In light of the inadequacies of the FAO’s response, we would like to reiterate our request for the FAO to have a dedicated meeting with Prof Paul Behrens and Dr Matthew Hayek to give adequate time to specifically discuss the critical errors they have identified in the Pathways report regarding dietary change. [...] We reiterate our call for the FAO to adopt more robust, inclusive and transparent processes in the creation of the next instalment of the 2050 Roadmap report, and all future reports. [...] We reiterate our call for the FAO to publish 1) the data sources and calculations used to arrive at the GLEAM statistics and 2) the identities of experts involved in production of the GLEAM figures, with disclosure of any potential conflicts of interest. [...] We thus reiterate our call for the FAO to re-evaluate these modelling assumptions in the Pathways reports and future reports: • The opportunity costs of land potentially spared through dietary change: The FAO fails to respond to the criticism that it has omitted the emissions mitigation potential of alternative uses of land spared through dietary change to lower meat and dairy consumption. [...] • Conflation of Nationally Recommended Diets with sustainable and healthy diets: The FAO makes the case for NRDs being the most appropriate diet to model, but the FAO does not respond to the issues raised that its report conflates the NRDs with “sustainable and healthy diets”20, despite the fact that the vast majority of NRDs do not factor sustainability into their design.
Authors
Related Organizations
- Pages
- 8
- Published in
- United Kingdom
Table of Contents
- Pathways 1
- Roadmap 1
- Pathways 2
- 1 Serious methodological errors 2
- Pathways 2
- Mixing baseline years in analysis underestimating meat reduction to meet NRDs 2
- Double counting emissions from increases in meat consumption 2
- Factoring in emissions from fruit vegetables and nuts unrelated to replacing meat 3
- Comparison with greenhouse gas estimates from agrifood systems by Tubiello et al . 2021 3
- 2 Inappropriate narrow and distorting modelling choices 3
- Pathways Pathways 3
- The opportunity costs of land potentially spared through dietary change 3
- Updates to Nationally Recommended Diets 3
- Using the mid-range rather than the lower-range value for meat intake from NRDs 4
- Failure to model more ambitious reductions in meat and dairy 4
- Livestocks Long Shadow 4
- Conflation of Nationally Recommended Diets with sustainable and healthy diets 4
- Organisational signatories 5
- Individual signatories please note for these signatories support is given in individual capacity not on behalf of institution 7
- References 8
