in the United Kingdom to create a food system that nourishes both people and our planet. In 2022, Foodrise EU was established to broaden Foodrise’s impact in Europe, and strengthen the involvement with EU food policy development & civil society coalitions. In its work, Foodrise especially focuses on EU governments & institutions, supermarkets, livestock companies, and investors.
Foodrise: Feeding People, Backing the Planet (foodrise.eu)
About Safe Food Advocacy Europe
SAFE – Safe Food Advocacy Europe is currently the only Brussels-based NGO specialised in the protection and representation of EU consumers in the food sector. SAFE aims to ensure that consumers’ health and concerns remain at the core of the EU’s food legislation, and its mission includes strengthening the voice of civil society in European food legislation and increasing public awareness of food safety issues. This is achieved through advocacy and lobbying campaigns, publications, working groups, trainings, and more.
We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.



We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
It probably won’t surprise that fish played a crucial role in the diets of Dutch coastal communities, and that many shaped not only their profession, but also their identities around this staple food. Dutch proverbs dating back centuries bear testimony of this:

Herring seller. The Herring Woman. By Charles Howard Hodges
Herring in particular remains a staple in Dutch national cuisine and festivals such as the Vlaggetjesdag celebrate the Dutch herring fishery each year in early summer. While fishing was traditionally a man’s job, women took to any matters on-land, including processing and selling the catch. In short: they were managing the family and the business on shore, independently.
Just like their Scottish and English counterparts, society didn’t necessarily cherish them. They were looked down upon for their crude language, and the lingering smell of fish marked them. Not that it bothered them too much – it’s a small price to pay for an entirely self-sufficient and empowered way of living in a time when women were openly oppressed.
Cornelie Quist from the International Collective in Support for Fishworkers adds this:
“In the 19th century, fishermen were paid wholly or partly in kind (i.e. the fish they helped catch). This fish was called women’s fish because it went to the fishwives to feed the family and to sell in the market or at the door. With the advent of industrialization in Dutch fisheries, fishermen’s pay in kind was abolished and replaced by direct cash payments.
In addition, fishermen now went to sea for longer periods (sometimes up to months at a time), which meant that women had to care for their families alone. Fish was still available, but now had to be bought. Women now generated the income needed for the family by taking out loans and/or doing wage work for fishing companies, such as repairing nets and processing fish, or as maids for an employer and less and less as self-employed workers. Before industrialization, the entire fish chain was a household and family-based activity with interdependent roles. Industrialization changed this and marginalized small-scale fishing and the status of women in fisheries.”

Credit: Katwijks Museum’s photo archive
On this International Women’s Day, we want to pay tribute to not only these resilient women from the past, but also those of today, and underline their crucial role in society (providers of food, especially for the less fortunate), as caretakers for their families and communities as well as in the local economies.
In our work, we fight alongside West African women processors and fishmongers for their right to food and against the destruction of their livelihoods and profession by a rotten food system, where staple wild fish are pillaged and reduced to meal and oil for export and to produce farmed fish for luxury markets – driving a phenomenon we can only call food colonialism.

Fish processors protesting against industrial overfishing in Bargny, Senegal, with empty calabash bowls made from gourds, which symbolize the lack of fish in the seas off West Africa. © Clément Tardif / Greenpeace
They’ve consistently called for action and stand up for their rights, and our partner organisation Greenpeace Africa made sure their voices are heard again today:
There are many ways to join the fight, including reading our latest report Blue Empire: How the Norwegian Salmon Industry extract nutrition and undermines livelihoods in West Africa, and signing on to our latest petition to have Wagamama drop farmed salmon off their menu. Dropping farmed fish off one’s menu is another clear individual call for change in the food system, and using one’s agency as a citizen (writing to your local MP or MEP) and as a consumer (writing to your supermarket, and leaving reviews) will help counter the root causes of the problems faced by local fishing communities the world over: harmful private sector practices and insufficient regulation.
We certainly won’t give up the fight, so please stay tuned for our future campaigns.
Further reading:
How your supermarket salmon is impacting communities in West Africa
We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
Een oproep tot verandering: de impact van industriële veeteeltbedrijven
In een wereld die worstelt met de gevolgen van klimaatverandering, ontbossing en schendingen van mensenrechten, staan industriële veeteeltbedrijven centraal. Zij zijn onderbelicht als aanjager van de problemen, maar hun voortdurende expansie is onverenigbaar met de dringende noodzaak om onze planeet te beschermen en toekomstige generaties te waarborgen.
