Exploring Elements of Food Policy Interventions (Mercy For Animals)

This report does not contain an executive summary. Here is a summary of the report:

This report, "Exploring Elements of Food Policy Interventions," presents findings from a nationwide survey of municipal sustainability offices in the United States to understand their current and potential food policy work. The research was conducted by Mercy For Animals.

Key Findings & Statistics:

• Research Focus: The study surveyed employees from 103 municipal sustainability offices and 36 related organizations to understand their activities, perceptions of potential policies, and identified barriers related to food sustainability, particularly plant-based diets.
• Current Priorities: Most offices are in the early stages of food-related work, focusing on "low-hanging fruit" like education and local initiatives rather than policy.
• Focus on Production, Not Consumption: Sustainability efforts concentrate more on food growing (33%) and food waste (22%) than on food consumption (16%). When consumption is addressed, it is typically about local food, not the type of food.
• Low Engagement with Plant-Based Foods: Of the activities that did focus on food consumption, only 28% promoted plant-based foods.
• Preference for Incentives: Respondents strongly prefer policies that incentivize sustainable choices over those that mandate them. The most feasible potential policies were incentivizing vendors to offer plant-based meals (65% feasibility) and committing to the Good Food Purchasing Program (62% feasibility).
• Unpopular Policies: A tax on meat-based products was considered the least attractive and least feasible policy (2% feasibility). Mandates like meat-free city catering (2% acceptable) or making vegetarian the default option (4% acceptable) also had extremely low support.
• Framing is Crucial for Outreach: The acceptability of outreach campaigns for plant-based food varied significantly by framing. Campaigns based on environmental impacts (34% acceptable) and health impacts (26% acceptable) were viewed more favorably than those based on animal welfare (10% acceptable).
• Primary Barriers: The most commonly reported barriers to promoting plant-based foods were related to sociopolitical context (32%) and structural constraints (29%).
• Sociopolitical Hesitations: Key concerns included being perceived as a "nanny state," creating inequitable impacts on low-income communities, public and agricultural industry resistance, and the belief that food is an individual choice.
• Structural Constraints: Barriers included a lack of municipal authority (e.g., no taxing authority), established priorities that rank food sustainability low, and a lack of political support from elected officials.
• Connecting to Social Justice (DEIJ): Respondents saw potential for connecting plant-based food choices to Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Justice (DEIJ) issues primarily through increasing accessibility to culturally relevant foods (31%) and framing initiatives around traditional diets and history (25%).
• Recommendations for Advocates: The report advises advocates to partner with progressive municipalities first, provide ready-made resources to address capacity issues, build stronger arguments for why food should be a priority, and find ways to connect plant-based eating to the local food economies that offices already support.