Practice Paper of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics:
Promoting Ecological Sustainability within
the Food System
ABSTRACT
Registered dietitians (RDs) and dietetic technicians, registered
(DTRs) can implement environmentally responsible practices
in their workplace and personal lives. RDs and DTRs who
conserve natural resources while minimizing environmental
degradation will help maintain sustainability of the food
system, which requires knowledge of the external costs of
operational and personal decisions. These external costs
include energy to produce, transport, and process food; water
for food production, preparation, and sanitation; removal
of air pollutants; and waste management. As client and
public educators, RDs and DTRs are uniquely positioned to
meet the growing needs of those seeking guidance on food
choices as they relate to ecological sustainability. In an effort
to promote ecologically sustainable diets, it is important to
consider natural resources as they relate to food production,
transformation, distribution, access, and consumption. It is
essential that the dietetics community take a more active
leadership role in support of ecological sustainability and
social responsibility. RDs and DTRs can influence policy at the
institutional, community, local, state, and national levels by
presenting results of operational practices and science-based
natural resource information. RDs and DTRs are encouraged
to become educated and active in implementing sustainable
practices and shaping policy in an effort to promote healthier
individuals, communities, and the nation as a whole.
Registered dietitians (RDs) and dietetic technicians,
registered (DTRs) have an opportunity to shape the future
of our food system and are uniquely poised to meet the
growing needs of clients seeking guidance on food choices
as they relate to human health and ecological sustainability.
The objective of this practice paper is to describe how RDs
and DTRs can apply environmentally responsible practices
to typical work settings by identifying key environmental
practices for food and nutrition managers; describing how
practitioners can apply food system sustainability concepts
that support environmental and ecological balance; and
specifying community applications and advocacy efforts
unique to the dietetics profession. A resource list is provided
(Figure 1), which can be used by Academy members seeking
additional information.
Energy
Primary renewable energy sources include thermal, wind,
water, and solar. Natural gas, coal, and oil are primary
nonrenewable energy sources. Primary sources, renewable
and nonrenewable, are used directly or converted
to another form of energy to produce light, heat, or
refrigeration for food production.2 Fossil fuel is the main
energy source for the US food system. The majority of
electricity is generated from coal, natural gas, or oil, all
of which are forms of fossil fuel. The Energy Information
Administration estimates that energy consumption for
the commercial sector, which includes foodservice, will
remain stable through 2035, mainly due to increases in
energy efficiency for lighting, heating, refrigeration, and
cooking.3 Electricity use in the commercial sector, however,
is projected to increase 1.4% per year from 53% to 58%
of total energy consumption. Therefore, efficiency gains in
food production equipment may be offset by increasing use
of non-food–related electronic equipment.4
ISSUES RELATED TO MANAGEMENT OF FOOD
AND NUTRITION OPERATIONS
Food and nutrition managers have an important role in the
food distribution and access sector of the food system—
procuring, preparing, and serving food in large quantities.
Their actions impact allocation of energy, water, and indoor
air quality for labor and equipment inputs within the food
production system, and their resource decisions impact both
the natural environment and the US economy.1
It is important for RDs and DTRs to know how to estimate
energy consumption and how that translates into expenses
for the foodservice operation. The following sections will
cover how to measure energy consumed and how to make
comparisons between energy sources.
Type of resource and organization
Website
Solid waste data, publications, environmental management systems
Environmental Protection Agency9
www.epa.gov/epawaste/inforesources/index.htm
Sustainable best practices in foodservice10www.greenfoodservicealliance.org
Do it yourself energy audit
Commercial foodservice energy audit11www.energytrust.org/library/forms/BE_FM_commercialSelfAudit.pdf
The Oregon Energy Trust
Potential best management practices for foodservice
The California Urban Water Conservation Council
www.cuwoc.org/products/pbmp-reports.aspx
Checklists for grease, oil, food waste & solid waste North Carolina Environmental Assessment and Outreach
Energy and water efficiency information
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/deao/recycling/fog
Food Service Technology Center
Information on equipment and sustainable actions
www.fishnick.com
Consortium for Energy Efficiency
www.cee1.org
Indoor air quality large building assessment model
Environmental Protection Agency
www.epa.gov/iaq/largebldgs/i-beam/index.html
AND Hunger and Environmental Nutrition (HEN) dietetic practice group
www.hendpg.com
Healthy Land, Healthy People: Building a Better Understanding of Sustainable Food Systems for Food and Nutrition Professionals
www.hendpg.org/docs/Sustainable_Primer.pdf
Natural Resources Conservation Service
www.nrcs.usda.gov
United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
www.fao.org
Farm to School
www.farmtoschool.org
Farmers’ Markets and Local Food Marketing (Includes National Farmers’ Market Directory) www.ams.usda.gov/farmersmarkets/map.htm
Farm Bill www.eatright.org/search.aspx?search=farm+bill&type=Site
Healthcare Without Harm
www.noharm.org/
American Community Gardening Association
http://communitygarden.org/
Community Food System (USDA list of resources)
http://fnic.nal.usda.gov/nutrition-assistance-programs/community-
food-systems
National Organic Program
http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/nop
Figure 1. Resources for supporting the ecological sustainability of the food system.
Energy Units Primary sources of energy are measured
by units such as cubic feet (ft3) and kilowatt hour (kWh).
Converting energy to the British thermal unit (Btu) is one
method to compare energy sources for making efficiency and
cost decisions. One Btu is equal to the energy released from
burning one wooden kitchen match. The Table shows the
energy equivalence for common sources of energy.5
Energy Comparison When deciding about equipment
purchases, RDs and DTRs should take into account energy
utilization and cost of energy. For example, a two-shelf electric
convection oven uses 12.5 kW per hour of operation. A
similar capacity natural gas powered convection oven uses
42.8 ft3 for the same time period.
• 12.5 kWh × 3,412 Btu = 42,650 Btu
• 42.8 ft3 × 1,028 Btu = 43,998.4 Btu
Both ovens consume similar amounts of energy when
converted to Btu. The cost of energy must be considered
when making energy comparisons. For this example, the
most recent commercial rate for electricity ($0.104/kWh)
and for natural gas ($0.008/ft3) will be used.
2
Energy Source
Btu Equivalents
Gasoline
1 gallon = 124,000 Btu
Electricity
1 kilowatthour (kWh) = 3,412 Btu
Natural Gas
1 cubic foot (ft3) = 1,028 Btu
Heating Oil
1 gallon = 139,000 Btu
Propane
1 gallon = 91,333 Btu
Table. Btu equivalents of forms of energy used in food production
• Electric oven uses 12.5 kW × $0.104/kWh = $1.30/
hour at maximum capacity
• Natural gas oven uses 42.8 ft3 × $0.008/ft3 = $0.34/
hour at maximum capacity
Despite similar energy consumption when measured in
Btu, the natural gas convection oven costs less to operate.