De rol van Nederlandse banken in dit verhaal
Het nieuwe rapport van Foodrise EU, ‘Klimaatimpact van het Grote Geld’ werpt een scherp licht op de rol van Nederlandse banken, zoals ING, ABN Amro en Rabobank, in het financieren van deze schadelijke praktijken. Deze banken hebben aanzienlijke sommen geld gestoken de industriële veehouderij.
ING en Rabobank staan beiden in de top tien van grootste financiers van de sector wereldwijd. Zij verstrekten zakelijke leningen en doorlopend krediet en stonden garant bij obligatie-uitgiften. ING met $15,6 miljard in kredieten, Rabobank met $15,4 miljard. Dit kan niet langer worden genegeerd.
De lokale gevolgen en de verantwoordelijkheid van banken
De impact van deze financiering strekt zich niet alleen uit over de wereld, maar is ook voelbaar in onze eigen achtertuin. In Nederland hebben de megaboerderijen geleid tot het faillissement van kleinschalige boeren en tot ernstige milieuproblemen. We moeten erkennen dat deze problemen ons allemaal aangaan en dat het tijd is om actie te ondernemen. Dat begint met geen miljarden meer naar de bio-industrie.
“De voortdurende financiering van massaproductie van vlees en zuivel door Nederlandse banken ondermijnt cruciale inspanningen op het gebied van klimaat, biodiversiteit, ontbossing, mensenrechten en corruptie,” zegt Frank Mechielsen, Directeur van Foodrise EU. “Het is tijd voor verandering. Banken moeten stoppen met het financieren van industriële veeteelt, en wel nu.”
Op weg naar een duurzame toekomst: een oproep tot actie
Deze bevindingen dwingen ons om te handelen. Het is tijd voor Nederlandse banken om hun financiering van industriële veehouderij af te bouwen. Het is tijd voor overheden om strengere regels op te leggen en subsidies te herzien. Er is geen tijd meer voor verder uitstel.
We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
Dutch Banks: Cease Financing Industrial Livestock Farming
A call for change: the impact of industrial livestock farming
In a world grappling with the consequences of climate change, deforestation, and human rights violations, industrial livestock farming takes center stage. Often overlooked as a driver of these issues, their continued expansion is incompatible with the urgent need to protect our planet and ensure the well-being of future generations.
The role of Dutch banks in this story
The recent report by Foodrise EU, ‘Climate Impact of Big Money’, sheds a stark light on the role of Dutch banks, such as ING, ABN Amro, and Rabobank, in financing these harmful practices. These banks have invested substantial sums of money in industrial livestock farming.
ING and Rabobank both rank in the top ten largest financiers of the sector globally. They provided business loans and revolving credit, and guaranteed bond issuances. ING with $15.6 billion in credits, Rabobank with $15.4 billion. This cannot be ignored any longer.
Local consequences and the responsibility of banks
The impact of this financing extends not only globally but also to our own backyard. In the Netherlands, the expansion of mega-farms has led to the bankruptcy of small-scale farmers and serious environmental issues. We must acknowledge that these problems concern us all and that it is time to take action. It starts with no longer funneling billions into the agribusiness.
“The continuous financing of mass production of meat and dairy by Dutch banks undermines crucial efforts in climate, biodiversity, deforestation, human rights, and corruption,” says Frank Mechielsen, Director of Foodrise EU. “It is time for change. Banks must stop financing industrial livestock farming, and they must do so now.”
Towards a sustainable future: A Call to Action
These findings compel us to act. It is time for Dutch banks to cease their financing of industrial livestock farming. It is time for governments to impose stricter regulations and revise subsidies. It is time for change, and it begins today.
Read the full report by Foodrise EU here.
We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
Waar zijn de klimaatplannen van miljoenenwinstsupermarkten?
Ahold Delhaize, het moederbedrijf van Albert Heijn publiceerde vandaag de jaarlijkse cijfers: wat een contrast tussen de stijgende voedselinflatie en de gerapporteerde winsten. Dit roept vragen op over de prioriteiten van de industrie. Boodschappen in Nederland kosten nu ongeveer 30% meer dan twee jaar geleden en tegelijk maakte het moederbedrijf van Albert Heijn 451 miljoen euro winst in 2023. Dat is 1.24 miljoen euro per dag. Deze cijfers drukken ons met de neus op het feit dat supermarkten niet het beste voor hebben met het publiek.
