THE CHALLENGES OF FOOD LAW: LOOKING FOR A RECIPE (()

Por

SARA RIGAZIO

Università di Palermo (Italia)

[email protected]

Revista General de Derecho Público Comparado 30 (2021)

ABSTRACT: The paper retraces some of the most relevant issues in reference to the theme of food and law, which offers the jurist multiple opportunities for reflection. Aware that this issue requires an approach as multidisciplinary as possible, it is suggested that the latest technological innovations can be an appropriate tool to achieve some of the objectives that the international community has set in the field of sustainability.

KEYWORDS: Food; Law; Innovation; Technology; Future.

SUMMARY: I. INTRODUCTION. – II. CULTURE, FOOD AND LAW: SOME PERSPECTIVES. – III. OTHER DIMENSIONS OF FOOD AND LAW. – IV. ONE RECIPE FOR THE FUTURE.

LOS DESAFÍOS DE LA LEGISLACIÓN ALIMENTARIA: EN BUSCA DE UNA RECETA

RESUMEN: El trabajo recorre algunos de los temas más relevantes en referencia al tema de la alimentación y el derecho, lo que ofrece al jurista múltiples oportunidades de reflexión. Conscientes de que este tema requiere un enfoque, lo más multidisciplinario posible, se sugiere que las últimas innovaciones tecnológicas pueden ser una herramienta adecuada para lograr algunos de los objetivos que la comunidad internacional se ha marcado en el campo de la sostenibilidad.

PALABRAS CLAVE: Alimentos; Leyes; Innovación; Tecnología; Futuro.

SUMARIO: I. INTRODUCCIÓN. - II. CULTURA, ALIMENTACIÓN Y DERECHO: ALGUNAS PERSPECTIVAS. - III. OTRAS DIMENSIONES DE LA ALIMENTACIÓN Y EL DERECHO. - IV. UNA RECETA PARA EL FUTURO.

Fecha recepción: 03/11/2021

Fecha aceptación: 15/11/2021

I. INTRODUCTION

According to the last report by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) issued on September 2021, COVID-19 has set back progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) enshrined in the UN's Agenda 2030, undermining decades of development efforts: this is certainly an alarming picture making the target of ending hunger even more distant than thought but, more generally, casting a dark light on the entire topic of food(1).

As a matter of fact, these data call (once again) the entire international community to approach and examine the theme of food not in terms of single sectors, in closed compartments, but with a broad and multidisciplinary perspective(2). The initiatives taken in recent years at the international level confirm this orientation. For example, the One Health strategy, shared by WHO (World Health Organization), FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) and OIE (World Organization for Animal Health), aims at addressing food safety and public health with a multi-sectoral approach, considering both environmental and animal related risks in the human-animal-ecosystem interface among the other topics(3).

In the same direction, the European Union approved the Regulation 2017/625, that addresses the issue of official controls for the agri-food chain, establishing a unique legal framework in this field. Moreover, this regulation includes, among many topics, animal welfare in addition to the health of animals intended to contribute to the food chain, protection of consumers in relation to deceptive and fraudulent practices and quality certification regimes (DOP and IGP)(4).

One concept seems particularly appropriate, nowadays, to describe the idea of ‘food’, as envisioned in a wide meaning: sharing. Indeed, sharing is essential in relation to the circulation of information when we refer to its quality (the origin of the product, the certification process and, thus, the consumer’s protection), its cultural dimension (religious traditions and agrarian heritage connected with it), its circulation (in terms of contractual rules, civil remedies, insurance systems, on line platforms management, logistics distribution) and its protection related to the new advanced technologies (traceability of products, novel food, seeds property).

In this scenario, the academic world plays a critical role in connecting all these aspects, social, economic, legal and science related, through the different expertise of the scholars. In the legal academia, the recent literature has shown a renovated interest in the relationship between food and law, as the multiple initiatives that in the last few years have taken place on this topic confirm(5). As a matter of fact, it is now common and certainly not surprising to hear about ‘agri-food law’, although there are still unanswered questions around this notion(6).

Looking at the dynamics concerning food, we are aware of the polyhedric nature of the sources involved and the spatial dimension where these sources operate - the national, the regional and the global one - interconnecting one with each other. Therefore, the role of the comparatist becomes particularly useful for understanding these dynamics in consideration of the context of legal pluralism and the circulation of models that are inherently part of the theme itself(7).