Foodservice directors should make operational decisions
based on common energy units (Btu) and cost per unit of
energy. Regional differences in energy cost and availability
will influence the type of energy used by equipment.
Purchase of Energy Star-certified equipment will be the most
cost efficient choice for the available energy sources.
The Energy Star program was implemented by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1992 as a
result of instability of oil supplies and prices during the
1970s and 1980s. It is a government-backed symbol for
energy efficiency and reduced operating cost of food
preparation, cooling, and heating equipment. In order
to earn the Energy Star label, equipment must offer
substantial energy savings, use non-proprietary technology,
and generate measurable performance.6
Energy Efficient Equipment Energy Star has published
specifications for food production equipment. The key
criteria for each type of equipment are developed from
testing procedures of independent organizations such
as the National Sanitation Foundation and American
Society for Testing and Materials. For example, Energy
Star criteria state that a stationary single tank door
dishwasher should consume less than 1 kWh when idle
(heater only) and use less than 0.95 gal water/rack. A
single tank conveyor dishwasher has idle criteria of less
than 2 kWh energy (heater only) and use less than 0.7
gal water/rack. Single tank dishwashers meeting these
key criteria will earn an Energy Star label. An Energy
Star certified dishwasher may save 90 million Btu of
energy per year and cost $900 to operate. The Energy Star
dishwasher may save $200 annually for water cost and
save 52,000 gallons of water per year.7 The Energy Star
website has equipment cost savings calculators for each
segment of the foodservice industry.
Energy Audits Foodservice operations consume 2.5 times
more energy per square foot than the rest of the commercial
sector.8 A record of the time and length of equipment
operation, including lighting, can reduce production costs
and decrease greenhouse gas emissions. Figure 2 illustrates
typical energy consumption for food production. An energy
audit is an evaluation of energy flow throughout a foodservice
operation to decrease energy consumption while maintaining
food quality and safety standards. An audit is a component of
an energy management plan.9
Knowledge of a facility’s energy consumption patterns
provides food and nutrition managers opportunities to
conserve energy and control costs. Measuring energy
generates baseline data, which can be used to measure
performance of conservation measures. An energy audit
can use several approaches; however, all audits will identify
energy consuming equipment or practices by type of
energy. Energy consumption for each piece of equipment
is monitored for a specified time period, typically 1 week.
Patterns of consumption such as time of day or type of
activity are recorded. Energy consumed should be converted
to Btu (refer to energy comparison example) so that all
energy is compared by the same criteria.
Cost comparisons for each type of energy and the amount
consumed will identify opportunities for conservation.
Demand charge and shared utilities are two factors that can
influence efficiency and cost. Electric capacity cannot be
stored; therefore, supply of energy must be constant to meet
periodic demand. A demand charge is a surcharge added
by electric utilities to compensate for daily fluctuations in
electricity consumption. The surcharge is added during high
use periods such as 12 PM to 1 PM and 5 PM to 6 PM. In
terms of shared utilities, unless a food production operation
is the sole building occupant, climate control functions
are often shared among departments. Collaborating with
building engineers will help quantify heating, cooling, and
air quality costs incurred by the foodservice operation itself
aside from the rest of the building. The EPA and other
organizations have developed energy audit forms for every
foodservice segment. The link can be found in Figure 1.9–11
Water
Water is an essential natural resource that must be
protected from contamination and conserved. The
commercial sector, which includes health care, public
institutions, and restaurants, consumes 46 million gallons
of water per day—11% of total freshwater use.12 This is
23% of the total potable water supply. Food production
water use ranges from 5 gal per child’s meal for school
3
Figure 2. Energy consumption by food production activity, percent of total energy consumed.
lunch to 10 gal per meal for full-service restaurants and
cafeterias.13 Commercial and institutional kitchen water
consumption accounts for about 10% of total water use
for each foodservice category. Regional population shifts as
well as the development of agricultural land to commercial/
residential properties has strained existing water systems.
The outcomes of building new water systems to serve
growing populations are increased water treatment and
delivery costs.14 The national average cost for tap water
was $1.87 per 1,000 gallons in 2008, a 36% increase from
1995 water prices,12 thus the need for RDs and DTRs
to carefully evaluate water consumption and costs when
making decisions. The next section will highlight the steps
needed to perform a water audit, a necessary duty to assure
water conservation and cost savings.
Water Audit Water consumption directly affects energy
use in the kitchen. Energy is needed for heating water
and for operating equipment such as steamers. Utilities
charge for water by the unit: one unit = 100 cubic feet or
748 gallons. The cost of water includes the water meter
charge (water in) and the sewer use charge (water out).
Disposing of food scraps and other organic material
through the sewer can result in biological oxygen demand
(BOD) charges. BOD refers to the quantity of oxygen
needed to break down the organic material when it enters
a body of water. If BOD exceeds available oxygen supply,
algae blooms and higher treatment costs will result. This
is why sewer use charge is usually higher than the water
meter charge. A water audit is a method directors can use
to control operational costs and minimize pollution. All
water consuming equipment and water outlets need to be
inventoried for flow rate and potential leakage.15 The flow
rate, or volume of water flowing through a device, can
be measured by placing a gallon pitcher below the device
and observing the time required to fill the pitcher with
the device completely open or at full force. The number
of seconds to fill a 1 gallon container multiplied by 60
seconds is the flow rate, or gallons per minute (gpm).
Equipment manuals may provide gpm or the gpm may be
etched on the equipment; however, the flow rate can be
determined by the method described if the information
is unavailable. The higher the flow rate, the more water is
consumed per time period. Knowledge of flow rates for all
equipment is important for water conservation planning
and for writing specifications for equipment purchases.16
WaterSense is a voluntary EPA–private collaboration
promoting water efficient practices and water conserving
equipment. A product must be at least 20% more water
efficient and perform as well as conventional equipment
to earn the WaterSense label. All efficiency claims must
be verified by a third party.14 Looking for the WaterSense
label is another tool that RDs and DTRs can use when
evaluating equipment purchases.
4
Capital budget planning for energy and water efficient
equipment should include payback period as part of
purchase criteria. Food and nutrition directors can identify
the most cost-effective equipment based on results of their
energy and water audits and payback calculations. The
payback formula: Equipment cost/savings per unit of time
= time to recoup investment. Example: A steamer costs
$15,000 and is estimated to save $3,600/year for water and
energy costs. $15,000 ÷ $3,600/year = 4.17 years or 4 years,
2 months is the payback period.
