Research

INTRODUCTION: FOOD SYSTEMS AND CHILDREN

Food systems are made up of actors and activities involved in “the production, aggregation, processing, distribution, consumption and disposal [loss or waste] of food products that originate from agriculture [including livestock], forestry or fisheries, and food industries, and the broader economic, societal and natural environments in which they are embedded” (von Braun et al. 2021:8). Sustainable food systems should provide food and nutrition security and decent livelihoods while respecting the planetary boundaries. The current global food systems largely fall short of these goals, and a transition to environmentally sustainable and socially just systems is required. Changes in land use patterns, more resource-efficient production methods and technologies, and plant-based dietary changes are needed (IPCC 2019, Kaljonen et al. 2021, Ortiz et al. 2021). Biodiversity loss must be stopped because it undermines the resilience of agricultural systems to pests and pathogens, and the climate crisis poses a serious risk to global food security (Government of Nepal 2014, IPBES 2019, Libert Amico et al. 2020).

In addition to environmental problems, food systems suffer from deep social injustices related to the inequitable distribution of wealth, power, and income (Gottlieb and Joshi 2010, Walsh-Dilley et al. 2016, Gilson and Kenehan 2018, Glennie and Alkon 2018, Kaljonen et al. 2021). Anderson (2008) has proposed the concept of a rights-based food system, arguing that food system reforms can help achieve human rights. According to Raza et al. (2020), current debates on food systems transformation do not prioritize children and adolescents. Previous literature on children and food systems has addressed healthy diets (e.g., Hawkes et al. 2020) but not specifically focused on children’s rights in the context of food systems.

In this article we take a children’s perspective to food system outputs and outcomes. We argue that several problems of the food system are directly or indirectly concerning the realization of children’s rights. Moreover, children’s rights place a duty on states and responsibilities on businesses (UN 2011) to transform food systems. We take the obligations of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC; UN General Assembly 1989) as a yardstick against which we discuss food system problems. We ask the following two research questions: (1) How do current food systems violate children’s rights? (2) How can states respect, protect, and fulfill children’s rights and address the problems?

Through five case studies from across the world, we search for answers to our research questions and exemplify how food system structures and activities can and should be either restricted/reformulated or promoted/supported by states to produce more favorable food system outputs and outcomes for children.

In line with international human rights law, we understand human rights law to recognize rights of people and specific groups such as indigenous peoples and establish rights-based duties for states and responsibilities on businesses. For identifying the relevant duties, we apply a legal-doctrinal method (Smits 2017, Egan 2018), which involves the analysis of authoritative texts, including case law, statutes, and other legal documentation. The primary materials consist of human rights law itself: we study how the existing law on children’s rights—as guaranteed by the CRC and other human rights conventions, UN bodies, and regional and national courts—sets duties and demands on states to make food systems more sustainable. This is a normative approach that as a result defines imperatives for states for transforming food systems. Human rights law constitutes a basis for modifying whole systems concerning food production and consumption. Although human rights do not automatically result in the improvement of food systems, a children’s rights approach is useful in detecting problems, understanding how different challenges related to food systems are interconnected, and detecting priority entry points for tackling these problems.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: HUMAN RIGHTS AS INSTRUMENTS FOR ADDRESSING FOOD SYSTEM PROBLEMS

In the face of current food system outputs and outcomes that are often negative for humans and for the environment as well their unsustainable development pathways, research has explored the need for food system transitions (De Schutter et al. 2020, Galli et al. 2020). Just transition includes that the transition to more environmentally sustainable systems must not exacerbate existing social problems (ILO 2015, European Commission 2019, UN Climate Change Conference 2021). Human rights are arguably some of the clearest standards against which to measure and monitor the justice dimensions in the targets and processes of food system sustainability transitions (FIAN 2023) and sustainability transitions in general (Lähteenmäki-Uutela et al. 2021).

In this article, we use children’s rights standards to identify the problems of food systems. A similar approach of defining problems as children’s rights issues has been used in previous research in relation to themes such as children’s health (Waterston and Goldhagen 2007), child maltreatment (Reading et al. 2009), and environmental justice and environmental health policy (Chesney and Duderstadt 2022).

We rely on the established conception of human rights as binding obligations that the state is committed to meet as it becomes a party of a human rights treaty (UN 1969). At the same time, human rights are the result of negotiations between states and should not be seen in an idealized light (Coomans et al. 2010). The meaning of human rights can be disputed and contested (e.g., Dembour 2010), and their content is ultimately defined when applied to a particular context. Moreover, human rights are conceived in relation to a particular conception of the state. Human rights treaties, such as the CRC, are based on an understanding of an active state who is the duty-bearer and is responsible for respecting, protecting, and fulfilling the human rights recognized in law (see Eide 1987, Kälin and Künzli 2019). In addition to negative obligations that require the state to not interfere in the enjoyment of human rights, human rights also create positive obligations that require active measures from the state (Shelton and Gould 2013). The understanding of the subject of human rights law has been broadened to children, for example, but criticism of human rights still questions the premises of human rights law, such as the focus on the liberal, individual subject of rights (e.g., Grear 2011, Moyn 2018). Moreover, in the context of children’s rights research, it has been argued that a focus on implementation of human rights standards without problematizing them assumes a consensus on the content of rights (Reynaert et al. 2012, Quennerstedt 2013). The existence of human rights instruments does not automatically result in a better protection of human rights (Hathaway 2002). Recognizing the relevant rights is a starting point for rights to be effective and realized in daily practices (Kindornay et al. 2012). The realization of human rights also depends on available resources. States have different ways to support the realization of rights. Lower-level laws and public budgets are central tools for realizing the imperatives set by human rights and constitutional law. However, there are limited mechanisms for rights-holders and their defenders to ensure the compliance of states with human rights standards. The CRC is not strong on access to justice and does not provide children a specific right to an effective remedy (Liefaard 2019).

In a rights-based food system (Anderson 2008), all actions are evaluated in relation to the rights of different groups of right-holders and human rights obligations of sates and responsibilities of businesses. Walsh-Dilley et al. (2016) suggest a combination of a rights-based approach and resilience thinking to advance food sovereignty and environmental justice. In food systems justice literature, Borras and Franco (2018) suggest that agrarian justice and climate justice should be considered. Concerning children’s rights, the right to nutritious food has been acknowledged (Cardenas et al. 2019), as well as the connection between environmental sustainability and children’s rights (e.g., Fenton-Glynn 2019). Kim et al. (2020) discuss how the food system is relevant for all domains of child well-being: physical, mental, social, spiritual, and moral. Lewis (2023) uses the term “future generations” as a broad concept that includes children and youth today through to generations to come and argues that both individual and collective dimensions need to be acknowledged, and in analyzing the potential of existing laws individual impacts and collective experience may need to be distinguished.

