Transforming the food system with a biomass value hierarchy: Sustainability and policy insights

The food system significantly impacts the environment and society. This study examined a shift from a continuation of the current trend (policy as usual scenario) towards a biomass value hierarchy scenario, which focused on optimizing land and biomass use and rethinking the role of livestock production. The biomass value hierarchy was based on circular economy principles, the waste hierarchy, and national self-sufficiency, which eliminated feed import and redistributed protein sources in the diet.

A Multi-Criteria Decisions Analysis (MCDA) framework was used to assess the two scenarios across four sustainability dimensions: environmental, social, economic and policy. Environmental and social impacts were analysed using life cycle assessment methodology, while economic and policy implications were explored using partial equilibrium modelling, with the Norwegian food system as a case study.

The results for the environmental dimension indicated that, compared to the policy as usual scenario, the biomass value hierarchy reduced environmental impacts by 8 % to 18 % across the indicators, including climate change, acidification, particulate matter, terrestrial eutrophication and occupation of arable land. Social impacts also improved in categories with the highest social risks, such as equal opportunities for workers, health and safety for farmers, cultural heritage, food security, fair competition, and promoting social responsibility. Contrarily, indicators within the economic dimension revealed reduced profitability, and results within the policy dimension showed a considerable increase in required subsidies, border measures and governmental restrictions on consumption. The study findings indicate that an environmentally and socially sustainable food system is feasible but requires significant political and economic support. Additionally, the study highlights the value of using MCDA when combining different research methods in cross-disciplinary assessments. These results underscore the need for a societal debate on acceptable levels of political intervention and the role of consumers and taxpayers in shaping the future food system.