Nergens toont zich dit duidelijk dan in hun klimaatplannen en gebrek aan concrete acties. Het Foodrise EU-rapport ‘Valse Bingo’, gelanceerd in het midden van 2023, belichtte de greenwashing tactieken, twijfelachtige gegevensrapportage en winstbejag met betrekking tot de klimaatcrisis binnen supermarkten. Bijna 40% van de totale uitstoot van broeikasgassen door supermarketen wordt veroorzaakt door de verkoop van dierlijke producten. Onze bevindingen onthullen een gebrek aan duidelijkheid en toewijding van retailers met betrekking tot hoe ze hun klimaatambities willen realiseren.
Afgelopen januari bezochten we het hoofdkantoor van Albert Heijn in Nederland en overhandigden we hen de honderd ansichtkaarten van onze supporters. We werden goed ontvangen, maar hebben nog steeds geen idee hoe Albert Heijn precies hun publiekelijk verklaarde ambitie wil bereiken om in 2030 een eiwitverhouding van 60% plantaardig en 40% dierlijk te bereiken in de verkoop van hun producten. Noch zijn er specifieke toezeggingen gedaan om de marketing van vlees en zuivel te stoppen.
Uitbreiding van Campagnes door heel Europa
In het Verenigd Koninkrijk onderzocht Foodrise de retailers in hun rapport ‘Greenwash Grocers‘ en ook in andere delen van Europa zijn campagnes gelanceerd: er zijn rapporten uitgebracht in Spanje en Polen. Deze initiatieven trachten greenwashing praktijken aan te pakken en transparantie binnen de detailhandel te bevorderen. Naarmate het bewustzijn van consumenten groeit, wordt de oproep voor verantwoordelijke en duurzame praktijken in de industrie steeds dringender.
Nieuwe Wetgeving ter Bescherming van Consumenten en Bestrijding van Misleidende Marketingpraktijken
Het Europees Parlement heeft onlangs een baanbrekende wet goedgekeurd om greenwashing en misleidende productinformatie te bestrijden. Deze wetgeving is ontworpen om consumenten te beschermen tegen misleidende marketingpraktijken en hen in staat te stellen geïnformeerde keuzes te maken. De richtlijn, die overweldigende steun kreeg van leden, behandelt verschillende marketinggewoonten met betrekking tot greenwashing en voortijdige productveroudering. De nieuwe wet verbiedt het gebruik van termen als “milieuvriendelijk” in advertenties of verpakkingen zonder concrete bewijzen. Het pakt ook claims aan die suggereren dat een product een “klimaatneutrale”, “gereduceerde” of “klimaatpositieve” impact op het milieu heeft door CO2-emissiecompenserende schema’s, die vaak onzin zijn.
Het Voortouw Nemen
Als de grootste retailer in Nederland heeft Albert Heijn de kans om het voorbeeld te zijn. Door concrete acties boven louter retoriek te plaatsen, en nu te stoppen met van de promotie van stapelkorting van vlees- en zuivelproducten nu. Het is tijd om werkelijk leiderschap en toewijding te tonen. Aan zowel het welzijn van consumenten als de planeet. We hebben vandaag nogmaals gezien dat er ruimschoots de middelen voor zijn.
We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
As Ahold Delhaize, the parent company of Albert Heijn, published their annual figures today, we again observe the contrast between soaring food inflation and supermarkets reporting substantial profits. It raises concerns about the industry’s priorities and its commitment to the public’s well-being: groceries in the Netherlands now cost about 30% more than two years ago. Yet the parent company of biggest retailer in the Netherlands made 451 million euros in profit in 2023. That is 1.24 million euros per day. These figures are a crucial reminder that supermarkets do not have the public’s best interests at heart.
Nowhere is this more apparent than in their climate plans, and their lack of concrete actions. Foodrise EU´s report ‘Valse Bingo’ launched mid 2023 and shed light on the greenwashing tactics, questionable data reporting, and profiteering related to the climate crisis within supermarkets. Almost 40% of their total greenhouse gas emissions are related to the sales of animal products. The findings reveal a lack of clarity and commitment from retailers regarding how they plan to achieve their climate ambitions.
This January, we visited the headquarters of Albert Heijn in the Netherlands and handed them the postcards of our supporters. We were well received but remain in the dark on how Albert Heijn aims to exactly achieve their publicly stated ambition to achieve a protein ratio in the sales of their products of 60% plant based and 40% animal based in 2030, nor were any specific commitments made to stop the marketing of meat and dairy.