• Download waste-tracking work forms and instructions
from http:// www.epa.gov/wastes/conserve/smm/
wastewise/pubs/br-excel-instructions.pdf or develop
a waste tracking sheet specific to the facility: http://
www.epa.gov/wastes/conserve/foodwaste/pubs/wastetracking-form.xls (Wastewise is a voluntary partnership
with the EPA to reduce and recycle solid waste. The
program has initiatives to reduce targeted categories
of waste and provides resources to help commercial
and institutional organizations implement solid waste
management programs20).
Waste Management
Municipal solid waste (MSW) is defined as any solid,
semisolid, or liquid substance that is a byproduct of
residential, institutional, commercial, or industrial
sources. In 2010, more than 249 million tons of MSW
was produced from residential, business, and institutional
sources, which approximates 4.43 lb per person.17
Approximately 35% to 45% of the total MSW stream
was generated by institutions such as hospitals and
schools in 2010. The two major solid waste categories
for foodservice were packaging (30.3%) and food scraps
(13.9%). The EPA has established a hierarchy of solid
waste management that promotes environmentally sound
strategies for MSW. Source reduction (including reuse)
is the most preferred method, followed by recycling and
composting, and lastly, disposal in combustion facilities
and landfills. Figure 3 depicts the EPA food waste
hierarchy for foodservice operations.18
• Place waste receptacles for both packaging and food
waste in appropriate areas in the kitchen.
Solid Waste Audit Food and nutrition directors should
understand the types of waste generated in their facility
so they can manage resources more effectively. Food
wastes generated from quantity food production represent
4%–10% of total food purchases. This waste category
incorporates embedded energy, transport, disposal, and
labor costs, in addition to the actual cost of food discarded.
Approaches to measure solid waste include records
examination, walkthroughs, and waste audits or sorts.
• Total the weight and volume of each waste category.
The data will highlight the largest waste categories. This
knowledge presents options for recycling and waste
reduction plans.
Examining records of activity such as purchases, waste
removal costs, and maintenance logs can identify major
sources of waste as well as opportunities for source reduction
and recycling. Conducting a walkthrough assessment is an
opportunity to observe processes that could be modified
to reduce waste. A solid waste audit characterizes the waste
stream by sorting and measuring wastes for a specified time
period.19 The process of a solid waste audit involves the
following steps:
• Select a time period to measure waste. The audit should
be conducted over several days to accurately represent
waste. Inform staff of the audit and describe the benefits
of measuring waste.
• Facilitate sorting by using tarps spread outside or on a
table out of the food production vicinity. Place scales
near the sorting area.
• Measure waste volume by using containers of known
volume, such as 5 gal buckets and 30 gal trash cans.
• Record time of waste sorting for each category of
waste. This is important for identifying periods of high
waste generation. Volume of solid waste generated will
vary by time of day and day of the week. Weigh and
measure the volume of waste. Volume measurements
are important for waste removal cost control. MSW
removal is charged by the cubic yard. Dumpsters range
from 6–9 cubic yard capacity.
Recycling The recycling rate has increased from less than
10% in 1980 to 34% in 2010.21 However, the overall
recycling rate has not met the EPA’s goal of 50% of all
wastes diverted from landfills. In addition to environmental
benefits, foodservice operations receive several operational
benefits from recycling. Waste removal and sewer use
costs would decrease, moving disposal from a fixed to a
controllable expense. In addition, the smaller amount of
energy and water used would reduce utility costs. Food
and nutrition directors have several recycling options
available. The type of recycling program implemented will
be influenced by factors such as storage availability, labor to
clean and collect waste, and markets for recyclable materials.
Food and Packaging Waste Food and packaging are
generally the two largest waste categories. Production food
waste can be used as animal feed or compost. Vegetable
oils or rendered fat can be stored in designated containers
for pickup by a grease recycler. Service food waste may
5
Figure 3. Hierarchy of waste management practices in food production. Reprinted from reference 18.
be recovered from pulpers or as plate waste, which can be
composted. Overproduction can be donated to charities. The
Good Samaritan Act protects organizations from liability
for donating food if appropriate food safety guidelines are
followed. Moreover, nearly all forms of packaging can be
recycled. Some types of packaging waste such as cardboard
can be sold to vendors, thus generating revenue.
Source Reduction Solid waste can be decreased by
purchasing products with minimal packaging. Purchasing
items with recycled content such as paper napkins diverts
waste from landfills. Providing condiments on request or
using bulk dispensers discourages creating unused food
that must be discarded. The choice of serviceware affects
volume of waste generated. Using permanentware and
going trayless will reduce waste, in addition to eliminating
the storage space needed for disposableware. However, the
potential savings must be compared to the cost for sanitizing
and replacement cost of permanentware. Going trayless
may decrease plate waste, but may not reduce dishwashing
costs.22,23 Service style and customer needs are factors to
consider when choosing appropriate serviceware.
Green Purchasing Implementing a policy that specifies
using products made from recycled materials, are nontoxic, can be recycled, or minimize waste plays an
important role in an organization’s conservation of natural
resources. A product’s environmental claims should be
evaluated in the context of guidelines from the Federal
Trade Commission and the EPA:24
• Environmental claims should be specific. If a product
or package states it is composed of recycled content,
the percentage must be stated if it is less than 100%. If
“recycled” means a product is made from reconditioned
or rebuilt parts, it must be stated in its description.
• Vague environmental terms are red flags. Phrases such
as “eco-friendly” and “environmentally safe” have
insufficient information to make purchase decisions on
a product’s performance or compare it to other brands.
Labels such as Energy Star indicate a product has met
criteria to be labeled as energy saving.
• Recyclable is not the same as recycled. A product labeled
as recyclable means the manufacturer has proof the
item can be used again or transformed into another
item. Some processors will pick up used items. A label
requesting “please recycle” means the product may be
recyclable if there is a recycling program in the area.
• All things biodegrade eventually, although this process
may occur over thousands of years. The time to
decompose depends on a material’s exposure to air,
water, or sunlight. Even toxic materials can biodegrade;
however, it does not render them harmless. A product
6
labeled as “compostable” indicates it can biodegrade into
material safe for consumer use as a soil amendment.
• Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were used as propellants in
aerosol cans. CFCs were found to harm the upper ozone
layer and were banned in 1978; however, CFC-free
products can still harm the environment. The product
may contain volatile organic compounds that contribute
to ground level ozone or smog. Volatile organic
compounds include propane, alcohol, and butane.
