Food Bytes: June 2025 Edition

FOOD BYTES IS A (ALMOST) MONTHLY BLOG POST OF “NIBBLES” ON ALL THINGS CLIMATE, FOOD, NUTRITION SCIENCE, POLICY, AND CULTURE.

I just returned from an unforgettable trip to Lao PDR, with two stopovers in Bangkok, Thailand. Laos is a country of striking contrasts—on one hand, it moves with an unhurried, almost meditative rhythm; on the other, it carries the weight of a complicated past, still navigating the long shadows cast by war, particularly the enduring legacy of unexploded ordnance.

By Jess Fanzo, Luang Prabang

As many of you are aware, I’m currently working on a book that explores how the counterculture movements of the long 1960s have shaped today’s food systems. Inevitably, that journey includes grappling with the legacy of the Vietnam War, and as an American, traveling through this region stirs deep reflection. It's impossible not to think about the imprint left behind by U.S. military action and the resilience of communities who’ve had to rebuild in its aftermath.

Yet what struck me most was how far this part of the world has come. There’s a quiet strength in Laos, a gentle pride in its culture, and a determination to move forward without forgetting the past. It’s a powerful reminder of the world’s ebbs and flows, and how, even in the face of immense hardship, there’s the possibility of healing. “This too shall pass” kept echoing in my mind—not as a dismissal of pain, but as a recognition of time’s capacity to soften and transform.

Onward to this month’s Food Bytes.

IFPRI put out a bible in this year’s Food Policy Report. Where the rubber meets the road is Section 5, on effective change and the factors that determine how policy change occurs. One of our new papers led by Stephanie Walton (who is doing amazing work at Oxford) suggests that addressing asset stranding proactively, rather than trying to prevent it, could be a powerful lever for change.

Some great data exercises are out that provide useful nuance in how our food systems are performing. First up is the Systems Change Lab, which assessed progress for 32 outcome indicators in the food system. To help spur transformational change, we also highlight 58 critical enablers and barriers. Results of their analysis? NOT GOOD. The second is by the Better Planet Laboratory, which identifies food flows through nearly every major port, road, rail, and shipping lane worldwide and traces goods to where they are ultimately consumed. It’s called the Food Twin Map.

There are also some great people producing worthy pieces to read and follow. First, the great Bill McKibben has a Substack. I encourage you to read one of his latest entries, “So many moving pieces.” Nicholas Kristof is fighting the good fight and producing many excellent pieces on how the US government’s actions are harming global health and nutrition. Check out this, this, and this. Other institutions are getting in on the action. Bloomberg News has launched a new food column, titled "The Business of Food." The UNDP appears to be making a play in the food systems sector, including the launch of a new Conscious Food Systems Alliance. Fascinating!

Some highlights from journalists writing about food:

• An interesting take on RFK Jr’s Make America Great Again policy: Grocery Update Volume 2, #4: MAHA Or Misdirection. Grocery Nerd argues that the “MAHA” framework may serve more as political window dressing than actual change.

• DeSmog reported that food giants Nestlé, JBS, PepsiCo, Mars, and Danone are overstating their climate commitments—leaning heavily on unproven carbon removal schemes, neglecting methane reductions, and relying on weak, loophole‑filled deforestation pledges—according to a new report from the NewClimate Institute and Carbon Market Watch. Gee, what a shocker…

• In this article by Grist, the blending of at least 30% vegetables or plant proteins into meat products—known as “balanced proteins”—can deliver taste and price similar to conventional meat, while significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

• This fascinating article in The New Yorker, entitled “Schmear campaign: How a Hazelnut Spread Became a Sticking Point in Franco-Algerian Relations,” is about how the European Union has banned Nutella competitor El Mordjene, a move some see as politically and racially motivated.

• In the New York Times, they have a new series, “What is History.” They kicked off the series with two articles on food: One by Jacques Pepin on culinary pursuits and the other by Carey Fowler on the biodiversity of our food supply.

• I fully admit to being a fan of Elizabeth Kolbert, and she delivers with her latest article: "Do We Need Another Green Revolution?" Worth your time to read along with all of her work.