Despite the challenges related to the justification, content, and impact of human rights, human rights provide a useful angle from which to analyze the problems of food systems and empower children to access information, participate in environmental matters, and hold accountable duty-bearers when they do not comply with commitments that states have set for themselves (Baber and May 2023). Koh et al. (2022) see that international human rights law can strengthen international environmental law, for example, through bringing citizen participation in focus. The universality and bindingness of human rights standards make them relevant in identifying which aspects of children’s lives are endangered by environmental and social problems. Human rights standards can contribute to influencing policies and enforcing accountability (similarly, see Reading et al. 2009), although the realization of human rights depends on several factors. The fact that children themselves (Global Youth Biodiversity Network 2022), NGOs (WWF 2018), and courts (Held vs. State of Montana, Ashgar Leghari v. Federation of Pakistan) refer to the rights of children as setting duties for the state and for broader society shows how such binding rights are wanted and needed. Even some companies operating in food systems analyze their human rights impacts (Global Child Forum 2022), yet many of our case studies in the next section reveal that business profits may typically clash with the rights of children and future generations.

The most important global document concerning children’s rights is the 1989 UN CRC, which is legally binding for states that have ratified it (all countries except the United States). The CRC is important in underscoring that children are independent rights-holders. The Convention protects all persons under the age of 18, but states can set a lower age of majority (Article 1). The CRC protects a wide range of substantive rights (civil-political and economic, social and cultural rights) as well as procedural rights. The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child is the treaty body that monitors states parties’ compliance with the Convention. The recommendations are non-binding (Kanetake 2018), yet by ratifying a treaty, states accept that its content is determined through the interpretations of the monitoring body (O’Flaherty 2006). Because states cannot be compelled to act, they must be sufficiently motivated to accept the Committee’s recommendations. In addition to the CRC, children’s rights are also guaranteed in other human rights treaties, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (United Nations 1966a) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (United Nations 1966b). Moreover, regional human rights protection systems are relevant too. In Table 1, we list central CRC articles that are closely connected to food system outputs and outcomes.

Other relevant CRC provisions include the obligation to provide the child with the necessary protection and care for the child’s well-being (Article 3.2), evolving capacities of the child (Article 5), right to freedom of expression, including the right to seek, receive, and import information (Article 13), freedom of thought, conscience, and religion (Article 14), freedom of association and peaceful assembly (Article 15), protection of privacy, family, home, and correspondence (Article 16), access to information through mass media, especially those aimed at the promotion of the child’s social, spiritual, and moral well-being and physical and mental health (Article 17), protection from all forms of violence, including maltreatment and exploitation (Article 19), the rights of disabled children (Article 23), right to education (Articles 28 and 29), rights of children of minorities or of indigenous peoples (Article 30), right to rest and leisure (Article 31), and right to be protected from any kind of abuse or exploitation (Articles 34-36, 39).

The obligation to consider the best interests of the child in all actions concerning children is essentially procedural (Sormunen 2020), which means that a systematic assessment of children’s interests and rights must be integrated in decision-making processes, also in areas indirectly affecting children (UN Committee on the Rights of the Child 2013a). Both best interests and participation rights aim to compensate for children’s vulnerability and lack of standing. Children’s rights need to be considered and children need to be heard when setting the targets for food system outputs and outcomes. The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (2023), in its recent General Comment 26, acknowledges that the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment is profoundly important for children and considers that toward the realization of this right for children, states should immediately take action to “Transform industrial agriculture and fisheries to produce healthy and sustainable food aimed at preventing malnutrition and promoting children’s growth and development ...” (para 65c). The UN consultation process for General Comment 26 was supported by a diverse children’s advisory team with 16,331 contributions from children in 121 countries. Children as biosphere defenders can contribute to translating biocultural values of ecosystems into evidence to inform legal and institutional decision making at various scales (Ituarte-Lima 2023, Ituarte-Lima et al. 2023).

CASE STUDIES ON CHILDREN’S RIGHTS IN FOOD SYSTEMS

Food systems and problems for children

All parts of the food system have structures and activities that cause problems for the realization of children’s rights: input industry, primary production, manufacturing, retail, and consumer marketing. Table 2 is not comprehensive but lists major problems that can cause violations of the rights of the child as defined in the CRC.

We selected five case studies to zoom into. We chose the cases to represent different parts of the food system, different parts of the world, different substantive rights entry points, and different regulatory and informational tools employed by states to improve the situation.

Case 1: Right to food of indigenous children in Australia and Muslim children in Spain.
Case 2: Right to health and tackling obesity and marketing of unhealthy food in Mexico.
Case 3: Right to a healthy environment affected by the climate crisis, agricultural subsidies.
Case 4: Right to health and a healthy environment impacted by pesticides in Costa Rica.
Case 5: Freedom from child labor in the context of international trade, Mali cocoa farms.

Case study 1: Right to food of indigenous children in Australia and Muslim children in Spain

Children’s right of access to nutritious food is a fundamental human right. Inaccessibility to nutritious food not only brings about serious health-related issues but also impacts children’s physical, cognitive, and psycho-social development. These can have detrimental effects on their overall well-being.

Ideally, food systems should provide food and nutritional security for all, defined as access to a stable supply of nutritious food (Oshaug et al. 1994, FAO 2018). Children’s health is however impacted by deficiencies, excesses, or imbalances in their intake of nutrients, i.e., malnutrition (Shetty 2006, Saunders et al. 2015, Scrinis 2020). One billion children worldwide are currently affected by various forms of malnutrition. Overall, two out of three children do not receive a diet that is diverse enough for healthy growth and development. Hunger can be categorized into stunting (low weight-for-age) and wasting (low weight-for-height; WHO 2021a). About 45% of all child deaths are linked to malnutrition (WHO 2021a). Stunting and wasting affects almost 200 million children globally. In addition, over 340 million children worldwide are affected by vitamin and mineral deficiencies. Malnutrition experienced at an early age can lead to enduring problems later in life as malnourished children have poorer motor and cognitive development and educational outcomes (WHO 2021a).

