Food Policy and the Values We Choose to Serve

Introduction

While the climate crisis is one of the most urgent and complex challenges of the 21st century, it is, ultimately, a failure of values. Global temperatures have already risen about 1.2°C above preindustrial levels, fueling record-breaking heatwaves, wildfires, and floods across every continent. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), even limiting warming to 1.5°C—the goal set by the Paris Agreement—requires cutting global greenhouse gas emissions nearly in half by 2030 (IPCC 2022). While most climate policy focuses on decarbonizing energy and transportation, a growing body of research shows that the global food system alone could make it impossible to meet those targets. Food sits at the center of this crisis because every meal reflects both consumer and producer choices about land, labor, equity, care, and public responsibility.

A 2020 study published in Science found that even if fossil fuel emissions ceased entirely, food system emissions alone would still drive 1.5°C of global warming by the end of the century (Clark et al. 2020). Today, food accounts for roughly one-third of all human-caused greenhouse gas emissions, or around 18 billion tons of CO₂-equivalent annually (Crippa et al. 2021). Livestock production, especially beef and dairy, generates nearly 15 percent of total global emissions—comparable to all transportation combined (Gerber et al. 2013). If current dietary trends continue, emissions from food could increase by another 30–40 percent by 2050, driven by rising meat and dairy demand (Bajželj et al. 2014).

Industrial agriculture relies on monocultures, synthetic fertilizers, and confined animal feeding operations that degrade soil, pollute waterways, and destroy biodiversity. Between 2001 and 2015, agriculture and food production were responsible for 80 percent of global deforestation, much of it in tropical regions (Curtis et al. 2018). At the same time, our food system fails on its basic goal of nourishment: Over 2 billion people experience moderate or severe food insecurity annually, while diet-related diseases like diabetes and heart disease have become leading causes of death in the United States (FAO et al. 2023). The crisis of food is thus not only ecological—it is social, economic, and moral.

For decades, governments have framed the climate crisis as a technical one: how to produce the same outputs with fewer emissions. While these efforts are essential, they are not sufficient. Food policy shows how environmental choices are also social choices: The foods prioritized in public institutions affect emissions, land use, worker livelihoods, community health, and access to nutritious meals. Meaningful climate action must therefore extend beyond technology to the daily practices and public values that connect people to one another and to the planet.

Public food procurement is one of the strongest tools for reshaping those values. The meals governments purchase and serve in schools, hospitals, jails, and senior centers express what our society believes people deserve. In December 2021, President Joe Biden’s Executive Order 14057, Catalyzing Clean Energy Industries and Jobs Through Federal Sustainability, recognized the power of government purchasing to drive change, directing federal agencies to achieve net-zero procurement emissions by 2050 (EO 14057). While the order focuses on energy, it establishes a broader principle: Public institutions can shape entire markets through what they buy. Yet the case for reform extends beyond emissions or budgets. Food procurement offers a way to make climate action tangible and participatory. Every publicly funded meal becomes a daily act of climate justice, reinforcing the idea that sustainability is not an abstract policy goal but a lived expression of collective responsibility.

This policy brief argues that New York City should embrace plant-forward food procurement across all public agencies as a cornerstone of its sustainability and equity strategy. Doing so would signal a shift in values from a neoliberal model of efficiency and individualism to one rooted in community care and shared well-being. In the face of a crisis born from disconnection, food offers a path back to one another.

Background and Context

For many years, most climate policy focused on reducing emissions from energy, transportation, and industry, while agriculture and food production were often seen as secondary or politically sensitive. As scientific understanding advanced, however, it became clear that the food system is one of the biggest drivers of global greenhouse gas emissions. In the early 2000s, scientists began to measure food’s contribution to global warming more precisely. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)’s 2006 report Livestock’s Long Shadow showed that livestock production accounted for about 18 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, more than all transportation combined (FAO 2006). Later reports from the IPCC confirmed these findings and warned that without changes in diets and land management, food-related emissions alone could prevent the world from meeting its climate goals (IPCC 2019). Despite this evidence, national governments were slow to act. Food and agriculture policy remained divided among agencies focused on health, trade, and rural development, while climate policy stayed focused on energy. This split created a gap in how governments approached the food–climate connection.