This the framework within which the two volumes edited by Lucia Scaffardi and Vincenzo Zeno-Zencovich, Food and Law. A comparative perspective, are set in. Both volumes contain the proceedings of the conference of the Italian Association of Comparative Law, held in 2019 in Parma. The first part of this collection focuses on the relationship between culture and food law and between agri-food chains, markets and competition law. The second part investigates the international dimension of food, the so-called food education, in the framework of sustainability and, finally, the rights of animals in the food chain. This collection represents a valuable window on this relatively new topic since it offers the scholars the instruments to address the relation between food and law from different points of view.

Not only, therefore, is this collection entirely in line with the international orientation mentioned above, but at the same time it poses an interesting yet demanding challenge as to the approach to be taken, in order to investigate this subject. Indeed, each of the essays, with its specificity, is part of a bigger, unique, picture that gets the reader to a new level of awareness on the topic of food and law.

II. CULTURE, FOOD AND LAW: SOME PERSPECTIVES

If we had to choose to describe the relationship between food and law with an expression, glocal could be an appropriate one. Literally, it indicates the simultaneous presence of a character that tends towards globalization and one that tends towards local particularism(8). Hybridization and contamination are among the most frequent consequences of this phenomenon(9).

In the food sector, this becomes particularly strong, for example when large fast-food chains decide to establish themselves in a new market, as in the case of McDonald’s(10). At times, this relationship could even turn into tension in the hypothesis in which the 'global' profile clashes with the ‘local’ one. This is what happened, for example, during the forced closure of one of Starbucks' locations in the Forbidden City in China due to issues linked to the cultural identity of the historic city toward the ‘western values’(11).

Therefore, the cultural element plays a critical role: after all, when we think of a specific country, place, tradition, one of the first things we refer to, is the typical food(12).

In this perspective we read the essay by Elettra Stradella on hebraism and food, where the author shows the role of dietary rules in Israel as an element of the constant, unresolved dualism between national and religious collective identity and as tool of secularization. At the same time, we are aware of the ‘global’ dimension of these rules when they clash, as in the case of slaughtering, with the European legislation, or when they ‘overlay’ the national borders, as in the case of the United States.

On the other hand, as the essay by Roberto D’Orazio on the freedom of conscience and the principle of equality illustrates, the questions linked to the adhesion to alimentary canons do not emerge only when they are derived from a precept observed in the context of a religious creed, and in adherence to its dogmatic structure, but also when they are the result of an ethical-philosophical type. For example, in this direction is the so-called ‘ethical Veganism’ that aims to ban meat and its derivatives from everyone's diet, in order to influence socio-economic processes and, in fact, contribute to an improvement of society.

It is interesting to observe that in this particular context the judicial formant plays a relevant role. In Vartic v. Romania, for example, the European Court of Human Rights expressly stated that “Dietary rules represent an expression of religious freedom through practices and observance of rites. They therefore fall within the scope of art. 9 ECHR”. At the same time, it is necessary to remember that not every act, in the interpretation of the Court, can in fact be considered as the manifestation of a belief, with the consequence that the analysis of the Court must fall outside art. 9 ECHR and look at other factors, such as, among the others, the factual finding(13).

In another case decided by an English Employment Tribunal, for example, the judges considered the ethical veganism such as a philosophical belief and so worthy of protection. The Tribunal recognized the sufficient binding character of the personal beliefs of the employee and, therefore, his firing by the company, unlawful(14).

The difficulties are multiple: the distinction between the mere moral personal opinion and the deep individual belief and, consequently, the level of protection (if any) that the legislator has to provide; the tension between the principle of equality and the right to diversity. The theme of food represents then a clear test ground for the modern constitutionalism also in terms of balancing the national needs and the general process of globalization.

This general tension can also be investigated looking at the international level. The UNESCO Convention of 2003 for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, indeed, represents the legal reference in relation to the protection of the cultural dimension of food in front of the risk of generalization, that occurs with the process of globalization. It is interesting to observe that from the approval of the Convention there has been a constant update of the notion of immaterial cultural heritage so that, even if the Convention remains the legal basis, the international community itself is aware of this development. As Pier Luigi Petrillo points out in his essay on cultural rights and food, we should take notice of the changes that the cultural heritage of each population has gone through and recognize the legal instruments at our disposal to preserve this heritage. In this regard, it looks more difficult to guarantee protection to the immaterial heritage due to its inherent nature. Therefore, the focus should be on the protection of cultural rights.