Childhood hunger is a problem that typically affects the whole family, yet women and girls tend to be disproportionally affected. Hunger is mainly a problem of poverty and the lack of resilience of individuals, communities, and countries to vulnerabilities and shocks such as the impacts of the climate crisis. Failure to earn a decent living may be due to a lack of access to land, overexploitation of natural resources, lack of education, or lack of health and healthcare. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated all forms of malnutrition globally, because of declining household income and disruptions in nutrition services (Headey et al. 2020, UNICEF/WHO/World Bank 2021). The childhood hunger problem also exists in the poorest households of the richest countries, although it is not always recognized (Henry 2020).

Early interventions can effectively improve not only children’s health and well-being caused by malnutrition but also children’s dietary knowledge, attitude, and behavior. In 2021, UNICEF teamed up with the Young and Resilient Research Centre in Western Sydney University in Australia and facilitated a comprehensive participatory workshop using dialogue with school-aged children and adolescents. The workshop aimed to understand how children and adolescents, hailing from 18 different countries and from diverse backgrounds, experience food poverty and climate change within the food system. Over 700 participants aged between 10 and 19 shared their lived experiences and perspectives on the food systems, highlighting the shortcomings in the current food system. Alongside the workshops, UNICEF carried out a U-Report Poll involving 22,561 children and youth across 23 countries. Both the workshop and the poll shed light on several key challenges, particularly the need for better availability, affordability, and accessibility of nutritious food to children. They also highlighted the growing concern for environmental harm caused by the food system. Improving accessibility to nutritious food and clean water is essential. Solutions include local production, school-based intervention, and improving food distribution infrastructure (Fleming et al. 2021).

In Australia, a significant issue is the impact of poor nutrition on indigenous communities and children particularly in rural areas (Gwynn et al. 2012, Brimblecombe et al. 2019, Kagie et al. 2019). Poor oral health is a related concern (Butten et al. 2019, Poirier et al. 2022). Lacking adequate accessibility to nutritious food and racial discrimination (Shepherd et al. 2017) have been identified among the causes of poor health. Browne et al. (2020) looked at various causes and solutions, such as interpretive food labeling that gives at-a-glance health guidance (e.g., Nutri-Score in Europe or Health Star Rating in Australia), and comprehensive school and child care center-based interventions. The study also explored food retail and store sales to evaluate the impact of accessibility of nutritious food to indigenous children. It revealed an alarming rate of consumption of confectionery and sugar sweetened products. The study provides concrete evidence for a multisectoral food system intervention to boost the availability of nutritious food such as fruits and vegetables in stores in rural areas. Community store owners would require further support to sell healthier options to keep the business afloat (Browne et al 2020). School-based nutrition programs are important in offering an ideal setting to facilitate dietary behavioral change as children spend a considerable time in schools learning as well as consuming meals. Browne et al. (2020) show how a peer program involving older children mentoring and guiding young students toward a healthier lifestyle can help. A children’s rights-based approach contributes to creating the way forward to overcome nutritional deficiencies amongst indigenous children.

Freedom of religion has a connection to the right to food because religions have their food traditions. According to Article 14.1 of the CRC, “States Parties shall respect the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.” Public schools should ideally provide meals that do not violate the religious traditions of practicing children to not force the child to compromise between malnutrition and spirituality. In Spain, for example, there is an Agreement of the Islamic Commission in Spain (Acuerdo de la Comisión Islámica de Espaňa) incorporated into Spanish national legislation via the Act No. 26/1992, which stipulates that if Muslim children so request, both public and private schools will seek to adapt dietary habits to Islamic religious norms including the fasting period of Ramadan (Robles Guitiérrez 2020). Yet the Spanish Constitutional Court (Tribunal Constitucional) in its decision of 16 June 2015, argued that requiring school canteens to provide halal meals on a regular basis would be disproportionate in terms of the associated costs. Proponents for inclusive catering say that in Strasbourg, France, halal meals are routinely offered at a cost that is only slightly higher than pork meals (Amérigo Cuervo-Arango 2016).

Case study 2: Right to health and tackling obesity and marketing of unhealthy food in Mexico

Obesity is a form of malnutrition. A total of over 340 million children and adolescents are obese or overweight. Obesity and related diseases affect 40 million children under 5 years globally. Childhood obesity has been on the UN agenda already for years (WHO 2010, UN Committee on the Rights of the Child 2013b) because it causes various non-communicable diseases, such as cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, musculoskeletal disorders, and the likelihood of certain cancers is elevated. The number of obese children is steadily growing (UNICEF 2019, World Obesity Federation 2019). Obesity has become more common also in low- and middle-income countries, particularly in urban areas. Different forms of malnutrition can and do exist within the same regions, communities, and even within the same households (WHO 2021b). It is noteworthy that all three forms of malnutrition, stunting, wasting, and obesity, affect Asian and African children the most (UNICEF/WHO/World Bank 2023).

Nutrition education enables a child to develop the skills and knowledge necessary to make informed food choices and maintain a healthy weight (Onur et al. 2021). Right to nutritious food and the right to information are thus interconnected. Currently, nutrition education does not seem to be part of standard school curricula worldwide (Abril-Valdez et al. 2012, Follong et al. 2020, Gonzáles et al. 2020, Davis et al. 2021). Further, nutritious food must be accessible and affordable for the family. Food deserts are geographic areas where access to affordable, healthy food options such as fresh fruits and vegetables is limited or non-existent because grocery stores are remote (Beaulac et al. 2009). Some suggested solutions to the food desert issue include government-run supermarkets, community gardens, farm to school models, mobile markets, and improved public transportation (Rural Health Information Hub 2020).

Food marketing practices play a role in childhood obesity. Currently, most food marketing targeting adolescents is on unhealthy foods. The rights of the child can be interpreted as setting states a duty to restrict or prohibit the marketing of unhealthy foods to children (WHO 2010, 2016, 2018, Handsley and Reeve 2018, UNICEF 2018, Tatlow-Golden and Garde 2020). Some countries already prohibit such marketing (see WHO 2018, Smith Taillie et al. 2019). It is particularly important to regulate the digital environment in which children can spend a major part of their time (WHO 2018, UN Committee on the Rights of the Child 2021).

Mexico is one country that has attempted to regulate junk food marketing, referring to the rights of children. The Mexican Ministry of Health also adopted specific regulations to limit child exposure to advertisements of junk food on TV as a measure to prevent childhood obesity and diabetes. As of mid-2014 the new measures were put in place banning the advertisement of four unhealthy food categories (sweet drinks, snacks, confectionery, and chocolates) between 2.30 PM and 7.30 PM on working days and between 7 AM and 7.30 PM on weekends (Secretaría de Salud 2014). Whereas limiting advertisements of unhealthy foodstuffs in Mexico is crucial because children spend more than four and a half hours per day watching TV, it is not sufficient as unhealthy food options make their way to Mexican television via product placement during the streaming time, outside the advertisement slots. In the food and beverages categories, product placement targeted at children promotes products high in saturated fat, sugar, or sodium (Munguía-Serrano et al. 2020). Regulation has banned unhealthy food from schools. Unhealthy foodstuffs are still advertised and offered in the neighborhoods of school buildings. A field study revealed that there are fewer unhealthy food options around private schools than in the vicinity of their public counterparts (Barquera et al. 2018).

