Chartered Institute for Environmental Health policy conference on climate change – key challenges for the FSA

Thursday 20 November 2008

Speech by Dame Deirdre Hutton, Chair, Food Standards Agency, 20 November 2008

Introduction

Professor Lowe’s presentation has starkly set out the science on climate change. Climate change is one of the biggest challenges facing the world.

The science, as outlined by the Stern Report, is clear and beyond doubt. Human activity is causing changes to our climate. Do nothing and we threaten lives, economic growth and the standard of living of everyone worldwide.

The FSA, as part of the UK Government, needs to rise to this challenge, alongside governments all over the world. For us, the question is how we do this while continuing to deliver our vision of safer and healthier food for all.

Agriculture is a significant contributor to clima emissions and seems highly probably that agricultural practices will have to change and develop to meet this challenge.

The Agency does not lead on agriculture but we are clearly closely connected to it.

We do not understand yet what impact will be, but will have to watch closely, continuing our horizon scanning processes (GACS) and joining up across Government.

Essentially, the challenge of climate, change and the intimately connected issues of food energy security, water security and energy security, is to produce more food to feed the world’s growing population on less water, with less energy, while ensuring nutritional standards and food safety.

The FSA's role, and that of environmental health officers, will change and develop as the science and evidence takes us forward.

With that background, let me set out what I see as the top five priorities for action for the FSA.

Five priorities for action

1. Improve the evidence base

First there is the need to deepen our understanding of the evidence on climate change and food.

We know that real changes are needed, but there is a gap in our knowledge about what a future sustainable food system will look like.

We are planning a systematic review in the immediate future to identify the gaps. The challenge will then be how we plug the gaps. It is essential that we do that in collaboration with others.

The Cabinet Office Food Matters report committed Government to working together to ensure co-ordination of departmental research. The effects of climate change must be an area where we co-ordinate.

Unless we build a robust evidence base, we will not be able to take the right decisions for the future.

2. Food safety

We will be vigilant about the effects of climate change on food safety.

Climate change might have an impact on hazards at various stages of the food chain. The Department of Health study of the effects of climate change suggested that each 1°C rise in temperature leads to a 5% increase in cases of foodborne disease.

Let me give you some examples of where we have already potentially seen the effects.

First, there would seem to have been an increase in incidents due to mycotoxins. (But maybe a few wetter summers?)This dangerous contaminant thrives in warmer, wetter weather, leading to issues around contaminated grain, dried fruit and nuts.

During 2007 mycotoxins were the single largest source of natural chemical contamination incidents – 177 identified in 2007 alone, up from less than 50 three years ago. The majority of those related to imports and were identified through border inspections. Some of the increase is due to our improved recording of border inspections. But we will be vigilant to the future trend in mycotoxins.

Blue tongue – Britain’s first outbreak last year was caused by midges that can travel up to 200km (124 miles) in warmer weather. Previously this disease was only seen in warmer countries.

Flooding. We worked closely with the Health Protection Agency after the widespread flooding in June and July 2007.

Flood water may contain microbial contaminants and chemical pollutants that present a risk to human health. This is a risk both for flooding in homes and for any agricultural or industrial premises involved in food production.

Clearly it was vital that we worked closely with the HPA, as we will do in the future. We were able to draw on our expertise in chemical safety and microbiology to inform public health advice. We gave clear advice about eating produce from contaminated ground and closely monitored the situation.

So far there have been no serious public health outbreaks – but it remains a possibility.

In identifying changes in food borne disease we will need to work in close collaboration with environmental health officers. Our partnership with you is vital, particularly in sampling, monitoring and tracking incidence of disease. You are the front-line soldiers who can alert us to any developing hazards that may be linked to climate change.

3. Food waste

The third priority for action, which I would identify is contributing to action on food waste.

Food waste is a significant contributor to climate change. Harm is caused by the embedded emissions associated with the food’s production, processing, transportation and retailing. Also emissions from landfill – although some local authorities are already ahead of the game and have moved to composting.

We are aware of the trade offs around 'use by' dates and food waste. Although our main concern will always be food safety, and 'use by' dates are a crucial part of that. But there are other aspects important to public health.

For example, refrigeration plays a huge part in the food chain. Ensuring that we have safe and fresh food. But it is also a huge contributor to emissions. Any push to reduce use of refrigeration could contribute to an increased food safety risk.

Again, more work is required, but it is on our radar.

4. Healthy eating

The fourth priority is the effect of climate change on the drive for healthy eating. This is where the interaction between climate change, world food prices and food security is significant.

Improving the nation’s diet is a key policy priority for us. We have made good progress with reducing salt consumption and are now beginning to tackle saturated fat.

We do not want to lose momentum on those. But we need to understand how changes in food prices, and changes to the availability of certain foods affects the ability of families – particularly poorer ones – to eat healthily.

Healthy eating does not have to be expensive. It is not true to say that it creates a risk of increased health inequalities.

5. The need for action

Finally, priority number five is the need for action.

We need to ensure that the scale of the task does not paralyse us.

There are gaps in our knowledge and we must seek to fill those – but this is complex. We must always be informed by the best scientific evidence. But we most not expect that science will tell us what to do. We are unlikely to have complete information.

Policy decisions need to be made. Today is helping us identify what the right judgements are.

Thank you.