A clear example is the recognition of the Mediterranean Diet as a world heritage of humanity by the United Nations, which took place in 2010. This recognition does not only refer to the nutritional aspect and its well-known benefits, but it goes further, including a lifestyle, a model: a social practice(15). So, food becomes twofold: it is the instrument to achieve a target that in this case is the recognition of an immaterial good and, at the same time, is part of the immaterial good itself.

The international setting, and in particular the comparative analysis of the jurisprudence, gives also the opportunity to reflect on some particular contexts where the conflict between cultural paradigms commonly accepted, and personal beliefs, is much more evident. These ‘places of juridification’ - as Cinzia Piciocchi defines them in her essay on the dietary choices as identity manifestations - highlight this contrast between the food choice and the food supply: the leading example is the case of school cafeterias and the limitations to the ‘commonly accepted menu’.

The cultural dimension of food can be traced down also looking at the perspective of the agrarian heritage. As Marcilio Toscano Franca Filho and Anna H. Bezerra Viana Falcao point out in their analysis of the Brazilian legal system, using a functional point of view helps to reach a notion of cultural heritage that includes agriculture, cattle farming and forestry in their material and immaterial expressions. In the same direction we can then appreciate food as a cultural element, in its double dimension of ‘language’ – setting the conditions of belonging and identity - and of ‘device of geopolitical pressure’, as Cristina Costantini clearly explains in her essay on geospatial semantics and legal constructions.

A first symbolic closure in this sense, is given by the anthropological vision that Sabrina Lanni presents in her essay on legal anthropology and food: here we no longer speak of 'consumers' but of ‘human beings’. Therefore, the perspective becomes broader, and the investigation focuses on the person as a whole and no longer on the role he or she plays (as in the case of the consumer) in the society. The anthropological view helps the interpreter to investigate and to look at the food as a right. In a certain measure, it also helps to recompose the different profiles that we have just mentioned related to the environmental, social, cultural, historical and religious dimension of food and, in perspective, to address the more immediate, but equally complex profile, of its market regulation.

The basis of agri food law, as Ferdinando Albisinni reminds us of in his essay on agri-food law and the comparative method, has to be searched in its shared European and global dimension: it is indeed ‘an open laboratory’ that characterizes this sector and that, specifically in the European legal framework, has produced a peculiar way of ‘making law’ that involves cooperation between the institutions and the States, ‘experiments’ on new legal instruments and models that have contributed to build the European legal experience in this field. A significative achievement has been reached with Regulation 178/2002 that was meaningfully defined as GFL – General Food Law - and that represents the “basis of the new agri food law”(16).

It is indeed a process that has involved the whole food system in Europe and that has begun before the adoption of this regulation. The merit is to have created a bond of trust among consumers, protection of health and free movement of products. The latest regulation, 2017/625, provides for a complex but global system of controls that represents the entire cycle of life process.

A turning point is represented by the use of new technologies: in fact, as Gabriella Autorino illustrates in her essay on chains and food markets, these technologies “recompose” the tension between the global dimension (large-scale distribution) and the local dimension (the so-called ‘neighborhood’ dimension or the realities of own production), both linked to food. A fundamental premise is a profitable interaction between the offline and the online modality of these instruments. It is in this perspective that a series of initiatives that have characterized the last three years are to be found.

For example, as Alessandra Pera illustrates in detail in her essay on the practice of the home restaurant in relation to the protection of market and of the consumers, we consider this phenomenon (the home restaurant) – as fashionable as it is complex – as well as, obviously, the more general context of food delivery that has been occupying our platforms – and tables – for some time now.

One of the main issues related to the practice of the ‘home restaurant’ is the absence, in Italy, of a specific regulation and, consequently, the implications it has in terms of consumer protection, antitrust law and freedom of economic initiative, without forgetting the protection of health, perhaps the most important evaluation that has to be made above all.