In recent years, cities have begun to fill that gap. Urban governments, which are often more flexible and directly accountable to residents, started treating food as part of their climate and public health strategies. The 2015 Milan Urban Food Policy Pact, now signed by more than 250 cities, encouraged cities to tackle food waste, improve nutrition, and reduce emissions together (MUFPP 2015). NYC joined this global effort through its OneNYC 2050 strategy, which linked sustainability, health equity, and climate action (City of New York 2019). Within that lens, the city’s Department of Education, which serves nearly 1 million meals daily, launched Meatless Mondays in 2019 and expanded to Plant-Powered Fridays in 2022 (Monday Campaigns 2019; 2022). These initiatives signaled a growing understanding that public food purchasing could advance citywide climate and health goals. As cities moved toward more systemic reform, many have increasingly begun adopting values-based procurement frameworks such as the Good Food Purchasing Program (GFPP). The GFPP is a national model that encourages public institutions to evaluate contracts through their effects on nutrition, environmental sustainability, local economies, workforce standards, and animal welfare, in addition to price. In NYC, that approach has been adapted into a citywide Good Food Purchasing initiative through Mayor Eric Adams’ Executive Order 8 in 2022, which directs the Mayor’s Office of Food Policy to collect vendor data and publish annual information showing how mayoral agencies’ food procurements perform on these values (Adams 2022). While this framework gives the city a way to measure whether procurement aligns with its stated goals, it has not yet created a fully binding, citywide standard that consistently governs what agencies buy or serve.

At the federal level, the General Services Administration and the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has created pilot programs to cut food waste and promote “climate-smart” products. For example, the General Services Administration has piloted food waste diversion and tracking initiatives in select federal cafeterias through its Green Proving Ground and sustainable facilities programs, testing composting systems and waste measurement tools in a handful of buildings rather than across the full federal portfolio. Similarly, the USDA launched the Partnerships for Climate-Smart Commodities initiative, which funds producers to pilot lower-emissions practices and develop climate-smart product labels—yet participation is voluntary and confined to funded projects rather than embedded as a universal procurement standard across federal food purchasing (USDA 2022). A more significant move came in December 2021, when President Biden issued Executive Order 14057, Catalyzing Clean Energy Industries and Jobs Through Federal Sustainability. The order directs the federal government to reach net-zero procurement emissions by 2050. Though focused mainly on energy and infrastructure, it demonstrates how public purchasing can shape markets (EO 14057).

Past attempts to link food and climate policy have struggled for several reasons. Food system emissions are widespread and hard to regulate through traditional environmental laws. Unlike pollution from factories or vehicles, agricultural emissions come from many small, dispersed sources such as soil, livestock, and fertilizers. Federal subsidies still favor commodity crops and livestock, keeping carbon-intensive foods cheap. Local procurement systems often prioritize cost and convenience, not climate or nutrition outcomes. Cultural barriers add another challenge. Dietary change can be portrayed as elitist or restrictive, even though programs in New York’s schools and hospitals show that plant-based meals can be both appealing and accessible. Without standardized metrics or reporting systems, it is nearly impossible to track progress or hold agencies accountable.

Collectively, these challenges have allowed food-related emissions to remain a blind spot in climate policy. Institutional food systems continue to serve billions of meals each year without considering their environmental impact. Reforming public food procurement offers a way to close this gap. By embedding sustainability and equity standards into purchasing decisions, cities like New York can use their buying power to drive meaningful change within multiple fields of social justice. 

Policy Analysis 

New York City’s food procurement system was built to prioritize efficiency and cost. It measures success by how many meals can be produced at the lowest price, not by how those meals affect the climate, public health, or local economies. This narrow approach overlooks a powerful opportunity. NYC’s own emissions inventory shows that food consumption accounts for almost 20 percent of its total emissions, mostly from meat and dairy (NYC Office of Climate n.d.). Reducing the carbon intensity of public meals could cut thousands of tons of emissions each year. Unlike infrastructure projects that require new construction or expensive technology, food procurement reform is a solution that can begin immediately through different choices and better standards.

In addition, plant-forward menus are one of the most effective ways to lower emissions and improve health at the same time. Research from organizations such as the World Resources Institute and Project Drawdown shows that shifting even 30 percent of institutional meals toward plant-based proteins can cut food-related emissions by up to 40 percent (Waite and Vennard 2018). This change would also have major health benefits: Diets centered on plants are linked to lower rates of heart disease, diabetes, and obesity (PCRM 2018). These conditions are especially common in low-income and minority communities that depend most on public meal programs. Expanding plant-forward food procurement would help the city meet its climate goals while improving public health and reducing health inequities.

