School of Agriculture, Food and Ecosystem Sciences - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 10 of 21
-
ItemIntegrating nutrition and obesity prevention considerations into institutional investment decisions regarding food companies: Australian investment sector perspectives(BMC, 2022-11-08)BACKGROUND: There is growing recognition that current food systems are both unhealthy and unsustainable, and are increasingly shifting toward the supply and marketing of unhealthy, ultra-processed foods and beverages. Large food companies hold substantial power within food systems and present a significant barrier to progress on addressing issues related to nutrition and obesity prevention. Institutional investors (such as pension funds) play a key role in influencing corporate governance and practices, and are increasingly incorporating environmental, social and governance (ESG) considerations within investment decisions. By considering nutrition and obesity prevention, institutional investors present a potential avenue for driving increased food industry accountability for their population health impact. This study investigated views of stakeholders in the Australian investment sector on the incorporation of nutrition and obesity prevention considerations within institutional investment decision-making regarding food companies. METHODS: Fifteen in-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted in 2020-21. Participants were predominantly Australian-based, and included representatives from asset management companies, superannuation funds, ESG advisory/consultancy firms, ESG research providers, and relevant advocacy groups. Interviews examined challenges and opportunities to the integration of nutrition and obesity prevention considerations within institutional investment decision-making. Interviews were analysed using deductive thematic analysis, informed by a theoretical change model. RESULTS: Several participants reported that their institution factored nutrition and obesity prevention considerations into their investment decisions; however, attention to nutrition-related issues was limited, generally perceived as 'niche', and not yet institutionalised. Key challenges and opportunities were identified at the employee, investment organisation, investment sector, government and non-government levels. These challenges and opportunities centred around experience and knowledge, quality and availability of ESG data and benchmarks, importance of investor coalitions, and demonstration of financial risks related to nutrition and obesity. CONCLUSION: There are a range of steps that could be taken to help ensure more systematic and effective consideration of issues related to nutrition and obesity prevention within institutional investment decision-making in Australia, including: (1) improved nutrition-related reporting metrics and benchmarking criteria for food companies; (2) better articulation of the financial risks that unhealthy diets and obesity pose to investors; (3) enhanced investor advocacy on unhealthy diets and obesity through investor coalitions and; (4) detailed guidance for investors on how to address unhealthy diets and obesity. Better engagement between the Australian public health community, institutional investors and government regulators is critical to drive changed investor practice in this area.
-
ItemBUILDING THE RESILIENCE OF MELBOURNE’S FOOD SYSTEM – A ROADMAP A Foodprint Melbourne Report May 2022(University of Melbourne, 2022-01-01)This report from the Foodprint Melbourne research project presents a roadmap of strategies and policy approaches for strengthening the resilience of Melbourne’s food system to shocks and stresses. It focuses particularly on shocks and stresses related to climate change and pandemic, but also considers underlying food system stresses, such as high levels of food waste and declining supplies of the natural resources that underpin food production. The combined effects of these shocks and stresses undermine the resilience of food systems, drive up food prices and increase food insecurity. The report identifies six key areas of opportunity for action to strengthen the resilience of Melbourne’s food system to future shocks and stresses.
-
ItemTHE RESILIENCE OF MELBOURNE’S FOOD SYSTEM TO CLIMATE AND PANDEMIC SHOCKS A Foodprint Melbourne Report May 2022(University of Melbourne, 2022-01-01)This report from the Foodprint Melbourne project summarises the findings of an investigation into the resilience of Melbourne’s food system to shocks and stresses. It focuses particularly on the resilience of Melbourne’s food system to climate and pandemic shocks and stresses. However, it also considers longer term underlying stresses on Melbourne’s food system from declining supplies of natural resources and environmental degradation. The report discusses the impacts of shocks and stresses throughout the food system from food production to consumption and the generation of waste. It identifies vulnerabilities in the city’s food system to these shocks and stresses, and it discusses the features of a resilient food system.
-
ItemLatest Trends in Investing for Improved Nutrition and Obesity Prevention(SPRINGERNATURE, 2022-03)PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of this paper is to summarise current trends and new developments with regard to institutional investor actions related to nutrition and obesity prevention. RECENT FINDINGS: Investor-related activity related to improving population diets is building, with several recent initiatives aiming to accelerate achievement of global nutrition goals. There is increasing civil society and investor activism focused on leveraging investor influence to improve nutrition-related food company actions. There are multiple sustainability-related reporting standards; however, few include comprehensive nutrition-related metrics. There is increasing interest from institutional investors in addressing nutrition-related issues; however, investor activity in the area is piece-meal. There is a need for further integration of nutrition within current reporting frameworks. Methodological alignment across the increasing number of food industry accountability initiatives would likely help galvanise increased investor action. Some jurisdictions are introducing relevant mandatory reporting requirements, which are likely to play a key role in enhancing transparency by the food industry and financial institutions.