Food purchased for US foodservice operations may
originate from literally any location on earth. Greenhouse
gases generated from food production contribute to global
warming. Many factors contribute to a food’s carbon
footprint; however, a controllable factor for green purchasing
is the distance, or food miles, traveled from harvest to
delivery. To calculate food miles, assume motor fuel
produces 19.5 lb of carbon dioxide per gallon. Fresh produce
from conventional suppliers travels an average 1,500 miles
from harvest to delivery; locally grown produce averages 56
miles from harvest to delivery. The following formula may be
used to calculate transportation carbon footprint:
Miles from harvest to delivery/mpg = gallons fuel
used × 19.5 lb CO2 = lb CO2 generated from
transportation of food
For example, a truck averaging 20 mpg to carry the same
load would generate 1,462.5 lb and 54.6 lb of carbon
dioxide to deliver conventional (1,500 miles) and local
produce (56 miles), respectively.25
The total cost of a product should be considered, not just
the purchase price. Packaging, food waste, water, and energy
consumption should be compared when evaluating the cost
of convenience or made from scratch foods. In addition,
considering the carbon footprint of purchases is important
and should be taken into account whenever possible.
Hazardous waste Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act defines a solid waste as hazardous if it
“shows ignitability, corrosiveness, reactivity, or toxicity.”
State or local governments also may designate waste as
hazardous. Staff often encounter solvents, compounds,
and solutions that could cause physical or environmental
harm if used improperly or accidentally. Both the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration and
the Joint Commission require health care facilities to
develop an emergency management plan that includes
chemical isolation and decontamination.26,27 The Hazard
Communication Standard (“Hazcom” or “employee right
to know”) requires copies of all Material Safety Data Sheets
for potentially harmful substances to be on file in a facility.
RDs and DTRs often are responsible for maintaining
these files and for educating employees about hazardous
substances. The Medical Waste Tracking Act of 1988
provides information about chemicals and other hazardous
materials in the workplace28 and establishes criteria for
packaging and storage of medical waste and requires
tracking of medical waste from cradle to grave.
Indoor Air Quality
Human impact on air quality has been the subject of much
debate in recent years. Issues such as air pollution, depletion
of the ozone layer, and global warming all have implications
for the food system. Air pollution is defined as the presence
of substances in the air that are in concentrations interfering
with human health, comfort, and safety. The Clean Air
Act, promulgated by the EPA, resulted in the introduction
of policies and regulations designed to improve air quality.
The EPA’s Office of Quality Planning develops strategies
to control pollutant emissions from a variety of sources,
including foodservice operations. Particulates from foodservice
equipment such as broilers, fryers, smokers, and grills can
generate air pollution. The vents and hoods that direct these
particulates to outdoor air are regulated by the EPA. Service
vehicles used by foodservice operations also may generate air
pollution. The cost to purchase and maintain service vehicles
must be included in the cost to transport goods.
Food and nutrition directors can evaluate indoor air quality
(IAQ) of their food production operation using checklists
developed by the EPA, which include the following steps:29
• Review existing records for heating, ventilation, and air
conditioner maintenance, system performance, and IAQ
complaints. Material Safety Data Sheets should be on
file in both the kitchen and maintenance department.
• Conduct a walkthrough of the kitchen to identify
potential source and ventilation pollution such as odors,
visible mold, uneven temperature, and blocked vents.
• Evaluate adequacy of preventative measures such as
cleaning schedules, pest management, and storage of
hazardous materials.
• Have procedures in place for responding to IAQ
complaints.
Figure 1 has resources to evaluate IAQ for hospitals and
schools. Maintaining air quality conserves energy and
minimizes pollution. It is important for employees’ health
because people spend the majority of their day in buildings
with mechanical heating, cooling, and ventilation systems.30
RDs and DTRs need to collaborate with other departments
within their organization to receive support for ecologically
sustainable operational practices.
7
DIETARY GUIDANCE IN SUPPORT OF ECOLOGICAL
SUSTAINABILITY
Scientific research provides compelling evidence to suggest
that consuming a diet rich in fruits, vegetables, and dietary
fiber promotes health and prevents chronic disease.31
Continued promotion of a diet rich in fruits, vegetables, and
whole grains should remain a priority for RDs and DTRs.
In addition, RDs and DTRs are uniquely positioned to
meet the growing needs of clients seeking guidance on food
choices as they relate to ecological sustainability.
In an effort to promote ecologically sustainable diets, it
is important to consider natural resources as they relate
to food production, transformation, distribution, access,
and consumption. A sustainable diet is composed of foods
that contribute to human health and also encourage food
system sustainability (Figure 4).32 RDs and DTRs have
opportunities to influence natural resource conservation
through the variety of roles they serve. RDs and DTRs who
provide dietary guidance have the potential to influence
consumer food choices and are, therefore, key players in
the consumption sector of the food system. The aim of the
dietary guidance portion of the current paper is to provide
information and resources to RDs and DTRs so that they
may advise clients who are seeking guidance relating to food
choice options in support of ecological sustainability.
The Food System and Conservation of Natural Resources
The modern industrialized food system provides for the
production of an abundance of relatively inexpensive food.
The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has described
some common characteristics shared by “industrialized” or
“conventional” farming operations:
“Rapid technological innovation; large capital
investments in order to apply production and
management technology; large-scale farms; single
crops/row crops grown continuously over many
seasons; uniform high-yield hybrid crops; extensive
use of pesticides, fertilizers, and external energy
inputs; high labor efficiency; dependency on
agribusiness; and most livestock production from
confined, concentrated systems.”33
It is important to continually evaluate current food system
practices and promote practices that support and sustain natural
resources and the environment. Food system sustainability
is dependent, in part, upon the protection and conservation
of soil, water, energy, and the preservation of biodiversity.
Promoting food system sustainability can be an admirable goal
among RDs and DTRs. The Sustainable Agriculture Research
and Education division of the USDA identifies three pillars
of sustainability: 1) profit over the long term; 2) stewardship
of our nation’s land, air, and water; and 3) quality of life for
farmers, ranchers, and their communities.34 According to
the USDA, some current ecological concerns associated with
agriculture include the decline in soil productivity; water
scarcity and pollution stemming from sediments, salt, fertilizers,
pesticides, and manures; elevated levels of carbon dioxide and
greenhouse gasses; pesticide resistant pathogens; and loss of
genetic diversity.33
Natural Resources: Soil A sustainable food system is
dependent upon fertile soil and the mitigation of soil
erosion. The Natural Resources Conservation Service
reported that, in 2007, 99 million acres (28% of all
cropland) were eroding above soil loss tolerance rates (“the
maximum rate of annual soil loss that will permit crop
productivity to be sustained economically and indefinitely
on a given soil”).35 However, this is down from 169 million
acres in 1982.35 Erosion can deplete the soil of organic
matter and nitrogen. To enhance soil nitrogen content,
synthetic nitrogen fertilizers are often used. In addition,
loss of soil carbon through erosion, management, and
decomposition can contribute to atmospheric carbon
dioxide, a greenhouse gas associated with climate change.