Some Mexican provinces have banned the sale of unhealthy foods and beverages to children altogether (National Law Review 2021). Larrañaga (2021, blog post, https://www.rwjf.org/en/insights/blog/2021/12/in-mexico-healthy-food-is-a-childs-right.html) describes how regulation started as a grassroots movement ignited by the strong community advocacy of 13 different indigenous groups in Oaxaca to protect children’s health and prevent the displacement of traditional foods rooted in indigenous cultures. Indigenous groups started a fight to stop deliveries of sugary drinks and junk food to the local stores (Larrañaga 2021). Now provincial laws prohibit donations, sales, and supplies of sugary drinks and high-calorie packaged foods such as chips and candy to consumers under 18. Labelling law supports the sales bans: junk foods also carry black stop signs and written warnings. The anti-junk movement interestingly referred not to public health but to children’s rights. The food and beverage industry has resisted and continues to resist any junk food marketing bans in Mexico (Forbes News 2020) and elsewhere (Fogelholm et al. 2021, FDI World Dental Federation 2023).

Case study 3: Right to a healthy environment affected by the climate crisis, agricultural subsidies

According to a 2021 United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF) report (UNICEF 2021), one billion children are at “extremely high risk” from the impacts of the climate crisis. That is more than half of the world’s children. The climate crisis causes sea-level rise, severe storms, and flooding. Rising sea levels are estimated to threaten nearly 200 million children, particularly in coastal Asia by the year 2100 (Kulp and Strauss 2019). More than 500 million children live in areas that are extremely vulnerable to flooding, and approximately 115 million children live in areas of high or extremely high risk of tropical cyclones (UN Committee on the Rights of the Child 2018). With crops failing and fish catches diminishing, many girls are forced to marry for food security as climate and environmental crises often hit the regions where childhood marriages are already a problem (Pope et al. 2023, Brides of the Sun project [date unknown]).

The Paris Agreement (UN Climate Change Conference 2021) is a major yardstick for defining the rights-based duties of governments concerning the climate crisis (Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights 2021). The legal duty of states to fight the climate crisis to protect the rights of children has been recognized by several courts and human rights bodies. To meet their obligations, states “must adopt and implement policies aimed at reducing emissions” (UN Joint Statement 2019). Children have recently brought climate cases to national and international bodies, claiming that the climate crisis violates their human rights and that governments should act to mitigate and adapt to the climate crisis. In Ashgar Leghari v. Federation of Pakistan 2015, for example, the Lahore High Court Green Bench declared climate change to raise serious concerns for food security, violating children’s right to life. In the context of the Philippines’ Commission on Human Rights’ landmark inquiry into the role of 47 fossil fuel companies, the so-called Carbon Majors, UNICEF Philippines (2017) argued that Carbon Majors have a responsibility to prevent harm and actively safeguard children rights. UNICEF based its arguments in the Convention on the Rights of the Child and other instruments. In one of the public hearings, part of this inquiry, a public official from the Philippines described how climate change led to fish migrating to higher latitudes, compromising food security and the realization of children’s rights in the tropics. Litigation by children themselves should not become a burden that interferes with their rights to education and leisure (see Rogers 2020, White and Callaghan-White 2021).

Agri-food systems are a major driver of the climate crisis: they produce a third of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions (Crippa et al. 2021, Hayek et al. 2021, Tubiello et al. 2022). Without lowering food system climate impacts, it will be impossible to reach the 1.5 goal or even the 2.0-degree goal (Clark et al. 2020). Food systems worsen the climate crisis through three major avenues: (1) land use change, i.e., converting forests and peatlands to agricultural production, (2) crop and livestock production (methane from cows and manure, nitrous oxide from fertilizers, energy use on farms), and (3) emissions in the rest of the supply chain (fertilizer production, food processing, transport, retail, consumption, and food waste disposal; Tubiello et al. 2022). Agriculture occupies 38% of global land surface (Foley et al. 2011), which means most of the habitable land on Earth. Of the land taken for agriculture, growing crops takes a third, and livestock grazing takes two thirds (FAO 2019).

To reduce the negative climate impacts of food systems, Willett et al. (2019) see three main avenues: technological solutions improving food production, a shift toward plant-dominant diets, and reducing food waste. Decreasing livestock numbers, improving livestock feed (Mottet et al. 2017), making fertilizer use more effective (Ren et al. 2022), and improving manure management (Montes et al. 2013) are changes that have been proposed. Sustainable soil management is important for water quality, biodiversity, climate change mitigation, and food security (European Court of Auditors 2023). Xiao et al. (2024) suggest how yield optimization, soil management and climate mitigation can be combined. Although mitigation of the climate crisis is urgent, policies are at the same time needed to support the climate adaptation of food systems to ensure food security (see, e.g., Antle and Capalbo 2010).

The case for reducing animal production and consumption in high-income, high-meat, and high-dairy consuming countries is overwhelmingly strong (Kim et al. 2020, Semba et al. 2020, Morris et al. 2021). In addition to environmental benefits, reducing animal-based food production may benefit children’s health also locally and directly. Children who live near ranches or attend school near concentrated livestock units are more likely to suffer from asthma than other children in Iowa (Merchant et al. 2005, Sigurdarson and Kline 2006). In the United States, the impacts of large factory farms are felt disproportionately in non-white communities and lower socioeconomic groups because factory farms are more likely located in proximity to minority and low-income communities (Son et al. 2021).

The amount and type of animal-source foods that best supports both nutritional and environmental goals depends on the local context (Beal et al. 2023). For low- and middle-income countries, it is important to recognize and mitigate the trade-offs between climate targets, the nutritional needs of children and adults, and the livelihood impacts of food systems. To replace parts of conventional animal-based food and to offer new livelihoods, plant-based proteins, microbial proteins, algae, insects, lab-grown meat, and other alternative protein sources and markets need to be developed in both high-income and low-income countries (Harwatt 2019, Sexton et al. 2019, Santo et al. 2020). It is not merely a national but a joint, global task to feed the global population while sparing land, lowering emissions, and saving biodiversity wherever possible.