In this scenario, the comparative method offers some interesting answers and chances of studying the phenomenon deeper. Once again, the solutions applied in different legal systems often rely on the technological instruments used, such as, for example, online platforms and their specific functions (the “reputational market” as Pera defines it, because of the mechanism of the reviews left by consumers).

The investigation regarding the market perspective implies also the analysis of the profiles related to unlawful commercial practices (Luigi Russo) as well as the one about the regulation of contracts in the agri-food chain, with particular emphasis on the solutions adopted by some member States (specifically France) in order to re-balance the position of the weak party (in this case, the farmer), as Irene Canfora explains in her essay on the agri-food chains and its rules. Moreover, the reflection on food law brings to consider the double nature of the agricultural products - as food and as commodities - as the mirror of the capacity of the legal systems to answer the needs of the agri-food system itself (Antonio Iannarelli).

The vastness of the themes linked to food law becomes clearer also in relation to some special food categories such as the nutritional supplements. Once again, the European legislator shows its foresight with the enactment of the regulation 745/2017 where the so called “frontier products”, as Pamela Lattanzi illustrates in her essay on this issue, are finally taken into consideration in the legal notion of ‘product’, as a response to the wide-ranging requests from the science and technologies, as well as, also, from some illegal practices. The necessity of a global perspective is also addressed in terms of the protection of the weak party in the agri-food chain, where the response of the civil instruments is not strong enough in front of the rapid evolution of this type of market, and where, instead, an international action is required also in order to avoid some forum shopping experiences (Anna Maria Mancaleoni).

Finally, the market analysis cannot disregard the themes related to transparency (and, consequently, of forgery) and security, that are necessarily connected to the regulation (nowadays considered too weak, according to Giovanni Sciancalepore in his essay on unfair competition) of the origin of the product. The civil liability system seems to have little deterrent effect also in consideration of the fact that the companies pass on the costs of defective products to the consumers themselves(17).

The insurance systems, indeed, is the focus of the essay by Albina Candian, who addresses this issue in the agriculture sector noting that a comparative analysis with the US systems shows a greater inclination to leave it to the autonomy, or rather the will, of the parties to fix the contours of the concepts of risk, damage and indemnity, while at least in the recent Italian jurisprudence a certain paternalism still prevails.

III. OTHER DIMENSIONS OF FOOD AND LAW

The path undertaken in reviewing the main issues related to food law leads us to consider an aspect which, once again, is linked to the glocal profile mentioned above, that is, the protection, at a global level, of local particularities. This can be seen in the so-called ‘food design’ in relation to the packaging and presentation of the food itself, which recalls, as Cesare Galli reminds us in his essay on food and intellectual property rights, a comprehensive approach.

On the same page are the considerations that invoke the need for international protection of agri-food products (Lucia Di Costanzo), the “taste industry” (Valeria Piergigli) and those relating to product traceability (Federico Pernazza and Pier Paolo Picarelli).

The latter issue is related to the use of new technologies, and in particular the blockchain type that is having widespread especially in the field of large-scale distribution. The topic of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) raises questions related to the circulation of models, as Andrea Stazi illustrates in his essay on GMOs and sustainability. Once again, traceability is based on the use of new technologies.

Still looking at technology, but from the point of view of social networks and mass media, we are introduced to the concept of 'food art', a recently exploded phenomenon that includes forms of creativity in the food sector. As the analysis on the protection of ‘creative dishes’ by Bruno Tassone and Marco Barbone shows us, the protection of the form of culinary works should be untied from the discipline of copyright and, rather, should be looked at in a transversal way, legally and geographically, referring to the concept of creativity.

Moreover, technological innovation is also central in the so-called “technological pools” and “clearinghouses”, where, through an agreement, the most relevant discoveries and information related to new plant varieties are shared, thus creating - as Laura Vagni shows us in her essay on the property of seeds - a collective management of intellectual property.

In a context in which the fruition even of food can become immediate thanks to the new means of information, it seems a paradox to affirm that it is necessary for the consumer to get the correct information. In fact, the proliferation in recent years of copious legislation on the subject of food labelling has caused misinformation due to an excess of information which - as Lorenzo Bairati illustrates in his essay on this topic - leads us to seek the solution in the virtuous collaboration between legislators and operators in the food sector, in a multidisciplinary sense.

