WHO plans sustainable food systems report under GFI APAC partnership

The World Health Organization is planning a report on sustainable food systems in the Western Pacific as part of a multi-year partnership with the Good Food Institute Asia Pacific (GFI APAC), examining how protein diversification and emerging food technologies could support public health.

• The partnership brings together GFI APAC and WHO’s Asia-Pacific Centre for Environment and Health.
• A planned WHO report will inform seminars and technical briefs on sustainable food systems, including sustainable proteins.
• Funding has been earmarked for two WHO technical staff members and an external academic researcher, all based in Korea.

The agreement was signed in Seoul by GFI founder Bruce Friedrich and Dr Sandro Demaio of WHO’s Asia-Pacific Centre for Environment and Health in the Western Pacific Region (ACE). It was subsequently announced during the World Food Forum at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations headquarters in Rome.

According to GFI APAC, the collaboration will bring together health, environmental and food system stakeholders to support WHO member states in developing food systems that can withstand climate pressures while improving health. Protein diversification and emerging food technologies will form part of that work.

The planned report will focus on sustainable food systems across the Western Pacific. GFI APAC describes it as the first of its kind, with findings intended to provide the basis for seminars and technical briefs examining specific policy issues. No publication date was given in the announcement.

Those follow-up activities are intended to help governments consider sustainable food systems, including sustainable proteins, within regional public health strategies. The agreement also provides for dedicated research capacity, with funding earmarked for two technical positions at WHO and an external academic researcher. All three will be based in Korea.

The announcement sets out a research and policy program, rather than the findings of an assessment already completed. It does not specify which protein technologies the report will evaluate individually, how their performance will be compared, or which countries will contribute case studies.

GFI APAC’s case for the partnership draws heavily on the relationship between food production and preventable health risks. Its announcement identifies antimicrobial resistance, diseases associated with animal production, environmental contamination and diet-related illness as reasons to examine a broader range of protein sources.

Antimicrobial resistance is a particular concern because it can make infections harder or impossible to treat. WHO identifies the misuse and overuse of antimicrobial medicines in humans, animals and plants as major drivers of resistance, requiring coordinated action across healthcare, agriculture and environmental management.

Producing protein without raising livestock could reduce dependence on antibiotics used in animal agriculture. GFI APAC points to plant-based and cultivated meat as technologies that could contribute to that objective, alongside their potential to reduce exposure to some hazards associated with conventional animal production.

The nutritional argument requires a separate assessment. The announcement highlights research on replacing processed animal meat with plant-based alternatives, as well as potential advantages associated with fiber, saturated fat and calorie density. Those comparisons depend on the foods being replaced and the composition of the replacement products. A finding about one formulation cannot establish the health effects of every product sold within the same category.

Cultivated meat also presents questions that extend beyond whether animals are raised for slaughter. Growing animal cells in controlled production conditions may offer opportunities to manage particular hazards, but food safety still requires assessment throughout production. WHO and FAO’s 2023 publication, Food Safety Aspects of Cell-Based Food, examined production technologies, potential hazards and regulatory frameworks as commercial development advanced.

The new agreement therefore follows earlier WHO engagement with sustainable protein technologies. WHO’s Regional Office for the Western Pacific previously worked with GFI’s international affiliates on a two-day workshop examining regulatory and food safety aspects of alternatives to conventional animal products.

That workshop covered cultivated meat safety, plant-based proteins, microbial fermentation and consumer perceptions. It also included a case study of Singapore’s regulatory approach, with participants from countries and territories across the region. The discussions addressed how authorities could evaluate unfamiliar production methods while maintaining food safety oversight.

The current partnership extends the stated scope from those regulatory and safety questions to the relationship between food systems, environmental pressures and public health. Its planned outputs include both a regional report and more focused technical material intended for policy discussions.

GFI APAC said the partners are seeking engagement with policymakers and public health leaders interested in applying the eventual recommendations at regional, national or international level. The announcement did not disclose the partnership’s total funding, its precise duration or a timetable for releasing the report and accompanying briefs.

(Main photo shows GFI founder Bruce Friedrich and WHO ACE’s Dr Sandro Demaio, who formalized the partnership at a signing ceremony in Seoul)

If you liked this, check these out...‍

• FAO maps the legal maze for cell-based foods and precision fermentation as Codex work stays formative

• GFI APAC report says China's biomanufacturing drive could reshape microbial protein production

• EIT Food study finds consumers willing to try precision fermentation, but trust remains a hurdle