Agricultural policy has a central role in the uptake of low-carbon farming and agroecological measures (Searchinger 2020). Yet, current policies strongly endorse diets that cause both environmental and health problems (Damania et al. 2023, Schläpfer and Lobsiger 2023). The UN resolutions and the various court verdicts such as the ones mentioned earlier can be interpreted as setting a clear duty to transform food systems toward significantly lower land use impacts and greenhouse gas emissions, which is not compatible with granting the most subsidies to production that harms the environment the most. Animal farming lobbies are strong, and as a rule, states currently fail to support sustainable alternatives (Vallone and Lambin 2023). We suggest a child rights-based approach to agricultural policy: children’s best interests should be given priority, and children should be heard in setting the policies.

The transition to climate neutral food systems must be just (McCauley and Heffron 2018, Krawchenko and Gordon 2021). Small farmers, wage laborers, and urban poor including their children are the main potential victims of low-carbon transitions (Bohle et al. 1994, Sovacool 2021). Support may be needed for adjusting to market requirements, finding new livelihoods, and/or shifting consumption.

Case study 4: Right to health and right to a healthy environment impacted by pesticides, Costa Rica

Pesticides have many undesirable effects on human health. They are responsible for an estimated high number of 200,000 acute poisoning deaths a year, of which 99% are in developing countries (Goldmann 2004, UN Special Rapporteur 2017). Pesticide exposure causes mental disorders, attention deficit, childhood cancers, miscarriages, and congenital malformation (Thrupp 1991, Defensoría de los Habitantes de Costa Rica 1998, Roberts et al. 2012, Chen et al. 2015, WHO 2017, Alkon et al. 2022). Children are more likely to suffer from pesticide-related health problems, because both the developmental and the behavioral risks are higher (Garry 2004). Children ingest more food, drink more water, and breathe more air than adults in relation to their size. Putting hands and objects into the mouth and playing outdoors can increase children’s exposure to environmental contaminants.

All human rights ultimately depend on a healthy biosphere (UN Committee on the Rights of the Child 2012, UN Human Rights Committee 2019, UN Special Rapporteur 2021), and pesticides destabilize ecosystems. Runoff from fields pollutes the surrounding ecosystem, and reductions in pest populations upset the balance in food chains. Pesticides decrease soil biodiversity and contribute to nitrogen fixation, both of which can lead to large declines in crop yields and thereby threaten the right to food (UN Special Rapporteur 2017).

Although the negative impacts of pesticides on humans and ecosystems have been demonstrated by scientists, the “systematic denial, fueled by the pesticide and agroindustry” and the “aggressive, unethical marketing tactics” have led to inadequate global and local regulation (UN Special Rapporteur 2017:3-4). Three powerful corporations, Monsanto and Bayer, Dow and Dupont, and Syngenta and ChemChina, control more than 65% of global pesticide sales and at the same time, they also control 61% of commercial seed sales. The power of these companies has “paralyzed pesticide restrictions globally” (UN Special Rapporteur 2017:18). Companies are accused of manufacturing evidence, buying scientists, and bribing research institutions. With regard to neonicotinoids and bees, Syngenta threatened to sue individual European Union officials. Studying the impacts of pesticides can even be dangerous for the scientist (UN Special Rapporteur 2017). With this thematic report, the UN Special Rapporteur places a spotlight on how pesticides seriously affect a wide range of rights and clarifies the obligations of states including legislators in tackling this situation.

Rights-based arguments can and should be used to clarify the impacts of pesticides and develop regulation in line with human rights standards. Regulating the use of pesticides in agriculture and prohibiting highly toxic pesticides and agrochemicals is necessary to protect children’s right to life and health. National human rights organizations can have an impact in demanding such regulation. For example, farm workers in Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Panama, the Philippines, the U.S., and various West African countries were exposed to the highly toxic pesticide dibromochloropropane (DBCP) from the 1960s until the cessation of its use (Thrupp 1991). The Costa Rica national human rights institution, Defensoría de los Habitantes de Costa Rica had an important role in investigating the impacts of DBCP on farmworkers working in banana plantations. The Defensoría found that its use caused miscarriages, sterilization of men, and congenital malformation of children and presented recommendations to legislators concerning the use of pesticides and agrochemicals in the country (Defensoría de los Habitantes 1998).

The Costa Rican agricultural landscape is typical of large-scale banana plantations with a long term and heavy use of pesticides. Compared to other American jurisdictions that have joined the OECD, the use of pesticides in Costa Rica is almost eightfold (Pomareda García 2022). The exposure to pesticides negatively affects child health, including various types of cancer and neurobiological dysfunctions (Brühl et al. 2023). Formulations used in pesticides applied in Costa Rica have often been banned for health and environmental concerns in the EU, yet they continue to be applied in banana plantations at high rates and frequencies (Brühl et al. 2023). The risky pesticides come mostly from European importers, such as Syngenta and BASF from Switzerland and Germany, countries where these products can no longer be used (Greenpeace 2023).

The current regulation of pesticides in Costa Rica does not protect local children and requires a serious reconsideration to avoid the negative impacts on the health of minors. This can be achieved by substituting the production of conventional bananas with organic ones (at least partially) and by replacing dangerous pesticides by less harmful alternatives (Brühl et al. 2023). The Ministry of Agriculture of Costa Rica expects the use of some 50 to 60% of dangerous pesticides to be discontinued by 2025 (Costa Rica 2023). Also, the employment of drones rather than planes for the application of pesticides in the future will be more targeted and will enable the total amount of dangerous substances to be reduced. Currently, the extensive contamination of drinking water by pesticides requires the supply of water tanks for the most endangered towns in Costa Rica (Greenpeace 2023). This is not a sustainable way to realize the right to water and the right to a healthy environment for Costa Rican children.

Costa Rica was one of the champions for the United Nations Recognition of the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment in 2022 at the General Council, and recognized this right in its Constitution as early as 1994. The country must keep pursuing environmental rights goals even under the pressure of multinational companies.

Case study 5: Freedom from child labor in the context of international trade, Mali cocoa farms

Approximately 152 million children are currently engaged in child labor worldwide (OECD 2019). Approximately 112 million (around 70%) of these children work in agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and aquaculture (FAO/ILO 2021, ILO/UNICEF 2021). In some countries, more than half of the children are engaged in child labor, and globally every 10th child (ILO/UNICEF 2021). Hunger and child labor are linked: children work to feed the family. Poverty, poor education, and a lack of rural infrastructure are the root causes of hunger and child labor (ILO 1999). Children working in agriculture are exposed to toxic chemicals. Children climb trees and beehives, often in extreme temperatures. They travel in fishing boats with low levels of hygiene. In herding cattle, they are exposed to animal diseases and animal attacks. (FAO 2015.)