Expanding Campaigns Across Europe
In the UK, Foodrise scrutinized the retailers in their ‘ and campaigns are launching in other parts of Europe: reports came out in These initiatives seek to address greenwashing practices and promote transparency within the retail sector. As consumer awareness grows, the call for responsible and sustainable practices in the industry becomes increasingly imperative.
New Law to Protect Consumers and Curb Misleading Marketing Practices
The European Parliament has recently approved a groundbreaking law to curb greenwashing and deceptive product information. This legislation is designed to shield consumers from misleading marketing practices and allow them to make informed choices. The directive, which received overwhelming support from members, addresses various marketing habits related to greenwashing and premature product obsolescence. The new law prohibits the use of terms such as “environmentally friendly” in advertising or packaging without concrete evidence. It also tackles claims suggesting a product has a “climate-neutral,” “reduced,” or “climate-positive” impact on the environment due to CO2 emissions offsetting schemes, which are often bogus.
Leading the Change
It is imperative for market leaders like Albert Heijn to lead by example. By prioritizing concrete actions over mere rhetoric, they can pave the way for a more sustainable future, starting with ending the promotion of multibuys on meat and dairy products now. It’s time to demonstrate true leadership and commitment to the well-being of both consumers and the planet. As we have seen once more today, they sure have the means to do so.
We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
Farming carnivorous fish in Europe harms fishing communities in West Africa by depriving them of a resource fundamental to their nutrition and their livelihoods. Salmon are carnivorous, and farmed salmon depend on the nutrients provided through fish oil in particular, gained through grinding up smaller, wild fish. At Foodrise, we have evidence that in feeding these smaller fish (sardines, sardinella, ethmalosa, etc.) to Scottish farmed salmon, major micro-nutrient losses occur. How can we allow an industry driving biodiversity loss, environmental pollution, and food insecurity to simply go on with business-as-usual?
Keeping up the fight, we have been looking into the place for farmed salmon production, Norway, and have now published a new report, showcasing facts on the industry’s scale and power, its hunger for wild fish and its devastating impact on West African communities.
Our research shows that in 2020, nearly 2 million tonnes of wild fish were required to produce the fish oil supplied to the Norwegian farmed salmon industry and that throughout this feeding process, one-quarter of the wild fish ground up is lost. Furthermore, the amount of fish sourced off the West African coast (FAO area 34) to supply fish oil to the Norwegian salmon farming industry in 2020 could have provided between 2.5 million and 4 million people in the region with a year’s supply of fish.
Four big feed producers, MOWI, Skretting, Cargill and BioMar supply close to 100% of the feed used in Norwegian salmon farming, and all of them source fish oil from FAO 34. Despite public sustainability pledges, salmon and feed producers’ take-up of alternative ingredients to replace wild-caught fish in feed remains minimal. Without significant changes in feed composition, Norway’s ambition to triple salmon production to 5 million tonnes by 2050 would require over three times as much wild-caught fish as in 2020.
The extraction of fish from West Africa by corporations headquartered in the Global North for the benefit of mainly high-income consumers in Europe, North America and Asia has far-reaching consequences, further entrenching global inequity and food insecurity. Thus, the continuing expansion of industrial aquaculture is fuelling a type of food imperialism.
Norwegian salmon is available in most European markets and is sold as a premium product all around the world, including the Netherlands. Here, it is found in all major supermarkets such as Albert Heijn, Jumbo, Aldi, Plus, where customers will have to dig through supply chain layers via ASC codes for a chance (if given) at finding out the exact origin of the product.
Wholesalers such as Makro also sell farmed Atlantic salmon, with minimum information available for buyers, which, for consumers frequenting Horeca, makes it difficult to get reliable information on where the food they are considering to eat comes from. Makro, just like feed producer Skretting, is a subsidiary of SHV Holdings, a Dutch trading company with a turnover of 26 billion euros in 2022.
The Netherlands profits from Norway’s salmon boom in its role as a seafood trade hub, but also through processing and further exporting the farmed fish.
Luckily, the solutions are already on the table. Our modelling shows that an alternative aquaculture-fisheries model combining the direct consumption of wild-caught fish alongside salmon fed on fish oil and fishmeal exclusively made from trimmings (waste from processing), rather than whole fish, delivers the same amounts of key micronutrients for the same number of people, but freeing up nearly 1 million tonnes of wild fish to feed people, or to continue playing their critical role in the marine ecosystem.
