The Swiss food security initiative: more sustainable agriculture or ‘vegan diktat’?

Salads rather than cows? The proponents of the initiative to be put to a vote on 27 September want to encourage the production of plant-based foods rather than meat. Keystone / Gaetan Bally

Following the failure of the drinking water initiative in 2021, environmental campaigner Franziska Herren is back with a new initiative aimed at requiring the Swiss government to promote the production and consumption of plant-based foods. Opponents reject the proposal as unrealistic. Swiss voters will decide on September 27.

What does the food security initiative propose?

The food security initiative was formally submitted in August 2024 after its backers collected the required 112,736 valid signatures. Its aim is to increase Switzerland’s food self-sufficiency from 46% to at least 70%. To this end, the initiativeExternal link calls for agricultural policy to be adapted to encourage the production and consumption of plant-based rather than animal-based foods.

The initiative also aims to preserve groundwater resources and promote sustainable, climate-friendly agriculture and an agri-food sector. This involves introducing measures to preserve biodiversity and soil fertility, as well as promoting natural and reproducible plants and seeds. All these requirements must be met within ten years.

Who supports the initiative?

The initiative was launched by environmental campaigner Franziska Herren, from the association Clean Water for All, and six other people, including Daniel Hartmann, former head of the Groundwater Protection Section at the Federal Office for the Environment. Herren was also behind the drinking water initiative, which was rejected in June 2021 by over 60% of voters. That initiative called for the withdrawal of subsidies from farms using pesticides and antibiotics as a preventive measure.

Politically, only the left-wing Young Greens are calling for a yes vote on the initiative. No major environmental organisation has come out in favour of it so far. Other smaller associations are among the initiative’s official supporters.External link

Franziska Herren at the submission of her second citizens’ initiative on 16 August 2024 in Bern. Keystone / Alessandro Della Valle

Who opposes the initiative?

Switzerland’s executive body, the Federal Council,  opposes the initiative. It decided not to put forward a counter-proposal, arguing that Switzerland’s Federal Constitution already provides a framework for agricultural policy. In Parliament, too, the initiative was unanimously rejected. All parties deemed it to be too radical and the proposed measures to be inadequate. The idea of a direct counter-proposal limited to the preservation of ecosystems, biodiversity and water quality also failed. Only the Social Democratic Party (left-wing), the Green Party (left-wing) and the Liberal Green Party (centrist) supported such a counter-proposal. The main economic and agricultural organisations also oppose the initiative.

What do proponents say?

At present, with a self-sufficiency rate of 42%, Switzerland cannot guarantee food security for its population in the event of a disruption to imports. However, in the view of the committee behind the proposal, the country is not immune to crises that threaten supplies from abroad, such as wars, trade disputes or extreme weather events.

Proponents of the initiative argue that nearly 60% of agricultural land is used to grow animal feed, and this is the main reason why Switzerland is forced to import half of its food. By growing plant-based food crops on this land, it would be possible to produce ten times as many calories for the Swiss population.

The initiative’s proponents also take issue with livestock farming, which they hold responsible for the climate crisis as well as over-fertilisation and soil acidification. Finally, they believe that by ensuring a sufficient supply of clean drinking water, the Federal Council would create the conditions for a sustainable agricultural and food economy whilst safeguarding consumers’ health. 

What do opponents say?

The 70% food self-sufficiency target is the main argument against the initiative. Opponents believe that this target is unrealistic and that the only way to achieve it would be for the Federal Council to drastically restrict the consumption of meat and animal-based foods. The Alliance Against the Food InitiativeExternal link, which brings together numerous organisations from the agriculture, food industry, catering, retail and mountain regions sectors, is protesting against what it describes as a ‘vegan diktat’.

Opponents emphasise that the current rate of 46% reflects what is feasible given the reality on the ground and the country’s topographical characteristics. In many regions, where the land is too steep, livestock farming is the only way to make use of the land. They believe that this initiative would jeopardise the use of mountain land and alpine pastures.

Opponents, led by the country’s main agricultural umbrella organisations, are campaigning on the basis of consumers’ freedom of choice. Keystone / Anthony Anex

The initiative has also been criticised in Parliament by several parliamentarians as being out of touch with reality. Farmers are once again being blamed for all the country’s ills, even though they are already making considerable efforts to promote sustainability and biodiversity, argued some parliamentarians. Finally, the no campaign committee believes that this initiative would drive up the price of locally produced food and encourage shopping across the border for cheaper groceries.

Edited by Katy Romy. Translated from French by Patrick Huwyler/ds