Economic justice and local resilience are also important reasons to support this shift. By sourcing more food from regional farmers who use regenerative and low-emission practices, the city can keep money circulating within New York State while reducing its dependence on global supply chains that are vulnerable to climate disruption. New York already produces many crops that fit into plant-forward menus, such as beans, grains, potatoes, and vegetables. When the city purchases more of these foods locally, it supports family farms, protects farmland, and builds a more resilient regional food economy.

Plant-based meals are often less expensive over time. Many schools and hospitals that have introduced plant-forward menus report that replacing meat with beans, grains, and vegetables can lower costs without reducing quality or nutrition. For example, NYC Health + Hospitals reported that its plant-based meal program saved about $0.59 per meal in 2023, and a later peer-reviewed account of the program estimated total annual savings at roughly $318,000 (Morgenstern, Redwood, and Herby 2024). The money saved can be then reinvested in staff training, local sourcing, or meal improvements. This creates a positive cycle where sustainability and affordability work together instead of competing.

For this policy to succeed, it must also change how people think about public food. The goal is not to limit choice but to expand it. Food policy should be built around health, taste, and care, not around restriction or sacrifice. Programs like Plant-Powered Fridays in schools and the Plant-Based Lifestyle Medicine initiative in hospitals have shown that cultural change is possible when food is presented in positive ways. When students discover new foods they enjoy, or when patients see their doctors prescribe plant-based diets as a form of healing, the idea of sustainable eating becomes practical and empowering.

Policy Proposals

To reimagine NYC’s food procurement into a force for climate progress and justice, bold policy changes are required. The following proposals outline a comprehensive approach that builds on existing initiatives and introduces new measures to ensure lasting impact.

1. New York City should set explicit targets to shift its institutional food purchases toward plant-based, low-carbon foods. For example, the city can commit to reduce purchases of red meat (beef and lamb) by 50 percent or more across all agencies within the next five years, and proportionally increase procurement of plant-based proteins like beans, legumes, tofu, and nuts. Such a target directly supports the city’s pledge to cut food-related emissions by one-third by 2030. To implement this, each department’s food budget should include benchmarks for emissions reduction or percentage of plant-based menu items. Progress should be measured annually in terms of greenhouse gas savings and reported publicly. By having a concrete goal—such as “X percent of all meals served by city agencies will be plant-based or vegetarian by 2028”—the city creates a unifying mission for its schools, hospitals, and other institutions.

2. The principles of the Good Food Purchasing Program (GFPP) should be fully integrated into every city agency that buys or serves food. This means adopting uniform standards and evaluation metrics for food contracts citywide. The Mayor’s Office should issue an executive directive (or the City Council could pass legislation) requiring all relevant departments to apply the GFPP’s value-based criteria when awarding food contracts. In practice, this would shift agencies from a “lowest bidder wins” approach to a “best value” approach that accounts for food quality and origin. The city should provide training for procurement officers on how to use these criteria and partner with the national Center for Good Food Purchasing to conduct regular assessments. By expanding GFPP, New York can ensure that a school cafeteria and a jail kitchen are both operating under the same vision for good food. Importantly, transparency will be key: Each agency should publish an annual scorecard showing how its purchases rate on the GFPP values and where improvements are planned. An expanded version of the city’s existing public procurement dashboard, managed by the Mayor’s Office of Food Policy, could compile these additional indicators so that elected officials and residents can more easily track the city’s progress toward sustainable procurement. This accountability will motivate continuous improvement and allow successes to be recognized and scaled.

3. Policy changes on paper must translate to appealing meals on the plate. To ensure plant-forward procurement is successful, city institutions need to make plant-based foods the norm and build acceptance among the people they serve. NYC should implement plant-based default menus across hospitals, schools, and other cafeterias, meaning the primary or automatically offered meal is vegetarian or vegan, with meat available as an opt-in choice. This “default” strategy, already showing success in NYC Health + Hospitals facilities, can gently nudge consumption patterns while preserving individual choice. Public schools can expand their once-weekly vegetarian days to multiple days, or offer a plant-based entrée as the featured special daily so that choosing meat is a deliberate exception rather than the expectation. Alongside menu shifts, the city must invest in training and capacity-building for its food service workforce. Cooks and cafeteria managers should receive ongoing professional development in plant-based nutrition and culinary skills—for example, how to prepare tasty legume-based stews, tofu dishes, or vegetable curries that appeal to kids and adults alike. The city’s large-scale meal programs can even partner with culinary schools or nonprofit groups to develop culturally diverse plant-forward recipes reflecting the tastes of New York’s communities (Latin American, Caribbean, Asian, African, etc.). Empowering foodservice staff with new skills and celebrating their creativity in the kitchen will be critical for acceptance. Finally, educational campaigns aimed at students, patients, and clients of city meals can highlight the benefits of a plant-rich diet for health and the planet. When people understand why the menu is changing and are engaged through tastings and feedback surveys, they are more likely to embrace the new offerings. This human-centric approach lays the groundwork for a gradual shift in collective values. By making plant-forward meals familiar, enjoyable, and culturally relevant, institutions help redefine what a default meal looks like and normalize climate conscious eating across generations.