Article 32 of the CRC prohibits child labor (see Table 1). The goal of ending exploitative child labor is also included in the UN Sustainable Development Goals (Target 8.7.). States have the obligation to take legislative, administrative, social, and educational measures to ensure children are not exploited. Specifically, states must establish a minimum age for admission to employment, regulate working hours and conditions, and provide appropriate penalties. Child labor in agriculture has its specific challenges: family farms are not always subject to national labor laws, it is difficult for state labor inspectorate to cover remote areas, and unionization of farm workers is limited (ILO [date unknown]). Child labor and children’s right to education are interconnected. Investments in schools, the abolition of school fees, free and safe transportation to school, and the provision of school meals support education instead of child labor. Parents may be granted scholarships linked to their children’s school attendance to compensate for the loss of family income (Huebler 2008, ILO 2009.) Another huge injustice linked to poverty and food insecurity is survival prostitution (Saphira and Oliver 2002, Musera Lugonzo et al. 2017). At the same time, ending survival prostitution of mothers improves the health of these women and allows them to invest more on the nutritional and educational needs of their children (Nathenson et al. 2017.)

Distinguishing exploitative work from non-exploitative is crucial (Alston 1989). Banning all work done by children is not the aim, instead a right to dignity at work can be derived from the CRC. The definition of child labor is intertwined with cultural conceptions of childhood and work (Bhukuth 2008, Abebe and Bessell 2011). Work carried out by children in food systems helps children acquire essential skills related to food and nutrition security, and it may be culturally acceptable that children work in the family business (Morrow 2010, FAO/ILO 2021). It is not a violation when vocational education has apprenticeship training embedded in the syllabus (see Rintala and Nokelainen 2020). Sustainability criteria for international trade and business must respect local community beliefs on the best interests of a child and not merely impose Western ideals (Pierik and Houwerzijl 2006).

Trade law and human rights criteria for traded products can play an important role in stopping child abuse in global supply chains, and at the same time it can improve the situation in domestically oriented food systems (see Hafner-Burton 2005). There are alternative and/or complementary regulatory approaches: the issue can be addressed in trade agreements between states and/or through duties set for traders. The European Union, for example, has adopted a zero-tolerance policy on child labor in relation to new trade agreements (European Commission 2020b). At the same time, the EU is enacting laws that will extend the responsibility of large companies to whole supply chains. The EU Commission’s proposal for Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (European Commission 2022a) includes environmental and human rights aspects in supply chains. The law is expected to come into force in 2024. Large European companies will have to prevent potential adverse human rights impacts in their supply chains (Article 7) and end actual adverse impacts (Article 8). The EU Commission has also proposed a regulation to ban products made using forced labor, including child labor, on the European Union (EU) internal market (European Commission 2022b). The proposal was approved by the European Parliament and a provisional agreement on the draft legislation was reached between the European Parliament and the EU Council (representing the national interests of EU Member States) acting as an EU co-legislator in March 2024 (European Parliament 2024). The ban on forced labor products would apply also to smaller traders that are not targets of the Due Diligence Directive.

In U.S. class action cases Nestlé USA, Inc. vs. Doe and Cargill, Inc. vs. Doe (593 U.S. (2021), two multinational food companies were accused of aiding and abetting child slavery. Six individuals from Mali, Africa, based their case on operational decisions made at the firms’ U.S. headquarters. The plaintiffs claimed that they had worked as enslaved children harvesting cocoa beans that were destined for the American market, basing their demands on the Alien Tort Statute. The U.S. Court of Appeals decided in favor of the plaintiffs, but in June 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court, through voting 8-1, ruled in favor of the companies as it reversed the decision and returned the cases for further production of evidence and review. It was held that plaintiffs must allege violations in domestic conduct; the companies cannot be convicted based on operations or omissions overseas. If the U.S. had EU-style supply chain due diligence law, the companies could have been convicted (see Gamble 2022). At the global scale, a new business and human rights treaty is currently being negotiated under the auspices of the UN Human Rights Council (Open-Ended Intergovernmental Working Group 2023), in which states would commit to set human rights due diligence duties for their companies.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

In this article, we discussed children’s rights in the food system and human rights-based approaches for solving food system problems. Although the content of children’s rights can be debated, resources to fulfill the rights may be lacking, remedies for children could be more effective, and the legitimate expectations of large companies also deserve protection, we claim that children’s rights are instruments with weight and meaning in sustainability transitions.

Unsustainable food systems are a major cause of the climate crisis and biodiversity loss, the existential threats that risk the life, survival, and development of children and future generations. The rights of the child create duties for states to transform food systems, considering the best interests of the child and placing effective measures for the realization of their interdependent rights. A child-friendly government (African Child Policy Forum 2008) takes the rights of the child at the center and recognizes the different needs of children in distinct situations. States and their provinces/regions and cities can and should give weight to children’s rights as part of day-to-day legislative process and policy planning. Child-friendly governments enact appropriate laws to protect children, ensure adequate budgets to child related services (see UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights 2017), invite children’s participation, provides information and adequate channels for children to access justice in environmental matters (Aarhus Convention 2001, African Child Policy Forum 2008, Escazu Agreement 2018). Integrating a gender lens is important: girls and boys may face different kinds of challenges to the realization of their rights.

Monitoring human rights is complex and requires the identification and specification of the measured norm, operationalization of the norm into meaningful, valid, and reliable indicators, and finally provision of scores for the indicators (UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights 2012, Walker 2017). The case studies discussed in this article can inform policy through the development of indicators for regulators and policy makers. The indicators allow policy makers to assess whether children’s rights are realized in the food system or whether further action is needed. In the development of such indicators, food system considerations discussed in this article and associated children’s rights are relevant and include taking into account the following questions:

• Are children suffering from malnutrition (stunting or wasting or obesity)?
• Is the food system worsening the climate crisis?
• Is the food system destroying ecosystems and biodiversity?
• Is the food system harming children’s access to safe drinking water?
• Is children’s health harmed by agricultural and food industry pollution?
• Is hunger leading to child prostitution, childhood marriage and/or child labor?