Agricultural management practices which conserve or
sequester soil carbon can help mitigate the rate of increase of
atmospheric carbon dioxide.36
Soil conservation methods developed to reduce the rate
of soil erosion include the use of biomass mulching, crop
rotations, no-till, ridge-till, added grass strips, shelterbelts,
contour row crop planting, and various combinations of
these.37 When possible, consumers with concerns about
soil conservation in agriculture can support growers who
integrate conservation techniques into their farming systems.
Production techniques could be identified via certification
labeling or may be provided by the producer.
Natural Resources: Water Agriculture is heavily dependent
upon water, with the largest use of freshwater in the US
dedicated to irrigation.38 In addition to water intensive
use, agricultural activities can be potential water polluters.
Agricultural activities (such as crop production, grazing,
and animal feeding operations) are among the top sources
of impairment in US rivers, streams, lakes, ponds, and
reservoirs.39 According to the EPA, common sources of water
pollution can be naturally occurring and others may result
from human activities such as: bacteria and nitrates from
human and animal wastes—septic tanks and large farms,
fertilizers and pesticides, heavy metals, industrial products
and wastes, household wastes, lead and copper (from
household plumbing), and water treatment chemicals40.
If water is contaminated with microorganisms from fecal
contamination, water suppliers issue notices to boil water to
the public. If water is contaminated with excessive nitrates
(commonly found in fertilizer and manure), this water should
8
Figure 4. Sustainable food system model. Reprinted from reference 32.
be avoided, as it can be fatal especially to infants, as nitrates
are converted to nitrites in the intestines and once absorbed,
can prevent hemoglobin from transporting oxygen, leading to
“blue baby syndrome” without immediate attention.40
Consumers may be interested in ways that they might ensure
consumption of safe drinking water and support water
conservation. To obtain more information about the safety
of their drinking water, consumers can obtain a copy of their
Consumer Confidence Report (available annually to people
with a community water system) online at www.epa.gov/
safewater/dwinfo.htm. If consumers obtain water from a
household well, they should work with their county health
department to test their water annually for coliform bacteria,
nitrates, total dissolved solids, and pH levels.40
Natural Resources: Energy The industrialized food system
(agricultural production, processing, packaging, and food
preparation) is energy intensive and utilizes a considerable
proportion of the nation’s fossil fuels.41 Greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions should be taken into account when
thinking about ecological sustainability. Food system sectors
contributing to GHG emissions include the following: carbon
dioxide derived from manufacturing, transportation, and
energy supply; methane from ruminant enteric fermentation;
and nitrous oxide (N2O) from fertilizers.41–43 In a report
prepared by the Food and Agriculture Organization,
global livestock was estimated to contribute 18% of world
anthropogenic GHG emissions;42 however, reported estimates
have ranged from 10% to 51%.43 This is one reason why
many feel that the practice of consuming a plant-based diet
benefits the environment. Consumers who wish to decrease
their impact on GHG emissions may consider choosing to
consume a diet richer in plants and plant-based proteins,
going meatless one day a week, eating less meat per meal,
choosing organic or grass fed meats, eating seasonally and
locally, reducing food waste, and reducing packaging.
Ecology, Pesticides, and Genetically Engineered Crops
Pesticides are commonly used in an effort to provide for an
efficient, consistent, and affordable food supply. To promote
crop quality and yield, farmers commonly use pesticides to
protect against various pests including animals, insects, weeds,
fungi, bacteria, and viruses.44 In the United States, the EPA,
USDA, and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) work to
ensure food safety as it relates to pesticides. The EPA regulates
pesticides for specific uses and can cancel registration if a
pesticide poses an unreasonable risk to human health or the
environment. Pesticide residues on foods are monitored by the
USDA Pesticide Data Program45 and FDA Pesticide Residue
Monitoring Program.46
Although pesticides are strictly regulated, some concerns
remain with regard to their impact on the environment.
9
The use of pesticides in agriculture may have a negative
impact on wildlife and the wider environment (water, soil,
air) if leaching, runoff, or spray drift occurs. In an effort to
mitigate adverse environmental exposures, consideration
should be given to alternative cropping systems less
dependent on pesticides, the development of pesticides with
improved safety profiles and formulations, and appropriate
use of spraying equipment.47
With regard to the environmental concerns about
genetically engineered crops, advocates of biotechnology
argue that genetically engineered crops can confer
environmental benefits such as decreased reliance on
toxic pesticides and reductions in soil erosion resulting
from decreased tillage. However, concerns relating to
risk of ecosystem disruption remain. Critics urge caution
highlighting research suggesting that introduced genes may
transfer to wild and non-genetically modified plants. In
addition, there is a concern that introduced genes can lead
to herbicide and pesticide resistance in non-target species
of weeds.48 Findings from a survey of American Dietetic
Association members indicated that dietetics practitioners
hold divergent viewpoints related to genetically engineered
foods and crops; however, investigators reported that
survey respondents were in agreement that dietetics
practitioners should employ critical thinking skills to
communicate implications of incorporating genetically
engineered foods and crops into the food system.49
RDs, DTRs, and consumers have the responsibility
to become educated and informed about food system
production practices and policies that promote the
conservation of soil, water, and energy and support
producers who integrate conservation techniques into their
farming systems.
FOOD PURCHASING OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO THE
CONSUMER
USDA has recently established an initiative titled “Know
Your Farmer, Know Your Food,” which promotes the
importance of understanding how and where our food
is produced50. The market for locally produced food has
expanded over the past decade.51 Consumers seek out local
foods for a variety of reasons including: freshness, taste,
quality, value, support for local economy, fair farm labor,
and knowing the source of the product52. Local foods
may be marketed direct-to-consumer (farmers’ markets,
farm stands/on-farm sales, pick-your-own operations,
and community supported agriculture operations) and to
retailers, restaurants, and institutions (eg, hospitals, schools,
government offices, prisons, colleges).52
In recent years, there have been deliberate efforts to connect
local farmers with a variety of institutions including schools
and hospitals. RDs and DTRs planning to bring local food
to area schools or hospitals can access an exceptional array
of information and resources to support this effort. As of
January 2012, the National Farm-to-School Network reported
programs in all 50 states and involvement in an estimated
2,305 school districts and 9,807 schools.53 Opportunities
associated with farm-to-school efforts can extend beyond
sourcing locally produced foods to include nutrition and
agricultural education, farm tours, and community gardens.
Information and resources are available to parents, food
service professionals, and concerned citizens interested in
promoting child health and integrating regionally produced
foods into school menus. Cost is a commonly cited barrier
to implementing farm-to-school programs; however, factors
contributing to program success include: 1) active leadership/
champions, 2) complementary partnerships with diverse
stakeholders, and 3) creative, resourceful use of assets.54 In
addition to farm-to-school efforts, farm-to-hospital efforts
are expanding. Foodservice professionals working in hospitals
and health care settings planning to source healthy, local,
sustainably produced foods can access information, resources,
and support at www.noharm.org.55
United States government agencies such as the EPA, USDA,
and the FDA continually adapt and revise policy to improve
public access to a safe, healthful food supply in support of
natural resources and the environment. RDs, DTRs, and
consumers have an opportunity to become knowledgeable
and involved with influencing government policy in
support of a healthful and sustainable food system. They
can review policies, contact legislators, and become active
in their communities by promoting efforts that encourage
conservation and ecological sustainability. While the modern
industrial food system provides the majority of food that most
people consume, community-based food system alternatives
exist if a consumer is interested in seeking these out.