Managing and taking advantage of the right information represents an important element in a balanced system, which means in turn contributing to having a sustainable system(18). The theme of sustainability is obviously central to the topic of food(19).

In this direction, therefore, it is longed that the intentions contained in the EU’s 2030 Agenda on the subject will be translated into concrete facts and will not be reduced to mere statements, or to real renunciations, by the European institutions, as happened with the decision to entrust business-to-consumer communication with an educational function (Silvia Bolognini).

The issue of sustainability, as mentioned, becomes vital in the agenda of the international community. The essay by Inigo del Guayo Castiella on food, energy and poverty shows us that there is an obvious interrelationship between food and energy as in the case of biofuels, i.e. fuels obtained indirectly from food crops, crop’s sugar or starch. Even if they are considered renewable energies by the European Union, and for this reason their use has been encouraged, at the same time they raise some concerns especially with regard to the exploitation of the land. Under this perspective, then, as underlined in this essay, “they negatively affect the fight against poverty”. The recent legislative intervention of the EU, however, gives hope for the future since it balances the environmental benefits of a sustainable biofuels industry and food.

A similar hope for a better future in terms of food sustainability comes also from the consumption of the “Novel Food” that represents a new resource and a new opportunity for the entire humanity in terms of fighting poverty (introducing new types of food in consideration of the growing number of under nutrition people) and in terms of protecting the environment, balancing the eco-system chain, as Lucia Scaffardi shows us in her analysis dedicated to the impact of novel food in the food system.

The challenge of sustainability also involves the profile of protecting consumers who are considered particularly vulnerable, such as minors. As Alessandro Palmieri illustrates in his essay based on a recent judgment by the Supreme Court in Chile, the issue of junk food and the increasingly felt need to fight it from various points of view, have led some legal systems - especially those of Latin America - to take significant actions in this direction, particularly with regard to the introduction of tax instruments aimed at dissuading the use of substances considered harmful.

State intervention plays a central role with reference to food in all its aspects and manifestations. The State’s intervention is also the central issue regarding the alcohol trade regulation in the essay by Giuseppe Rossi, where the “cultural issues” play a critical role as well. The reason of the State intervention stays in finding a proper balance between economic initiative in the food sector and consumer protection. Such necessity of protection is the one driving also the action in the fast-food litigation, as the analysis by Salvatore Sica and Luca Parriello shows us through the study of the instrument of civil liability in the US and in Europe.

The relationship between food and law would not be complete without considering the aspect of animals and their welfare, as the action by the European Union on promoting the improvement of farm animals and animals in general, in the last years, has demonstrated. It is worth remembering, indeed, that the Lisbon Treaty has introduced the recognition of animals as ‘sentient beings’, opening a new chapter in the reflection regarding animals and their relationships(20). Under this profile, therefore, animals are not seen simply only as object of food consumption, but also as rights bearers, with all the issues related to this new perspective.

For the scholars, this is quite a recent theme that however offers interesting and complex chances of investigation. From a general overview on the legal framework in China (as provided in the analysis by Mauro Mazza), the message regards the necessity of applying the principle of equality even beyond the barrier of species (as Francesca Rescigno shows us in her essay). This, implies, more generally, abandoning an anthropocentric perspective to embrace, instead, a more comprehensive one, in favor of the animals, and recognize their own specific status in the legal system (as indicated by Francesco Paolo Traisci, Fiore Fontanarosa).

IV. ONE RECIPE FOR THE FUTURE

Food law can and must interpret the challenges that globalization poses to the scholars. It could easily be objected that this is a rhetorical phrase, however, the reading of the essays mentioned above fully supports this statement.

We have seen how the theme of food law is closely linked to a dimension which is naturally local and, at the same time, necessarily global, with the consequences that this status entails. It is necessary, then, to adopt a new perspective that is able to take into consideration all the related aspects without forgetting the role of the law in promoting and guaranteeing the protection of rights. These latter concern as we have seen, the most diverse subjects operating in the agri-food system (consumers – more or less weak – animals, stakeholders, States, international organizations), the different processes related to the production, the information and the sharing system and the market in general.

In a context where the temporal and spatial dimensions seem to be thinning out, the key word to describe this new perspective could be found in innovation.

