Agroecological public policies to mitigate climate change: public food procurement for school canteens in the municipality of Ames (Galicia, Spain)

Abstract

This work evaluates and discusses the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction potential of agroecological policies implemented in public food procurement for school canteens. Using a life cycle analysis (LCA) methodology (cradle-to-grave approach) and the information gathered from the Red Municipal de Comedores Escolares (Local Network of School Canteens) in the municipality of Ames (A Coruña, Galicia, Spain), the results show how organic production, dietary change (less animal protein), seasonal consumption, and packaging reduction, among other measures, can mitigate the climate impact of school meals. The food policies implemented in Ames have allowed mitigating the GHG emissions of local school canteens by 13.4%. Under realistic conditions, this reduction could rise to 40.6% should the agroecological transformation of the food system continue to advance.

Sustainability Recommendations and Practices in School Feeding: A Systematic Review

“…Among European countries, three studies were conducted in Spain and Italy, two in England, and one in Denmark, Finland, and Wales. The most common practices involved were buying local and organic food [ 8 , 30 , 47 , 58 , 67 ]. In Italy, socio-environmental criteria in hiring school food services were also mentioned [ 47 ].…”

“…Another frequently cited category of sustainability practices concerns schools food supply initiatives. Actions to purchase or encourage the employment of local or short-chain foods, including participation in programs such as “Farm to School” and “Fish to School” were cited by 26% ( n = 13) of the studies [ 8 , 14 , 24 , 30 , 46 , 48 , 59 , 67 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 73 , 77 ] and organic foods were observed in 18% ( n = 9) [ 8 , 24 , 30 , 45 , 47 , 58 , 59 , 67 , 68 ]. Participation in a sustainable food consumption promotion program (4%; n = 2) was also identified [ 12 , 54 ].…”

“…Participation in a sustainable food consumption promotion program (4%; n = 2) was also identified [ 12 , 54 ]. Although little mentioned, practices that integrated socio-environmental and economic dimensions in the contracts (4%; n = 2), the use of regional (2%; n = 1), seasonal (2%; n = 1), and produced foods in lands confiscated from criminal organizations, were also observed [ 8 , 30 , 47 , 62 , 72 ].…”

“…The use of local or organic foods, often set by government regulations, stems from concerns about students’ health, the living conditions of farmers, and the environment [ 34 , 47 , 48 , 70 , 100 ]. Initiatives involving the use of local and organic foods were also frequently cited among the analyzed studies [ 8 , 14 , 24 , 30 , 47 , 58 , 59 , 67 ].…”

“…Although elements before or after the meals’ preparation are responsible for most of these effects (such as field production, transport, and food waste) [ 21 , 22 , 23 ], the choices made by school food services influence this dynamic, determining the degree to which they employ actions to mitigate the environmental impacts generated in this process. Some examples are the purchase of organic and local food, encouraging the consumption of fresh vegetables at meals, controlling the supply of meat, and actions such as adjusting portions, donating food, composting, purchasing products with minimum packaging, recycling, and reducing energy and water consumption [ 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 ].…”