Efforts to Increase Accessibility Food access for the citizens
and residents of the United States is a priority and sustained
action is needed to obtain food and nutrition security for all.56
In certain areas of the nation, both urban and rural, people
may experience limited access to healthy affordable foods;
these areas are sometimes identified as food deserts.57 While
increased consumption of fruits and vegetables from any
source remains a priority of community health promotions,
efforts dedicated to improving access to locally produced
foods may offer expanded opportunities for those with limited
incomes. Farm-to-school programs, community gardens, and
farmers’ markets may offer increased accessibility as additional
venues for healthful food purchases.
Growing numbers of consumers are seeking a closer
connection to the farmers who produce their food. The
Increased Accessibility at Schools Within schools, qualifying
children have the opportunity to access free or reduced cost
10
breakfasts and lunches. This venue may provide an opportunity
for children from limited income families to access locally
produced fruits and vegetables at a reduced cost. RDs and
DTRs can bolster support for student consumption of fruits and
vegetables within the schools through the promotion of farm-toschool programs by connecting students to local farmers, farms,
and gardens. A new public health program, “Let’s Move Salad
Bars to Schools,” may also provide an opportunity to promote
increased fruit and vegetable consumption among all students
within schools.58
Increased Accessibility at Home, School, and Community
Gardens Gardens can offer an abundance of fresh
produce, often for the cost of inputs and time. A variety
of resources are available to those interested in starting up
and maintaining home and community gardens.59 RDs
and DTRs can play an important role in supporting efforts
among individuals, schools, and communities desiring to
start up and maintain gardens.
Increased Accessibility at Farmers’ Markets Farmers’
markets are experiencing success in communities across
the country. Many of these markets are offering innovative
ways to promote purchases of healthy affordable foods
using Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
benefits, and some offer additional financial incentives to
SNAP recipients each time they shop at the farmers’ market.
RDs and DTRs have the opportunity to support initiatives
promoting the acceptance of SNAP benefits through
electronic benefits transfer cards.60 In addition to SNAP
benefits, vouchers to purchase food at farmers’ markets may
be obtained through the Supplemental Nutrition Program
for Women, Infants, and Children farmers’ market nutrition
program (available to low-income pregnant, breastfeeding
and non-breastfeeding postpartum women, and to infants
and children up to 5 years of age, who are found to be at
nutritional risk)61 and the senior farmers’ market nutrition
program (available to low-income seniors).62 At present,
these programs do not provide sufficient assistance to
recipients to continually purchase locally grown foods, and
increased support for these efforts may be warranted. It
remains a priority to educate consumers about a variety of
convenient venues available to purchase healthful foods.
Another resource available to RDs and DTRs interested
in promoting healthy affordable food is the cooperative
extension service.63 The extension service provides many
resources including information about food, nutrition,
cooking, and gardening to all community members.
Furthermore, programs exploring ways to make healthy
food choices on a limited budget are often offered free of
charge to people with limited incomes and most of the
foods suggested for those on a limited budget incorporate
ecologically friendly ingredients like beans, lentils, and
locally grown fruits and vegetables.
RD AND DTR PROFESSIONAL PRACTICES IN
SUPPORT OF ECOLGICAL SUSTAINABILITY
RDs and DTRs are encouraged to evaluate their personal
and professional practices and take action to more
effectively conserve natural resources and support the
ecological sustainability of the food system. Included in
the resource figure (Figure 1) is a link to the document
“Healthy Land, Healthy People: Building a Better
Understanding of Sustainable Food Systems for Food and
Nutrition Professionals,” which provides wide-ranging
recommendations for RDs and DTRs to incorporate
professional practices in support of ecological sustainability
in the food system. RDs and DTRs are encouraged to
utilize this valuable tool to identify practical examples
within a variety of practice areas. Wilkins and colleagues
contend that the economic, ecological, and social
sustainability of the food system matter as much as the
nutritional value of its products and encourage RDs
and DTRs to practice “civic dietetics” by integrating
food system awareness into their work.64 RDs’ and
DTRs’ knowledge of the complex issues associated with
environmental concerns should be increased through
participation in continuing education activities and
research. Knowledgeable Academy members should be
proactive in advocating for and implementing programs
in their workplaces, homes, and communities to conserve
natural resources and protect the environment. They
should also participate in the legislative process within
their states and communities.
SHAPING THE FUTURE OF OUR FOOD SYSTEM
RDs and DTRs have an opportunity to shape the future
of our food system and are uniquely poised to meet the
growing needs of clients seeking guidance on food choices
as they relate to human health and ecological sustainability.
It is essential that the dietetics community take a more
active leadership role in support of ecological sustainability
and social responsibility. Opportunities exist to join the
growing number of RDs and DTRs who are becoming
involved with supporting environmentally responsible
industry efforts and influencing public policy at the
community, local, state, and national levels. RDs and
DTRs have the opportunity to become educated and active
in shaping public policy65 in an effort to promote healthier
communities and a healthier nation.
Acknowledgements
The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics authorizes
republication of the practice paper, in its entirety, provided
full and proper credit is given. Commercial distribution is
not permitted without the permission of the Academy and
any distribution should not be used to indicate endorsement
of product or service. Requests to use portions of the paper
11
must be directed to the Academy headquarters at 800/8771600, ext. 4835, or [email protected]. This paper will be
up for review in 2017.
Authors: Ramona Robinson-O’Brien, PhD, RD
(Minneapolis Medical Research Foundation, Minneapolis,
MN); Bonnie L. Gerald, PhD, DTR (Gerald Consulting
LLC, Hattiesburg, MS).
Reviewers: Jeanne Blankenship, MS, RD (Academy Policy
Initiatives & Advocacy, Washington, DC); Food and
Culinary dietetic practice group (Sylvia H. Byrd, PhD,
RD, LD, University of Mississippi, Mississippi State,
MI); Hunger and Environmental Nutrition dietetics
practice group (Ashley Colpaart, MS, RD, Colorado State
University, Fort Collins, CO); Sharon Denny, MS, RD
(Academy Knowledge Center, Chicago, IL); Kelly D.