Indeed, this is considered to be one of the critical elements that contribute to improve the quality of life also by the international community: innovation is encouraged in a number of diverse areas such as, for example, fighting poverty, improving education or creating inclusive finance for the economic system of the developing countries.

Consequently, technology could represent the instrument able to ‘interpret’ this new perspective. The specific context we refer to is that of advanced distributed ledger technologies, where blockchain is the best known and most widely used type at the moment. This technology has been used in a variety of diverse areas thanks to its particular characteristics: immutability, decentralization and transparency(21). These qualities can improve significantly the food and the agriculture sector, as also a recent study commissioned by the FAO U.N. Agency has shown(22).

Blockchain can be useful for fighting hunger, for creating better chance of transparent supply chains, for educating young generations, for a better traceability of products and for a better protection of consumers(23). The possibility of recording every step of every process given by this system ensures that sustainability standards are improved, as well as data on the quality, safety, potential diseases, are at disposal of the competent authorities. Digital food platforms using blockchain can reduce costs and risks for seller and banks and, at the same time, reach more efficiency in the supply chains.

Alongside these undoubted advantages, however, it must not be forgotten that the use of this technology presupposes that the users can access the services of the Internet. Although aware that millions of people still do not enjoy this privilege(24), we cannot fail to observe that blockchain technology can nevertheless represent a concrete opportunity for the international community to achieve the objectives of sustainability in the food sector, which have long been the subject of programs and statements of the major world organizations, as well of the scholars (25).

NOTAS:

((). This paper develops from the reading of the two volumes Cibo e diritto. Una prospettiva comparata, edited by L. Scaffardi and V. Zeno Zencovich, Collana Consumatori e Mercato, n. 10, Roma, 2020.

(1). See, http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/1440498/icode/. In particular, the observations contained in the analysis “Tracking progress on food and agriculture-related SG indicators” of 2021, in http://www.fao.org/sdg-progress-report/2021/en/, where the most critical areas are indicated (for example, high food proportion of food lost in the supply chain, disadvantages of the small-scale food producers…). See, also, the study conducted by the World Food Program (WFP), at https://docs.wfp.org/api/documents/WFP-0000114546/download/?_ga=2.218572058.2084351837.1589121765-2136095440.1589121765, that confirms this unfortunate provision.

(2). On the evolution of food law also in terms of studying this subject, among the others, see M. Ferrari, U. Izzo, Diritto alimentare comparato, Bologna, il Mulino, 2012; F. Leonini, M. Tallacchini, M. Ferrari (eds.), Innovating Food, Innovating the Law, Tricase, Hoepli, 2014; N. Fortin, Food Regulation – Law, Science, Policy, and Practice, New Jersey, Wiley, 2009; B. Van Der Meulen (ed.), EU Food Law Handbook, Wageningen, 2014; L. Costato, F. Albisinni (eds.), European and Global Food Law, Padova, CEDAM, 2016; F. Aversano, Concorrenza Sicurezza e Food Law. Per una disciplina della diversità, Napoli, Jovene, 2018. P. Hutt, R. Merrill, L. Grossman, Food and Drug Law – Cases and Materials, St. Paul (MN), West Academic, 4th ed., 2014, passim, affirm that people decide what to eat “based on a rough negotiation – a pushing and tugging between three factors: identity, convenience and responsibility”. See, also, F. Albisinni, Strumentario di diritto alimentare europeo, Milano, Giuffrè, 2018, p. 19 ss., who, with regard to food law, stresses the autonomy of the discipline and, at the same time, “a plurality of purposes”, resulting in "a transversal nature of the discipline, which covers several areas of need and several sectors, and for this reason takes on new or innovatively configured models and regulatory tools”.

(3). FAO, OIE and WHO have been working together for years to address the risks at the human-animal-ecosystems interface. Their collaborative work was formally laid down in 2010 in the FAO/OIE/WHO Tripartite Concept Note. In 2017 these organizations enlarged the scope of their collaboration with an ambitious program that, among the multiple goals, aims also at reinforcing the national services in human health. Finally, on September 2021, the One Health approach has been praised during the G20 Conference by the FAO President. See, in this regard, http://www.fao.org/news/story/it/item/1437726/icode/.