-
ItemThe Extent to Which Obesity and Population Nutrition Are Considered by Institutional Investors Engaged in Responsible Investment in Australia-A Review of Policies and Commitments(FRONTIERS MEDIA SA, 2020-12-23)INTRODUCTION: Responsible investment (RI), in which environmental, social and governance (ESG) considerations are incorporated into investment decision making, is a potentially powerful tool for increasing corporate accountability and improving corporate practices to address broad societal challenges. Whilst the RI sector is growing, there is limited understanding of the extent to which pressing social issues, such as obesity and unhealthy population diets, are incorporated within RI decision making. This study aimed to investigate the extent to which obesity prevention and population nutrition are considered by Australian institutional investors engaged in responsible investment. METHODS: A desk-based review was conducted of investment approaches of prominent Australian asset managers and superannuation funds identified as engaged in responsible investment. Relevant information on the incorporation of ESG issues related to obesity and population nutrition was extracted for each investor, drawing on websites, published policy documents and annual reports. Strategies were categorized as: (1) negative/exclusionary screening; (2) positive/best-in-class screening; (3) norms-based screening; (4) ESG integration; (5) sustainability-themed investing; (6) impact/community investing; and (7) corporate engagement and shareholder action. These strategies were compared across investors and by themes related to obesity and population nutrition. RESULTS: Eighteen of the 35 investors indicated that they applied investment strategies that considered issues related to obesity and population nutrition. The most commonly identified strategy was ESG integration (n = 12), followed by sustainability-themed investing (n = 6), and positive screening (n = 4). The ways in which obesity and population nutrition were considered as part of these approaches included relatively high-level general health considerations (n = 12), considerations around the healthiness of food company product portfolios (n = 10), and consideration of specific company nutrition policies and practices (n = 4). The specificity and depth to which RI strategies were disclosed varied. CONCLUSION: There is significant potential for investment decisions to contribute to efforts to address key social issues, such as obesity and unhealthy diets. Some institutional investors in Australia have recognized the potential importance of incorporating obesity- and population nutrition-related issues into decision-making processes. However, the extent to which these considerations translate into investment decisions and their impact on companies in the food sector warrant further exploration.
-
ItemIntroduction(ROUTLEDGE, 2020)BACKGROUND: One important way to transform food systems for human and planetary health would be to reduce the production and consumption of animals for food. The over-production and over-consumption of meat and dairy products is resource-intensive, energy-dense and creates public health and food equity risks, including the creation of superbugs and antimicrobial resistance, contamination and pollution of land and waterways, and injustice to animals and humans who work in the sector. Yet the continuing and expanding use of animals is entrenched in food systems. One policy response frequently suggested by parties from all sectors (industry, government and civil society) is voluntary or mandatory labelling reforms to educate consumers about the healthiness and sustainability of food products, and thus reduce demand. This paper evaluates the pitfalls and potentials of labelling as an incremental regulatory governance stepping-stone to transformative food system change. METHODS: We use empirical data from a study of the regulatory politics of animal welfare and environmental claims on Australian products together with an ecological regulation conceptual approach to critically evaluate the potential of labelling as a regulatory mechanism. RESULTS: We show that labelling is generally ineffective as a pathway to transformative food system change for three reasons: it does not do enough to redistribute power away from dominant actors to those harmed by the food system; it is vulnerable to greenwashing and reductionism; and it leads to market segmentation rather than collective political action. CONCLUSION: We suggest the need for regulatory governance that is ecological by design. Labelling can only be effective when connected to a broader suite of measures to reduce overall production and consumption of meat. We conclude with some recommendations as to how public health advocates and policy entrepreneurs might strategically use and contest labelling and certification schemes to build support for transformative food system change and to avoid the regressive consequences of labelling.
-
ItemNo Preview AvailablePost COVID 19 and food pathways to sustainable transformation(SPRINGER, 2020-09)
-
ItemHow Free Is Sow Stall Free? Incremental Regulatory Reform and Industry Co-optation of Activism(WILEY, 2020-07)This article critically examines how interactions between social movement activism, supermarkets, and the pork industry led to the voluntary adoption of “sow stall free” standards in Australia. We “backwards map” the regulatory space behind “sow stall free” products to show how the movement against factory farming became selectively focused on the abolition of one form of confinement for sows rather than on other forms of confinement and the conditions of the sows’ offspring, the piglets that are consumed. We argue that this facilitated an incremental shift to “sow stall free” production, allowing the concept of pig welfare to be corporatized in a way that maintains the dominant model of factory farmed pig meat production.
-
Item
-
ItemCan the Hidden Hand of the Market be an Effective and Legitimate Regulator?: The Case of Animal Welfare Under a Labeling for Consumer Choice Policy Approach(Wiley, 2017)In Australia, labeling for consumer choice, rather than higher government regulation, has become an important strand of the policy approach to addressing food animal welfare. This paper illustrates the usefulness of “regulatory network analysis” to uncover the potentials and limitations of market‐based governance to address contentious yet significant issues like animal welfare. We analyzed the content of newspaper articles from major Australian newspapers and official policy documents between 1990 and 2014 to show how the regulatory network influenced the framing of the regulatory problem, and the capacity and legitimacy of different regulatory actors at three “flashpoints” of decisionmaking about layer hen welfare in egg production. We suggest that the government policy of offering consumers the choice to buy cage free in the market allowed large‐scale industry to continue the egg laying business as usual with incremental innovation and adjustment. These incremental improvements only apply to the 20 percent or so of hens producing “free‐range” eggs. We conclude with a discussion of when and how labeling for consumer choice might create markets and public discourses that make possible more effective and legitimate regulation of issues such as layer hen welfare.