4. To drive these reforms, New York City should create robust mechanisms for coordination and accountability at the highest levels of government. One option is to expand the mandate of the Mayor’s Office of Food Policy to oversee all city agency food purchasing through a climate and justice lens. They would set citywide guidelines, help resolve inter-agency obstacles, and ensure compliance with the new plant-forward standards. Crucially, it would monitor performance by collecting data on metrics such as greenhouse gas emissions of purchases, percentage of spend on local/BIPOC suppliers, and nutritional improvements in menus. Regular audits and public reports should be mandated. For example, the office can release an annual “Climate & Good Food Report” detailing progress toward the 33 percent emissions reduction goal and highlighting successes or shortfalls at each agency. In addition to bureaucratic oversight, inclusive governance is vital. The city should incorporate participatory input by forming a Food Policy Council or advisory board that includes representatives from low-income communities, small farmers, food workers, and public health experts. Modeled loosely on local education councils, this body could include elected seats to strengthen community ownership and ensure that diverse residents have a direct role in shaping priorities such as which culturally important foods should appear in plant-based menus. The council would also help hold the city accountable by reviewing annual progress reports and elevating concerns from frontline communities most burdened by diet-related disease and environmental harms. By instituting transparency and community oversight, NYC will not only implement changes but also build public trust in the process. Over time, this creates a feedback loop: As residents see improvements in school meals or senior center food, they can provide input and support, which in turn pressures agencies to maintain high standards. In summary, making governance of food procurement more cohesive and participatory will lock in the gains from the above proposals and ensure that the shift to plant-based, equitable sourcing endures across mayoral administrations.

Conclusion

New York City stands at the forefront of a new way of thinking about climate action, one that treats the food on our plates as a powerful tool for climate justice, health equity, and community well-being. The city has already taken meaningful steps, from Meatless Mondays in schools to emissions tracking in its climate inventory. These efforts have laid an important foundation, but the challenges of climate change and inequality demand something greater than incremental progress. Restructuring public food procurement is no longer a niche idea; it is a necessary pillar of New York’s sustainability and equity agenda. By committing to low-emission, plant-based foods across all public institutions, the city can reduce greenhouse gases, model healthier eating patterns, and strengthen its role as a national leader in climate innovation. By opening more opportunities for local and minority-owned producers, it can use its purchasing power to build regional resilience and shared prosperity. And by improving the meals served to children, patients, and older adults, it can make real progress in reducing the health disparities that affect so many New Yorkers.

This transformation is not only about policy but about values. The climate crisis is not simply an environmental emergency; it is a symptom of institutions that have lost sight of their purpose to serve people and the planet. Our current systems often prioritize profit and efficiency over care and justice. Reforming public food procurement challenges that logic by aligning everyday government action with the moral responsibility to protect life and sustain communities. Every dollar New York City spends on food can either reinforce an extractive, high-emission system or invest in one that honors workers, supports farmers, and nourishes residents. A healthier population is more resilient, a sustainable food system is more stable, and an equitable supply chain builds public trust. Together, these outcomes strengthen the foundation of a city that leads through compassion as well as innovation.

At its core, this brief asks what kind of leadership the climate era requires. It calls for public institutions that act not only as administrators of policy but as stewards of care and justice. Reforming what is on the menu in our schools, hospitals, and senior centers may seem like a small act, but it represents a profound shift in how government expresses its values. Through plant-forward procurement, NYC can demonstrate that climate action is not limited to technology or infrastructure. It can live in the daily choices that connect people to each other and to the planet.

The city’s legacy can be one of moral clarity and visionary leadership, proving that food policy rooted in care can transform not only emissions but the values that drive them. By leading with its plate, NYC can begin to heal both the planet and the institutions that sustain it. The question is not whether we can afford to make this change, but whether we can afford to continue without it.