• Michael Grumwald has a new book out, and he wrote a piece, A Food Reckoning Is Coming, as part of his book tour. Another worthwhile and perhaps divisive read.

Some highlights from the science literature

• This study validates the Healthy Diet Basket—a least-cost dietary model based on food-based dietary guidelines—as a globally consistent benchmark, finding that it delivers adequate macronutrients and micronutrients at about US $3.68/day.

• Whereas this study argues that dietary species richness (DSR)—a measure of the number of different edible species in a diet—is the most effective global marker for capturing food biodiversity. They also show it correlates strongly with lower mortality in Europe compared to other diversity indices, and tracks micronutrient adequacy in low- and middle-income countries.

• Speaking of diets, this study uses a linear programming model of over 2,500 U.S. foods to show that individually tailored vegan, vegetarian, and flexitarian diets (with ≤255 g of pork and poultry per week) can meet nutritional needs, align with the Paris Agreement's 1.5 °C climate target, yield up to ~700 healthy-life minutes per week, and reduce climate impacts sevenfold.

• Fortification remains essential and is considered a cost-effective way to fill nutrient gaps. Check out this modeling paper.

• On processing…This NEJM perspective argues that mounting evidence linking ultraprocessed food consumption to increased calorie intake, obesity, and chronic disease necessitates regulatory policies—such as front‑of‑package labeling, marketing restrictions, and excise taxes—to curb their public health impact. Not sure there’s anything new here.

• Numerous modeling papers are being published on the impacts of climate change on food production. This paper models six usual suspect staple crops — maize, soy, rice, wheat, cassava and sorghum — and finds that for every 1 °C increase in temperature, food production will decline from current levels by 120 calories per person per day, but that income growth and adaptation strategies could alleviate 23% of global losses by 2050 and 34% by 2100. Gulp.

• Should we consider alternatives like insects? According to this article, that may not be the case. The title alone is click-worthy: Beyond the buzz: insect-based foods are unlikely to significantly reduce meat consumption.

• Maybe it’s time to start building climate-resilient systems - not just food, but across all systems. Check out our new policy paper, which argues in this manner.

For those interested in broader development issues, the Sustainable Development Report 2025 is now available. Another report that feels more like a book on how the world is progressing on those pesky goals that would make the world a better place and leave no one behind. Related to that, we have a new paper on how pastoralists are coping with resource constraints, conflict, and climate extremes. We initiated this work a decade ago in Isiolo County, Kenya, utilizing photo elicitation and semi-structured interviews with Borana and Turkana pastoralists to gain a deeper understanding of the constraints hindering their ability to practice pastoralism and to identify opportunities for better supporting pastoralist communities with climate-resilient strategies. And last but not least, a conversation about The Myth of the Poverty Trap.

And do check out our new Food for Humanity podcast! This limited series is all about alt-proteins.

That’s all, folks. Have a wonderful, safe, and delicious summer!

Bodies upon the gears

The years between 1965 and 1974, also known as the long sixties, were a decade in which the U.S. and the world were in great turmoil, witnessing a complete cultural shift led by the “baby boomer generation.” America had just emerged from a Great Depression and two devastating world wars that toppled and reorganized world order. As a result, it arose as the world's foremost economic, political, and military power with a resulting illusion of great prosperity and hope for the future. But things began to unravel slowly. Just a few years prior, the young, charismatic President John F. Kennedy was gunned down in broad daylight in Dallas, Texas. His assassination shocked the nation and ended the optimism and innocence many, especially the youth, felt for the country’s future.

By 1965, the U.S. entrenched itself in what was to be a senseless war in faraway Southeast Asia, where we had very little business engaging in, a commonly held view around the world. Then came more nonsensical assassinations. The first was in 1965, when Malcolm X, an American Muslim minister and human and civil rights activist, was killed while giving a speech in the Washington Heights neighborhood of New York City (where Columbia University’s medical campus now sits). Just three years later, American Baptist minister, one of the most prominent civil rights leaders, Martin Luther King Jr., and a president’s brother and the former U.S. Attorney General, Robert F. Kennedy, were both gunned down in hotels in Memphis and Los Angeles, respectively. Then, from 1972 to 1974, the Watergate scandal plagued the country, leaving citizens wholly untrusting of its government and the lengths it would go to cover up crimes, no matter how inconsequential or considerable. The darkness fully engulfed the country when former president Nixon resigned from office before a certain impeachment because of the scandal.

