The Swiss voice in the world since 1935
Personal feed

Sign in to add topics to your feed.

Sign in now
Bookmarks

Sign in to add articles to your saved list.

Sign in now

To what extent should the state intervene in the food that ends up on our plates?

Hosted by:

As a correspondent at the Federal Palace for SWI swissinfo.ch, I report on federal politics for the Swiss Abroad. After studying at the Academy of Journalism and Media at the University of Neuchâtel, my career path initially took me to various regional media, working in the editorial offices of Journal du Jura, Canal 3 and Radio Jura bernois. Since 2015, I have been working in the multilingual editorial department of SWI swissinfo.ch, where I continue to practise my profession with passion.

Is it a step towards more sustainable farming or a “vegan diktat”? The food security initiative, which goes to a vote on September 27, is sharply dividing opinion.

The proposal, launched by environmental campaigner Franziska Herren, aims to increase Switzerland’s food self-sufficiency rate from the current 46% to at least 70%. To achieve this, it calls on the government to adapt agricultural policy in ways that encourage the production and consumption of plant-based foods over animal products.

The initiative has reignited the debate over the state’s role in shaping our diets. What do you think? Is it legitimate for the government to promote certain eating habits in the name of sustainability, or does this amount to an infringement on consumers’ freedom of choice?

More

Join the conversation!

Contributions must adhere to our guidelines. If you have questions or wish to suggest other ideas for debates, please, get in touch!
J
jepyerly@websud.ch
The following contribution has been automatically translated from FR.

It is a well-established medical fact that vegans need to take dietary supplements to make up for the trace elements not found in vegetables. Furthermore, for safety reasons, the grass on alpine or sloping pastures must be grazed. I propose we run a trial over one summer season, taking vegans out to graze on the grass. It is true that only 46 per cent of our food is produced in Switzerland. However, the donkeys who voted ‘NO’ on 14 June are incapable of realising that there are 2 million too many humans in Switzerland. Everything is being concreted over at the expense of food production.

C'est médicalement connu que les humains végan ,doivent ingurgiter des compléments alimentaires , pour compenser les oligo-éléments que l'on ne trouve pas dans les légumes. D'autre part, les herbages des prairies alpestres ou en pente , pour des question de sécurité, doivent êtres broutées. Je propose que l'on fasse un essai d'une saison estivale, conduire les végan pour brouter l'herbe. C'est vrai que seul le 46 % de nourriture est produite en Suisse. Mais, les ânes qui ont voté NON le 14 juin , sont incapable de constater que l'on a 2 millions de trop d'humains en Suisse. Tout se bétonne au détriment de la nourriture.

dario giandeini
Dario Giandeini
The following contribution has been automatically translated from IT.

It’s all very well to have provocations. But when a provocation is based on arguments that are doomed to fail from the outset, we’re pushing the boundaries – or rather, crossing them. A referendum that is bound to be soundly rejected costs a great deal and diverts resources that could be put to better use elsewhere.__Politicising food, which is essentially a cultural issue, might be attributed to the right, whereas here it is being ‘ideologised’ by the left, which will in no way benefit from it – quite the opposite!__Food evolves as countries evolve. New trends arrive with migration and are more or less widely accepted and adopted. Giving the state the power to regulate what goes on our plates is unthinkable and undemocratic. If one of the objectives is to improve environmental sustainability, this will not be achieved by pushing a single issue, but by combining several factors.__Urban sprawl, which robs agriculture of fertile land, must be combated – for the sake of consistency – alongside a redefinition of crop quality. Nor will raising public awareness succeed unless it goes beyond a group that communicates through slogans. Indeed, we are witnessing a further polarisation between those who shout slogans and those who prefer to take responsibility for what they eat. __The state must act as a state and lay the foundations for fostering a culture of nutrition; under no circumstances should it regulate what people can grow or eat.

Va bene che ci siano provocazioni. Ma quando una provocazione che parte da tesi perdenti in partenza, siamo ai limiti, anzi fuori limiti. Una votazione popolare che sarà nettamente rigettata costa moltissimo e ruba risorse utili per qualcosa di più importante.__Politicizzare l'alimentazione, che è un fattore essenzialmente culturale potrebbe essere attribuibile alla destra, mentre qui viene "ideologizzato" dalla sinistra, che non ne trarrà in nessun caso beneficio, anzi!__L'alimentazione evolve come evolvono i paesi. Nuovi trend arrivano con la migrazione e sono più o meno bene accettati e diffusi. Dare mandato allo stato di regolamentare cosa mettere nel piatto è impensabile e antidemocratico. Se uno degli obiettivi è quello di migliorare la sostenibilità ambientale, non sarà spingendo un solo tema, ma associando più elementi.__La cementificazione, che rapina l'agricoltura di terreni fertili deve essere combattuta, per coerenza, assieme alla ridefinizione di qualità delle colture. Nemmeno una sensibilizzazione della massa, al di fuori di un gruppo che comunica per slogan avrà successo. Anzi, assistiamo ad una ulteriore polarizzazione tra chi urla slogan e chi invece preferisce assumersi la responsabilità di cosa mangia. __Lo stato deve fare lo stato e creare il substrato per far crescere la cultura per l'alimentazione e in nessun caso regolamentare cosa chi può coltivare o mangiare.

SWI swissinfo.ch - a branch of Swiss Broadcasting Corporation SRG SSR

SWI swissinfo.ch - a branch of Swiss Broadcasting Corporation SRG SSR