For further info:
https://www.arte.tv/en/videos/113682-002-A/data-sources/
https://journals.plos.org/sustainabilitytransformation/article?id=10.1371/journal.pstr.0000005
We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
In a final negotiation session on 8th December, Member States did not bow to pressure from the European Parliament and rejected the introduction of a binding high biomethane target by 2030 in the Gas and hydrogen markets Regulation.
Check out details in the Euractiv article
Read the full press release
Coalition’s Call for Action
This is a huge victory for the coalition of independent not-for-profit organisations who have been actively campaigning for the target to be dropped based on evidence of major environmental risks associated with the high biomethane target.
Among recent studies, Foodrise EU’s latest research highlighted the risks of encouraging more livestock production and food-feed-fuel competition and concluded that at best the high EU biomethane target would be unachievable, at worst it will lock in dangerously unsustainable agricultural, land use and energy practices.
Joint Letter: Rejecting Industry-Backed Biomethane Goals
The call to reject the industry-backed introduction of the high biomethane target was made in a joint letter to Member States by a mounting coalition of not-for-profits active in the fields of food security, sustainable land use, clean transportation and climate change mitigation. It is a big success and relief that the call has been heard.
Next Steps: Advocating for a Scientific Approach
The coalition now requests that the Commission heeds to its other demand echoed by participants of the recent Foodrise webinar on biomethane requesting that a scientific target-setting process be conducted in conjunction with independent food system experts to set an EU biomethane target that is fit for food and the climate.
Navigating Further Challenges and Industry Pressures
While we celebrate this significant victory, we are aware of ongoing risks, in particular in relation to the inclusion in the Regulation of a 100% tariff discount for the injection of biomethane into networks which will create perverse incentives in favour of biomethane. In the face of intensive industry lobby, the campaigning effort to secure a biomethane target that allows it to play its important but niche role in a truly decarbonized future, within a sustainable, healthy and just food system will continue.
We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.
Our recent report on biomethane has sparked a surge in awareness on the sustainability issues considered with scaling up biomethane production and use. The ripple effect has reached international media outlets, including features in international media outlets. Beyond media coverage, the European Biogas Association has weighed in, addressing our report through an open letter. Responding transparently, we have initiated a public dialogue to address concerns. Moreover we have written a joint letter to EU member states’ representatives, collectively advocating for rejection of the high EU biomethane target, backed by – amongst others – GreenPeace and Oxfam.
Media Recognition and Biogas Association’s Open Letter:
Our report has transcended national boundaries, gaining noteworthy recognition in various countries through esteemed publications such as Euractiv, the Greek press, Italian press and Polish press. Furthermore, the European Biogas Association has taken notice of our findings, seeking dialogue through an open letter. We have promptly addressed their concerns and made our response transparent for all stakeholders. Read our full response to the European Biogas Association’s open letter here.
NGO Coalition Calls for Rejection of High EU Biomethane Target:
Adding momentum to the conversation, a joint letter calling for the rejection of the high EU biomethane target has been sent to EU Member States Representatives. This collaborative effort has gained significant support from a growing number of NGOs, with the latest endorsement coming from none other than Oxfam. The mounting support signifies a shared commitment to addressing the sustainability challenges posed by the current biomethane trajectory. Our joint letter is now co-signed by seventeen NGO’s:

Invitation: Biomethane Webinar December 6th
In light of the interest and the critical need for a nuanced understanding, we extend an invitation to all stakeholders to join our upcoming webinar on 6 December (3-5pm CET). The webinar is entitled “Biomethane: Considerations for setting a target fit for the climate and for our food system”. The session will provide a comprehensive exploration of the sustainability challenges associated with biomethane and aims to add independent and scientific perspectives to the debate around the high EU biomethane target.
We will have two presentations and time for discussion. Andreas Graf of Agora Energiewende will present key findings of their “Breaking free from fossil gas” report which is based on detailed sectoral modelling of the energy, buildings and industry sectors, and shows that Europe can structurally reduce the consumption of fossil gas by an amount that is equivalent to gas imports from Russia before the war in Ukraine. Karen Luyckx will present the findings of the research for Foodrise EU into the feedstock assumptions behind the 35bcm biomethane target.
We look forward to an open discussion based on scientific evidence. To register for the webinar, please use this link.
Press Contact: Frank Mechielsen, frank@foodrise.org.uk
We would love to hear from you!
Share on social media
Stay up to date with our latest work.