Our case studies show how states must support access to healthy food, for example, for rural indigenous children, ban the marketing of unhealthy foods to children, completely reformulate agricultural subsidies toward more sustainable food systems, set stronger pesticide regulations, and set human rights criteria for traded products. Legislators and policy makers must expect and overcome the fact that unsustainably operating seed companies, chemical companies, food manufacturers, food traders, and food marketers will try to hinder or delay the transitions that are needed to protect children’s rights across the world. The dissemination of good practices and achievements reached by some governments sets an example for other states to follow, showing how ensuring a better life for children is not a utopian fantasy destined to be crushed by global capitalism.

Finally, all children’s rights discussed here can be greatly enhanced through disengaging from armed conflict and promoting peace (Jonsson 1996, UN Security Council 2022). Further research is needed including case studies in conflict and post-conflict countries that analyze the connections between children’s rights, food systems, and peacebuilding.

LITERATURE CITED

Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters. 2001. https://unece.org/environment-policy/public-participation/aarhus-convention/text

Abebe T., and S. Bessell. 2011. Dominant discourses, debates and silences on child labor in Africa and Asia. Third World Quarterly 32(4):765-786. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2011.567007

Abril-Valdez, E., C. Rascón-Loreto, P. Bonilla-Fernández, H. Hernández-Pérez, S. Cuevas-Bahena, and L. Arenas-Monreal. 2012. Promoción de hábitos saludables en escolares de Hermosillo, Sonora, México. Revista Cubana de Higiene y Epidemiología 50(3):354-364.

African Child Policy Forum. 2008. The African report on child wellbeing 2008: how child-friendly are African governments? The African Child Policy Forum, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Ait Hsine, E., A. Benhammou, and M. N. Pons. 2005. Water resources management in soft drink industry-water use and wastewater generation. Environmental Technology 26(12):1309-1316. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593332608618605

Alkon, A., R. B. Gunier, K. Hazard, R. Castorina, P. D. Hoffman, R. P. Scott, K. A. Anderson, and A. Bradman. 2022. Preschool-age children’s pesticide exposures in child care centers and at home in northern California. Journal of Pediatric Health Care 36(1):34-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedhc.2021.09.004

Alston, P. 1989. Implementing children’s rights: the case of child labor. Nordic Journal of International Law 58(1):35-53. https://doi.org/10.1163/157181089X00136

Amérigo Cuervo-Arango, F. 2016. La problemática de la alimentación religiosa y de convicción en los centros educativos. Revista De Derecho Político 1(97):141-178.

Anderson, M. 2008. Rights-based food systems and the goals of food systems reform. Agriculture and Human Values 25(4):593-608. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-008-9151-z

Antle, J. M., and S. M. Capalbo. 2010. Adaptation of agricultural and food systems to climate change: an economic and policy perspective. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 32(3):386-416. https://doi.org/10.1093/aepp/ppq015

Ayers Looby, A., N. Frost, S. Gonzalez-Nahm, E. R. Grossman, J. Ralston Aoki, and S. E. Benjamin-Neelon. 2020. State regulations to support children’s cultural and religious food preferences in early care and education. Maternal and Child Health Journal 24(2):121-126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-019-02833-1

Baber, W. F., and J. May, editors. 2023. Environmental human rights in the Anthropocene: concepts, contexts, and challenges. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

Barquera, S., L., Hernández-Barrera, S. J. Rothenberg, and E. Cifuentes. 2018. The obesogenic environment around elementary schools: food and beverage marketing to children in two Mexican cities. BMC Public Health 18:461. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5374-0

Beal, T., C. D. Gardner, M. Herrero, L. L. Iannotti, L. Merbold, S. Nordhagen, and A. Mottet. 2023. Friend or foe? The role of animal-source foods in healthy and environmentally sustainable diets. Journal of Nutrition 153(2):409-425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tjnut.2022.10.016

Beaulac, J., E. Kristjansson and S. Cummins. 2009. A systematic review of food deserts, 1966-2007. Preventing Chronic Disease 6(3):A105.

Benton, T. G., C. Bieg, H. Harwatt, R. Pudasain, and L. Wellesley. 2021. Food system impacts on biodiversity loss. Chatham House, London, UK. https://www.ciwf.com/media/7443948/food-system-impacts-on-biodiversity-loss-feb-2021.pdf

Bhukuth, A. 2008. Defining child labor: a controversial debate. Development in Practice 18(3):385-394. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614520802030466

Bohle, H. G., T. E. Downing, and M. J. Watts. 1994. Climate change and social vulnerability: toward a sociology and geography of food insecurity. Global Environmental Change 4(1):37-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-3780(94)90020-5

Borras, S. J., and J. Franco. 2018. The challenge of locating land-based climate change mitigation and adaptation politics within a social justice perspective: towards an idea of agrarian climate justice. Third World Quarterly 39(7):1308-1325. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2018.1460592

Brides of the Sun. [date unknown]. How climate change is creating a generation of child brides. https://bridesofthesun.com/

Brimblecombe, J., M. Ferguson, E. McMahon, A. Peeters, E. W. Miles, T. P. Wycherley, L. M. Minaker, K. De Silva, L. Greenacre, and C. Mah. 2019. Reducing retail merchandising of discretionary food and beverages in remote indigenous community stores: protocol for a randomized controlled trial. JMIR Research Protocols 8(3):e12646. https://doi.org/10.2196/12646

Browne, J., M. Lock, T. Walker, M. Egan, and K. Backholer. 2020. Effects of food policy actions on indigenous peoples’ nutrition-related outcomes: a systematic review. BMJ Global Health 5(8):e002442. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002442

Brühl, C. A., M. A. Arias, S. Echeverría-Sáenz, M. Bundschuh, A. Knäbel, F. Mena, L. L. Petschick, C. Ruepert, and S. Stehle. 2023. Pesticide use in banana plantations in Costa Rica - a review of environmental and human exposure, effects and potential risks. Environment International 74:107877. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2023.107877

Butten, K., N. W. Johnson, K. Hall, M. Toombs, N. King, and K. O’Grady. 2019. Impact of oral health on Australian urban Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families: a qualitative study. International Journal for Equity in Health 18(1):34. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-019-0937-y

Cardenas, D., C. Bermudez, and S. Echeverri. 2019. Is nutritional care a human right? Clinical Nutrition Experimental 26:1-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yclnex.2019.05.002

Chen, M., C.-H. Chang, L. Tao, and C. Lu. 2015. Residential exposure to pesticide during childhood and childhood cancers: a meta-analysis. Pediatrics 136:719-729. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2015-0006

Chesney, M., and K. Duderstadt. 2022. Children’s rights, environmental justice, and environmental health policy in the United States. Journal of Pediatric Health Care 36(1):3-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedhc.2021.08.006