Horton, MS, RD (National council on Aging, Washington,
DC); Kathy Keenan Isoldi, PhD, RD (Long Island
University/Post Campus, Brookville, NY); Public Health/
Community Nutrition dietetic practice group (Marjorie
A. Sawicki, MS, RD, LDN, Saint Louis University, St.
Louis, MO); Alison Steiber, PhD, RD (Academy Research
& Strategic Business Development, Chicago, IL); Julienne
T. Stewart, MS, RD, LDN (SAS Institute, Cary, NC);
Academy Quality Management Committee (Valaree
Williams, MS, RD, LDN, University of Pennsylvania
Health System, Philadelphia, PA).
Academy Positions Committee Workgroup: Linda B. Godfrey,
MS, RD, SNS, LD (chair); Aida Miles, MMSc, RD, LD;
Marian Levy, DrPH, RD (content advisor).
We thank the reviewers for their many constructive comments
and suggestions. The reviewers were not asked to endorse this
practice paper.
References
1. Peregrin T. Sustainability in foodservice operations: an update.
J Am Diet Assoc. 2011;111(9):1286-1294.
2. Hulscher WS. Basic energy concepts. In: Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Energy for
Sustainable Rural Development Projects: Vol. 1: A reader. Rome,
Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations; 1991:23. http://www.fao.org/docrep/u2246e/
u2246e00.htm#contents. Accessed December 13, 2011.
3. Energy Information Administration . Natural gas prices.
http://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=natural_
gas_prices. December 17, 2010. Accessed December 11,
2012.
4. Annual Energy Outlook. US Energy Information
Administration. http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/MT_
commercialdeman.cfm. April 26, 2011. Accessed December
12, 2011.
5. US Energy Information Administration. How can we
compare or add up our energy consumption? http://www.eia.
gov/energy_in_brief/comparing_energy_consumption.cfm.
March 19, 2012. Accessed December 12, 2011.
6. Energy Star. EnergyStar Guide for Restaurants. EPA 430R-09-030 . November, 2010. http://www.energystar.gov/
ia/partners/publications/pubdocs/restaurant%20guide%20
508%20-%20Dec%202009.pdf?1422-2676. Accessed
December 11, 2012.
7. Energy Star. Commercial dishwashers key product criteria.
http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=comm_dishwashers.
pr_crit_comm_dishwashers. 2007. Accessed December 11,
2012.
8. Energy Star. How a product earns an Energy Star label. http://
www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=products.pr_how_earn.
2010. Accessed December 11, 2012.
9. Energy Star. Guidelines for energy management. http://www.
energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=guidelines.guidelines_index.
2011. Accessed December 28, 2011.
10. Washington State Univesity Energy Program. Energy audit
workbook. http://www.energy.wsu.edu/Documents/audit2.
pdf. Published May, 2003. Accessed December 27, 2011.
11. Energy Trust of Oregon. Do it yourself energy audit.
http://www.energytrust.org/library/forms/BE_FM_
commercialSelfAudit.pdf . Accessed December 14, 2011.
12. IFC International. Water and energy: leveraging voluntary
programs to save both water and energy. Environmental
Protection Agency website. http://water.epa.gov/scitech/
wastetech/upload/Final-Report-Mar-2008.pdf. Published
March 2008. Accessed December 29, 2011.
13. Mancl K. Water use planning guide. Ohio State University
Extension Fact Sheet AEX-420-94. http://ohioline.osu.edu/
aex-fact/0420.html . 2011. Accessed December 29, 2011.
14. Environmental Protection Agency. Planning for Sustainability:
A Handbook for Water and Wastewater Facilities. EPA832-R-12-001. February 2012. Accessed January 17, 2013.
15. New Mexico Office of the State Engineer. A water
conservation guide for commercial, institutional, and
industrial users. http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/DEPUTATE/
POLLPREV/Iso14001/tools/Facility%20Environmental%20
Issues%20Toolbox/Wu%20Water%20Use/WU2,%20
WU5%20WU9%20Water%20Conservation%20Guide.pdf
July 1999. Accessed January 21, 2013.
16. Energy Star. Best practices— how to achieve the most efficient
use of water in commercial food service facilities. http://
www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=healthcare.fisher_nickel_
feb_2005. February 2005. Accessed December 29, 2011.
17. Environmental Protection Agency. What is WaterSense?
http://www.epa.gov/watersense/about_us/what_is_ws.html.
December 9, 2011. Accessed January 2, 2012.
18. Environmental Protection Agency. Source reduction strategies
in foodservice. http://www.epa.gov/wastes/conserve/pubs/
food-guide.pdf. November 2010. Accessed January 21, 2013.
19. Environmental Protection Agency. Municipal solid waste gen
eration, recycling, and disposal in the United States: Facts and
12
Figures for 2010. EPA-530-F-11-005. http://www.epa.gov/
wastes. Accessed December 13, 2011.
20. Environmental Protection Agency. Conducting a waste
assessment. In ch. 2 Business guide for reducing solid waste.
http://www.epa.gov/wastes/nonhaz/municipal/pubs/busguide/chap2.pdf March 20, 2012. Accessed January 21, 2013.
21. Environmental Protection Agency. Conserving resources,
preventing waste. http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/nonhaz/
municipal/index.htm. December 20, 2012. Accessed January
21, 2013.
22. Hackes BL, Shanklin CW, Boyer J. A decision model to
select serviceware for school foodservice. J Child Nutrit Mgt.
1999;23(1):22–27.
23. Thomes B, Gerald BL. Managing change in campus food
waste after using an education tool [thesis]. Hattiesburg, MS:
The University of Southern Mississippi; 2011.
24. Federal Trade Commission. Green purchasing guide. http://
www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0226-shopping-green. October
2012. Accessed January 19, 2013.
25. Buchenau M. The carbon footprint of community gardens.
http://www.dug.org. 2009. Accessed November 10, 2011.
26. Environmental Protection Agency. Definition of hazardous
waste. http://www.epa.gov/osw/inforesources/pubs/training/
defsw.pdf. 2011. Accessed January 8, 2012.
27. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare
Organizations. Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS)
requirements. http://www.jointcommission.org/standards_
information/jcfaqdetails.aspx?StandardsFaqId=127&Prograq
mId=1. September 4, 2009. Accessed January 9, 2012.
28. Environmental Protection Agency. Medical Waste Tracking
Act of 1988. http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/
medical/tracking.htm. July 27, 2012. Accessed January 8,
2012.
29. Environmental Protection Agency. Building Air Quality
Action Plan. EPA 402-K-98-001; DHHS (NIOSH)
Publication No. 98-123. http://www.epa.gov/iaq/largebldgs/
pdf_fles/baqactionplan.pdf. June, 1998. Accessed January 9,
2012.
30. Environmental Protection Agency. The inside story: a guide to
indoor air quality. http://www.epa.gov/iaq/pubs/insidestory.
html. April 18, 2011. Accessed January 9, 2012.