(4). Regulation (UE) 2017/625 by the European Parliament and the European Council, 15 March 2017. See also F. Albisinni, “Regulation (EU) 2017/625: Official Controls, Life, Responsibilities, and Globalization”, in European Food and Feed Law Review, 2019, p. 118.

(5). Many conferences around the world have taken place and many centers have been created at universities. All concern the specific relationship between food and law. Consequently, also the written production increased proportionally. See, for example, S. Mancuso, Law and Food. Regulatory Recipes of Culinary Issues, Routledege, 2021; Id., The Language of Law and Food. Metaphors of Recipes and Rules, Routledege, 2021; AIDA, Innovation in agri-food law between technology and comparison, Milano, 2019. Interestingly, also overseas there is an increasing interest on this topic. UCLA Law School founded the new Resnick Program for Food Law and Policy, Harvard Law School has a new Food Law and Policy Clinic, as well as the long-established program like Michigan State's Institute for Food Laws and Regulations.

(6). F. Albisinni, in his essay “Diritto agro-alimentare e metodo comparativo: oggetto, strumenti e prospettive”, in L. Scaffardi, V. Zeno-Zencovich (eds.), Cibo e diritto. Una prospettiva comparata, cit., p. 191 ss., reminds us of the doubts about the area where to consider this subject belonging to: administrative law or criminal law, as happened in the past if we look at food as a set of technical rules; agri-food law, as the present orientation seems to be, and in this case, it is necessary to consider the protection of health as a relevant profile, but not the only one.

(7). F. Albisinni, “Agri-Food Law and Comparative Tools in Global Market”, in Cardozo Electronic Law Bulletin, 26, 2020, p. 4 ss., affirms that “Italian scholars of agricultural law in fact always looked with interest at the comparison with foreign experiences” and that “Agri-Food Law, by its nature, implies a comparative approach, as a necessary tool to know and share models and tools”. This last thought has been already underlined by the scholars starting from the 60’s. See, in this regard, E.J. Bigwood, A. Gerard, Fundamental principles and Objectives of a Comparative Food Law, New York, CUP, 1967, passim.

(8). According to the Oxford dictionary definition, it is “a portmanteau term (globalization + localization)”. It is defined as “A term that emphasizes that these two concepts do not exist in polar opposition, but rather that they operate in mutual interdependence in a globalized world. Typified by the slogan, ‘Think globally, act locally’. See, https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095855473. The concept comes from the Japanese term dochakuka that means global localization and was then adopted in the business environment. It then appeared in the Harvard Business review in the late 80s and was introduced in the 90s by the sociologist Roland Robertson during a conference. See, R. Robertson, “Glocalization: Time – Space and Homogeneity – Heterogeneity”, in M. Feathersone, S. Lash, R. Robertson (Eds.), Global Modernities, London, SAGE, 1995, pp. 15.

(9). An interesting example is offered by the case of the English language. English has spread around the world and, in some cases, it has transformed adjusting to the local needs, as in the case of Mainland China. In this regard, see, X. Shi, “The Glocalization of English: A Chinese Case Study”, in Journal of Developing Societies, 29, 2, 2013, pp. 89-122.

(10). McDonald’s entered the Indian and Chinese market offering rice meals in its menu. This has been done after market research that showed the market’s requirements for a successful take away. On the other hand, this can be also a costly process since it requires the standards processes to be adapted to cultural and local needs. See, A. Crawford, S.A. Humphries, M.M. Geddy, “McDonald’s: A Case Study in Glocalization”, in Journal of Global Business Issues, 9, 1, 2015, pp. 11 ss.

(11). G. Han – A. Zhang, Starbucks is forbidden in the Forbidden city: blog, circuit of culture and informal public relations campaign in China, in Public Relations Review, 2009, vol. 35, n. 4, pp. 395 ss.

(12). R. Pravettoni, “Il cibo come elemento di identità culturale nel processo migratorio”, in http://www.globalgeografia.it/temi/pravettoni.pdf; A. Denuzzo, “Cibo e patrimonio culturale: alcune annotazioni”, in Aedon, 1, 2017.

(13). See, in this regard, the Guide published by the European Court of Human Rights, Guide on Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights Freedom of thought, conscience and religion, 31 August 2021, in https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Guide_Art_9_ENG.pdf.

