Can a health framing supercharge a narrative shift for food systems?
Over the past decade, communications around the need for food systems transformation have focused largely on emissions. The statistic that our food systems are responsible for a third of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions has become a well-worn refrain within the food systems bubble. This line of communication has had some success, with food systems receiving a first full mention in the official COP cover text during COP27 in 2022. But is the momentum showing signs of slowing? If the underwhelmed reactions of food systems policy experts to SB64 (the most recent Bonn Climate Change Conference) are anything to go by, the answer is yes.
Meanwhile the subject of climate mitigation has become a political hot potato as governments roll back commitments and naysayers capitalise on public fatigue to push the issue further down the agenda. Where climate mitigation was once a compelling argument for change, it now comes with a whole lot of extra baggage. For food systems communicators, this presents a problem: how to reframe the need for food systems transformation in the face of these attitudinal shifts?
Health as a trojan horse for climate messaging
This time last year, Greenhouse was grappling with this very question as we prepared to launch the much-anticipated EAT-Lancet Commission on Healthy, Just and Sustainable Diets. This landmark report – the the most comprehensive global scientific evaluation of food systems to date – confirmed that food systems are the largest contributor to the transgression of five planetary boundaries, and that while food systems currently account for roughly 30% of total greenhouse gas emissions globally, transforming food systems through alignment with the Planetary Health Diet could cut these emissions by more than half.
These were compelling statistics, but the political and cultural climate they were set to land in was volatile. Not only were we hearing from journalists that climate angles were becoming increasingly hard to land with editors in the context of a news cycle grappling with the aftershocks of the second inauguration of President Trump in January, the launch also faced the threat of a coordinated attack from the meat and dairy industry in a similar vein to the smear campaign that plagued the launch of the 2019 Commission. This ‘mud-slinging’ exercise had positioned the Commission as a group of global elites attempting to curtail the freedom of individuals by dictating what we should and shouldn’t eat. With the rise of the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement in the USA, public feeling around dietary freedom had only become more pronounced in the years since. It was clear we needed an angle that could unlock conversations without pouring fuel on an already smoldering culture war.
A health-focused narrative provided us with the path forward. By leading with the potential individual and public health benefits of shifting towards plant-forward diets – namely the prevention of 15 million premature deaths per year – the media could run with an angle that resonated with a broad cross-section of the public, while still discussing the added climate benefits of dietary shifts. The launch resulted in over four thousand pieces of media coverage, the overwhelming majority of which presented the Commission in a positive light.
The potential of a health framing for food systems
The link between climate and health – relating to both the health effects of the climate crisis and potential solutions – is gradually coming to the fore in the public discourse, spurred this summer by record-breaking heatwaves that have left European countries asking what implications global heating might have for public health in coming years. Twice as many media stories now link the climate crisis and health as in 2018. Meanwhile, at COP30 last year over 35 philanthropies committed $300m to climate–health solutions. It’s only natural that this trend should creep into food systems communications. Slowly we are seeing a new narrative opportunity emerge, one that is focused on the health implications of the way we produce and consume our food.
This framing has considerable potential. A recent survey of over 80,000 people across Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the UK and the US found that climate action has broad public support, but the wrong language and messaging can prevent this support from translating into action. Abstract scientific or jargon-heavy terms were found to be alienating, while material, human-focused messaging – particularly messaging focused on health and money – is more likely to result in support. That means studies like this one from Madre Brava, which posits that Germans could save hundreds of Euros by following healthy eating guidelines on meat, are likely to resonate with far wider audiences than statistics about methane emissions.
What makes a health narrative in particular so effective? We think there are a few factors.
- It makes food systems personal rather than planetary. Nothing is more personal than our health. Where the climate crisis can feel abstract, understanding its impact on health offers a more tangible ‘way in’ for people who may feel alienated or confused by talk of emissions data and planetary boundaries.
- It shifts the emphasis from sacrifice to wellbeing. Changes in behaviour, such as dietary change, are framed as investments in individual wellbeing, rather than sacrifices for a ‘greater good’ that can be hard to conceive of.
- It engages broader audiences. A health framing can reach beyond the climate bubble, engaging new audience through a health and wellbeing narrative before introducing the potential co-benefits for planetary health.
- It creates common ground between climate, agriculture and public health organisations. A narrative that unites sectors has the most potential to trigger action, by uniting organisations under a common goal.
Where is this framing already showing up?
We’re seeing health narratives emerge across food systems issues with increasing frequency. Whether it’s the recent US Supreme Court ruling in favour of Bayer reigniting debate around pesticide health risks, increased scrutiny of the links between red meat intake and non-communicable diseases compared to alternative protein sources like legumes and pulses, or recent geopolitical shocks and extreme whether events putting questions of nutrition security in the spotlight, health has become an increasingly central theme in sustainable food systems discourse.
What do we need to supercharge the impact of the health narrative?
With the health narrative gaining strength by the day, there are several ways we can ensure we can make the most of this framing in our communications work.
- Identify new messengers outside the climate bubble. Who are the messengers that can highlight the links between food, climate and health beyond farmers and academics? We need to broaden our definition of who a climate messenger can be, bringing unexpected groups like health professionals, teachers and parents into the mix.
- Find the killer case studies. Policymakers need to see clear evidence that food systems transformation can have interconnected positive impacts on public health and climate goals. We need to identify where these success stories are, and amplify them to the audiences that have the most potential to bring about change.
- Tell a compelling food and health story across this year’s three COPs. The Rio Conventions offer critical opportunities to influence where funding and policy attention is directed. We need to demonstrate synergies between goals for nutrition and health, land restoration, biodiversity protection and climate mitigation, proving that interconnected solutions can build the most resilience.
- Ensure coordination across sectors and geographies. Building this narrative will require cooperation across the health, food, climate and economic sectors, as well as across continents. With the health implications of the climate crisis and industrial food systems playing out differently across the world, we need to identify connecting themes, while also acknowledging and highlighting that different solutions are needed in different locales. Cooperation and knowledge sharing can allow space for both consensus and nuance.
Building a health-focused narrative will take time, but if done right it has the potential to supercharge the transition towards food systems that protect both people and planet.
What next?
We are always keen to hear the perspectives of organisations working at the nexus of food, climate and health. If that’s you, and you want to share your thoughts, or if you’re grappling with how to get your message out there, don’t hesitate to get in touch by emailing info@greenhouse.agency.