31. American Dietetics Association. Position of the American
Dietetic Association: The roles of registered dietitians and
dietetic technicians, registered in health promotion and
disease prevention. J Am Diet Assoc. 2006;106(11):1875–
1884.
32. American Dietetic Association Sustainable Food Systems
Task Force. Healthy land, healthy people: building a better
understanding of sustainable food systems for food and nutrition
professionals. Chicago, IL: American Dietetic Association;
March 2007. www.hendpg.org/docs/Sustainable_Primer.pdf .
Accessed November 16, 2012.
33. Gold MV. Sustainable agriculture: definitions and terms.
(Special reference briefs; 99-02). http://www.nal.usda.gov/
afsic/pubs/terms/srb9902.shtml#toc2. 2007, 2012. Accessed
May 6, 2012.
34. Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education. What is
Sustainable Agriculture? http://www.sare.org/LearningCenter/SARE-Program-Materials/National-ProgramMaterials/What-is-Sustainable-Agriculture. Accessed May 6,
2012.
35. Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2007 National
Resources Inventory, Soil Erosion on Cropland. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/
nrcs143_012269.pdf. 2010. Accessed January 10, 2012.
36. Environmental Protection Agency. Carbon dioxide capture
and sequestration. http://www.epa.gov/sequestration/. Update
June 14, 2012. Accessed January 10, 2012.
37. Pimentel D. Soil erosion: a food and environmental threat.
Environment, Development and Sustainability. 2006;8(1):119–
137.
38. United States Department of the Interior. Water use in the
United States. http://nationalatlas.gov/articles/water/a_
wateruse.html. Modified January 26, 2011. Accessed January
10, 2012.
39. United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of
Water. National Water Quality Inventory: Report to Congress
2004 Reporting Cycle. Washington, DC: 2009.
40. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Water on
tap, what you need to know. http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/wot/
pdfs/book_waterontap_full.pdf. Published December 2009.
Accessed January 10, 2012.
41. Weber CL, Mathews HS. Food-miles and the relative climate
impacts of food choices in the United States. Environ Sci
Technol. 2008;42(10):3508–3513.
42. Steinfeld H, Gerber P, Wassenaar T, et al. Livestock’s Long
Shadow, Environmental Issues and Options. Rome, Italy: Food
and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2006.
43. Herrero M, Gerber P, Vellinga T, et al. Livestock and
greenhouse gas emissions: the importance of getting the
numbers right. Animal Feed Sci Tech. 2011;166–167:779–
782.
44. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Pesticides.
http://epa.gov/agriculture/tpes.html. Updated June 27, 2012.
Accessed January 10, 2012.
45. United States Department of Agriculture Agricultural
Marketing Service. Pesticide Data Program. http://www.ams.
usda.gov/AMSv1.0/ams.fetchTemplateData.do?template=Te
mplateC&navID=PesticideDataProgram&rightNav1=Pestici
deDataProgram&topNav=&leftNav=ScienceandLaboratorie
s&page=PesticideDataProgram&resultType. 2011. Accessed
January 10, 2012.
46. United States Food and Drug Administration. Residue
Monitoring Reports. http://www.fda.gov/Food/
FoodSafety/FoodContaminantsAdulteration/Pesticides/
ResidueMonitoringReports/default.htm . Accessed January
10, 2012.
47. Damalas CA, Eleftherohorinos IG. Pesticide exposure, safety
13
issues, and risk assessment indicators. Int J Environ Res Public
Health. 2011;8(5):1402–1419.
48. Cowan T. Agricultural biotechnology: background and
recent issues. Congressional Research Service. http://www.
nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/RL32809.pdf. 2011.
Accessed January 10, 2012.
49. Roberts KS, Struble MB, McCullum-Gomez C, Wilkins
JL. Use of a risk communication model to evaluate dietetics
professionals’ viewpoints on genetically engineered foods and
crops. J Am Diet Assoc. 2006;106(5):719–727.
50. United States Department of Agriculture. Know Your Farmer
Know Your Food. http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/kn
owyourfarmer?navid=KNOWYOURFARMER. Accessed
November 10, 2012.
51. Martinez S, Hand M, DaPra M et al. USDA-ERS Local
Food Systems: Concepts, Impacts, and Issues. http://www.ers.
usda.gov/Publications/ERR97/ERR97.pdf. Accessed January
13, 2012.
52. Martinez SW. Varied interests drive growing popularity
of local foods. Amber Waves. December 2010;8(4):10–17.
http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/december10/Features/
LocalFoods.htm. Accessed January 10, 2012.
53. National Farm to School Network. http://www.farmtoschool.
org. Accessed January 10, 2012.
54. Joshi A, Azuma AM, Feenstra G. Do farm-to-school programs
make a difference? Findings and future research needs. Journal
of Hunger and Environmental Nutrition. 2008;3(2–3):229–
246.
55. Health Care Without Harm. Healthy Food: Global View.
http://www.noharm.org/all_regions/issues/food/. Accessed
January 10, 2012.
56. American Dietetic Association. Position of the American
Dietetic Association: Food insecurity in the United States. J
Am Diet Assoc. 2010;110(9):1368–1377.
57. Walker RE, Keane CR, Burke JG. Disparities and access to
healthy food in the United States: a review of food deserts
literature. Health and Place. September 2010;16(5):876–884.
58. Let’s Move Salad Bar’s to Schools. http://saladbars2schools.
org/. Accessed May 6, 2012.
59. American Community Gardening Association. http://
communitygarden.org/learn/starting-a-community-garden.
php. Accessed May 6, 2012.
60. USDA Food and Nutrition Service. Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program Learn How You Can Accept SNAP
Benefits at Farmers’ Markets. http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/
ebt/fm.htm. 2011. Accessed January 10, 2012.
61. USDA Food and Nutrition Service. WIC Farmers’ Market
Nutrition Program. 2012; http://www.fns.usda.gov/wic/WICFMNP-Fact-Sheet.pdf. Accessed November 9, 2012.
62. USDA Food and Nutrition Service. Senior Farmers’ Market
Nutrition Program. http://www.fns.usda.gov/wic/seniorfmnp/
seniorfmnpoverview.htm. 2012. Accessed November 9, 2012.
63. USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture. About Us:
Cooperative Extension Systems Office. http://www.csrees.
usda.gov/Extension/. Accessed January 10, 2012.
64. Wilkins JL, Lapp J, Tagtow A & Roberts S. Beyond eating
right: the emergence of civic dietetics to foster health and
sustainability through food system change. J Hunger Environ
Nutr. 2010;5(1):2–12.
65. Muller M, Tagtow A, Roberts SL, Macdougall E. Aligning
food systems policies to advance public health. J Hunger
Environ Nutr. 2009;4(3–4):225–240.
14