(14). Casamitjana v. League Against Cruel Sports, 17 gennaio 2020, ([2020] UKET 3331129/2018).

(15). Decision 5.COM 6.41, Mediterranean Diet. “The Mediterranean diet (from the Greek diaita, or way of life) encompasses more than just food. It promotes social interaction, since communal meals are the cornerstone of social customs and festive events. It has given rise to a considerable body of knowledge, songs, maxims, tales and legends. The system is rooted in respect for the territory and biodiversity and ensures the conservation and development of traditional activities and crafts linked to fishing and farming in the Mediterranean communities […]”. See, http://www.unesco.org/culture/ich/index.php?lg=en&pg=00272.

(16). See L. Costato, “Preambolo, in Commentario al regolamento (CE) n.178/2002 del 28 gennaio 2002”, a cura dell’IDAIC, in Le nuove leggi civili commentate, 2003, p. 1.

(17). A. Palmieri, “La responsabilità dell’impresa alimentare”, in L. Paoloni (eds), Alimenti, danno e responsabilità, Milano, FrancoAngeli, 2008, p. 93 ss.

(18). See, “The right to food, cornerstone towards sustainable systems”, in https://www.fao.org/right-to-food/news/news-detail/en/c/1402274/, where the FAO organization address the concept of sustainability also enlightening the need to access the right and all the information related to food. See, also, more generally in terms of food security, E.M. Berry, S. Dernini – B. Burlingame, A. Meybeck, P. Conforti, Food security and sustainability: can one exist without the other?, Cambridge, CUP, 2016, passim.

(19). The theme is certainly vast. In this regard, we refer to the official statement by the FAO, in https://www.fao.org/sustainability/en/, on the 5 key principles of sustainability for food and agriculture: increase productivity and employment, protect and enhance natural resources, improve livelihoods and foster inclusive economic growth, adapt governance to new challenges. Also, the E.U. set up a strategy on this topic particularly focused on the protection of the environment, healthy food for everyone and ensuring farmers’ livelihood. See, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/society/20200519STO79425/creating-a-sustainable-food-system-the-eu-s-strategy.

(20). The first step taken by the E.U. in the direction of the promotion of animal welfare was in 1998, with the Council Directive 98/58/EC on the protection of animals kept for farming purposes which gave general rules for the protection of animals of all species kept for the production of food, wool, skin or fur or for other farming purposes, including fish, reptiles or amphibians. These rules reflect the so-called ‘Five Freedoms’: freedom from hunger and thirst, freedom from discomfort, freedom from pain, injury and disease, freedom to express normal behaviour and freedom from fear and distress. With the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, as said, the concept of animal welfare has been formally introduced, as stated in Art. 13, Title II. See, https://ec.europa.eu/food/animals/animal-welfare_en.

(21). C. Cachin, M. Vukolic, “Blockchain Consensus Protocols in the Wild”, in https://arxiv. org/abs/ 1707.01873, 2017, who affirm that “A blockchain is a distributed ledger for recording transactions, maintained by many nodes without central authority through a distributed cryptographic protocol. All nodes validate the information to be appended to the blockchain, and a consensus protocol ensures that the nodes agree on a unique order in which entries are appended”. See also, among the other, G. Pascuzzi, Il diritto dell’era digitale, Bologna, il Mulino, 2020, p. 279 ss.

(22). The publication by FAO aims to facilitate a better understanding of the opportunities, benefits and applications of DLTs in agri-foods. It explores the potential of DLTs to address many of the challenges that disadvantaged market players face by participating in integrated supply chains. It also identifies the technical limits, possible institutional barriers to their adoption and the way forward for the public sector. Overall, it shows how DLTs can be an impetus to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). See https://www.fao.org/policy-support/tools-and-publications/resources-details/en/c/1330492/.

(23). See the project by the World Food Program, https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/cefact/OtherMeetings/2018/BlockChainForTradeFacilitation_Geneva/03_GiovanniPio-Blockchain.pdf.

(24). See, https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/05/1092312, the U.N. report of July 2021 that shows how reaching people in terms of new technologies, does more than urban migration in providing better jobs and standards of living.

(25). Ex multis, on the benefits of using the blockchain technology, see P. De Filippi, A. Wright, Blockchain and the Law, Cambridge, CUP, 2018, passim.