A new understanding and evaluation of food sustainability in six different food systems in Kenya and Bolivia.

Food systems must become more sustainable and equitable, a transformation which requires the transdisciplinary co-production of knowledge. We present a framework of food sustainability that was co-created by academic and non-academic actors and comprises five dimensions: food security, right to food, environmental performance, poverty and inequality, and social-ecological resilience. For each dimension, an interdisciplinary research team-together with actors from different food systems-defined key indicators and empirically applied them to six case studies in Kenya and Bolivia. Food sustainability scores were analysed for the food systems as a whole, for the five dimensions, and for food system activities. We then identified the indicators with the greatest influence on sustainability scores. While all food systems displayed strengths and weaknesses, local and agroecological food systems scored comparatively highly across all dimensions. Agro-industrial food systems scored lowest in environmental performance and food security, while their resilience scores were medium to high. The lowest-scoring dimensions were right to food, poverty and inequality, with particularly low scores obtained for the indicators women's access to land and credit, agrobiodiversity, local food traditions, social protection, and remedies for violations of the right to food. This qualifies them as key levers for policy interventions towards food sustainability.

Government regulation and public opposition create high additional costs for field trials with GM crops in Switzerland.

Field trials with GM crops are not only plant science experiments. They are also social experiments concerning the implications of government imposed regulatory constraints and public opposition for scientific activity. We assess these implications by estimating additional costs due to government regulation and public opposition in a recent set of field trials in Switzerland. We find that for every Euro spent on research, an additional 78 cents were spent on security, an additional 31 cents on biosafety, and an additional 17 cents on government regulatory supervision. Hence the total additional spending due to government regulation and public opposition was around 1.26 Euros for every Euro spent on the research per se. These estimates are conservative; they do not include additional costs that are hard to monetize (e.g. stakeholder information and dialogue activities, involvement of various government agencies). We conclude that further field experiments with GM crops in Switzerland are unlikely unless protected sites are set up to reduce these additional costs.