Times were, to put it lightly, unhinged, and the country was fractured. Protests were an everyday occurrence. Students were being injured or killed on campuses for demonstrating, sometimes by the National Guard, the very institution meant to instill peace and protect citizens. On the other side of the world, young men were sacrificing their lives for a war without cause. Sound familiar? Indeed…

Many young people bucked convention by attempting to create a new future on their terms—an authentic counterculture movement. They took risks—running away from home to protest in the streets, joining a commune, or getting lost in the haze of the Haight. Even before the dark days of ‘68-69, students mobilized in incredible, organized, and purposeful ways. Check out Mario Savio, a student activist and leader of the Berkeley Free Speech movement in the video below making a speech in 1964 on the Berkeley campus named "Bodies Upon the Gears" (also known as the Operation of the Machine). His speech is highly relevant today.

“There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part! You can't even passively take part! And you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels ... upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop! And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!”

Dark days can breed creativity, and these times sparked new ways of thinking and living on this shared planet. Young people fought for a different and new world. A big part of that new world was about food and the beginning of climate and environmental justice movements. Some within the counterculture movement were deeply concerned about the direction of U.S. agriculture, its impacts on health and nature, and how the industrialization of the food system was moving more and more towards unhealthy, processed foods controlled by transnational conglomerates. These large-scale industries also spouted environmental contaminants and pollutants into ecosystems, further damaging the environment. There were also deep concerns about the unfailing violation of civil rights and the systemic social injustices domestically and abroad, much of that revealed through the U.S. food system. Democratizing food was a way to potentially address these myriad challenges and find a new, equitable future better for humans and the planet.

The counterculture movement explicitly used food to ignite a social revolution. They returned to the land and started communes to grow their food in organic, wholesome ways. They opened neighborhood co-operatives to sell and provide these foods to their communities. They (the Black Panthers) started safety net programs to feed children living in impoverished neighborhoods.

Putting the long sixties in the context with our world today, we are once more living in a highly polarized, fractured country, with significant loss of life on the domestic front due to everyday gun violence and shootings, drug and alcohol addiction, and unhealthy lifestyles. Our political position in the world is also uncertain, with increasing animosity and frustration towards America’s tactics to ensure its power and relevancy in a globalized society. At the same time, climate change is barreling down on the world because of powerhouse countries’ inability to commit seriously to mitigating global warming over the last 40 years. Diet and diet-related risk factors are now the top killers of disease and death in the country and the world. The U.S. is in the middle of a public health crisis with obesity and non-communicable diseases. For the first time, Americans’ life expectancy is one of the worst among high-income countries. Our food systems are unsustainable and fraught with fragility. So are the environment and the natural resources that agriculture depends on. The rights of citizens, particularly food system workers, marginalized groups, and women, continue to be violated across food systems and every other system.

They say one should study the past to know the future. In the world of food policy, where I spend my professional days, we keep repeating the past, reinventing the wheel of history, and not learning from what came before. Every so often, debates surface on how to feed a growing world, particularly when extreme weather events or conflicts spur food shortages, food price increases, and famines. Questions arise as to why our global food system is so fragile, why we trust international trade, and why we depend on just a handful of crops to feed the world. In addition, there are questions about tipping points related to population growth and climate change. Whether technology and innovation can keep pace or whether we are headed for a collapse. But on we go, with quick fixes that never entirely repair the problem but instead put band-aids on wounds that never entirely heal. That is why the challenges we face today as a global community are even more difficult. Food systems and a raging, changing climate show how fragile our society is and how much we could lose.

The counterculturalists wanted to transform food systems 60 years ago. Maybe their attempts at a social revolution did not work out as they envisioned. Still, they tried to create the foundation for a new society built on sustainable food systems that benefit human and planetary health, community cohesion, and global citizenry. They gave us enough to learn from, adopt, and adapt about how to better govern food systems and the environment while looking out for each other. They tried. Maybe it’s time to pick up where they left off and move forward.