Clark, M. A., N. G. G. Domingo, K. Colgan, S. K. Thakrar, D. Tilman, J. Lynch, I. L. Azevedo, and J. Hill. 2020. Global food system emissions could preclude achieving the 1.5 ° and 2 °C climate change targets. Science 370:705-708. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aba7357

Coomans, F., F. Grünfeld, and M. T. Kamminga. 2010. Methods of human rights research: a primer. Human Rights Quarterly 32(1):179-186. https://doi.org/10.1353/hrq.0.0127

Costa Rica. 2023. Departamento de Servicios Parlamentarios. Unidad de Proyectos, Expedients y Leyes. Asamblea Legislativa de la República de Costa Rica. Proyecto de Ley. Regulación de Plaguicidas Altamente Peligrosos para la Salud y el Ambiente. Expediente No. 23.783. https://vlex.co.cr/vid/regulacion-plaguicidas-altamente-peligrosos-940168045

Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights. 2021. Third party intervention by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights under Article 36, paragraph 3, of the European Convention on Human Rights Application No. 39371/20 Cláudia DUARTE AGOSTINHO and others v. Portugal and 32 other States. Strasbourg. https://rm.coe.int/third-party-intervention-by-the-council-of-europe-commissioner-for-hum/1680a26105

Crenna, E., T. Sinkko, and S. Sala. 2019. Biodiversity impacts due to food consumption in Europe. Journal of Cleaner Production 227: 378-391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.054

Crippa, M., D. Guizzardi, E. Solazzo, M. Muntean, E. Schaaf, F. Monforti-Ferrario, M. Banja, J. Olivier, G. Grassi, S. Rossi, and E. Vignati. 2021. GHG emissions of all world – 2021 report. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg. http://dx.doi.org/10.2760/173513

Damania, R., E. Balseca, C. Fontaubert, J. Gill, K. Kim, J. Rentschler, J. Russ, and E. Zaveri. 2023. Detox development: repurposing environmentally harmful subsidies. World Bank, Washington, D.C., USA. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/39423 https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1916-2

Davis, J. N., A. Pérez, F. M. Asigbee, M. J. Landry, S. Vandyousefi, R. Ghaddar, A. Hoover, M. Jeans, K. Nikah, B. Fischer, S. J. Pont, D. Richards, D. M. Hoelscher, and A. E. Van Den Berg. 2021. School-based gardening, cooking and nutrition intervention increased vegetable intake but did not reduce BMI: Texas sprouts-a cluster randomized controlled trial. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 18:18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-021-01087-x

Dembour, M.-B. 2010. What are human rights? Four schools of thought. Human Rights Quarterly 32(1):1-20. https://doi.org/10.1353/hrq.0.0130

De Schutter, O., N. Jacobs, and C. Clément. 2020. A ‘common food policy’ for Europe: how governance reforms can spark a shift to healthy diets and sustainable food systems. Food Policy 96:101849. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2020.101849

Defensoría de los Habitantes de Costa Rica. 1998. Informes Anuales 1997-1998. Defensoría de los Habitantes de Costa Rica, San José, Costa Rica. https://www.dhr.go.cr/images/informes-anuales/if97_98.pdf

Egan, S. 2018. The doctrinal approach in international human rights law scholarship. Chapter 3 in L. McConnell and R. Smith, editors. Research methods in human rights. Routledge, London, UK. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315672632-3

Eide, A. 1987. Report on the right to adequate food as a human right. UN Doc E/CN.4/Sub.2/1987/23. United Nations, New York, New York, USA.

Escazu Agreement. 2018. Regional Agreement on Access to Information, Public Participation and Justice in Environmental Matters in Latin America and the Caribbean. United Nations, Escazú, Costa Rica. https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=IND&mtdsg_no=XXVII-18&chapter=27&clang=_en

European Commission. 2019. The European Green Deal. COM(2019) 640 final. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium.

European Commission. 2020a. Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system. COM(2020)381. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium.

European Commission. 2020b. Child labor in agriculture. European Commission contribution to the FAO Consultation 27 April - 26 May 2020. Brussels 25 May 2020. DEVCO.B.3/MRDP (2020)3126159. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium.

European Commission. 2022a. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937. COM/2022/71 final. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium.

European Commission. 2022b. Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market. COM/2022/453 final. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium.

European Court of Auditors. 2023. EU efforts for sustainable soil management. Unambitious standards and limited targeting. Special report 19/2023. European Court of Auditors, Luxembourg.

European Environment Agency (EEA). 2015. Climate change and agriculture. EEA, Copenhagen, Denmark. https://www.eea.europa.eu/media/infographics/climate-change-and-agriculture/view

European Parliament. 2024. Press release. Products made with forced labour to be banned from EU single market. European Parliament, Strasbourg, France. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20240419IPR20551/products-made-with-forced-labour-to-be-banned-from-eu-single-market

FDI World Dental Federation. 2023. Promoting oral and general health: Norway’s move to ban marketing of unhealthy foods to children. FDI, Geneva-Cointrin, Switzerland.

Fenton-Glynn, C., editor. 2019. Children’s rights and sustainable development: interpreting the UNCRC for future generations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108140348

FIAN. 2023. Policy Brief. Human rights must be placed at the heart of EU food systems transformation. FIAN, Heidelberg, Germany. https://www.fian.be/IMG/pdf/fian_ecvc_policy_brief_en_final_version.pdf

Fleming, C. A., S. Chandra, K. Hockey, G. Lala, L. Munn, D. Sharma, and A. Third. 2021. Fix my food: children’s views on transforming food Systems. Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia. https://doi.org/10.26183/6qhg-xn49

Fogelholm, M., E. Närvänen, M. Erkkola, A. Lähteenmäki-Uutela, I. Kaivonen, A. Nikkola, U. M. Sutinen, and L. Uusitalo. 2021. Epäterveellisten elintarvikkeiden markkinointi lapsille ja nuorille: Tilanne Suomessa ja pelisääntöjä markkinoinnin säätelyyn. Finnish Government, Helsinki, Finland. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-383-170-4

Foley, J., N. Ramankutty, K. Brauman, E. S. Cassidy, J. S. Gerber, M. Johnston, N. D. Mueller, C. O’Connell, D. K. Ray, P. C. West, C. Balzer, E. M. Bennett, S. R. Carpenter, J. Hill, C. Monfreda, S. Polasky, J. Rockström, J. Sheehan, S. Siebert, D. Tilman, and D. P. M. Zaks. 2011. Solutions for a cultivated planet. Nature 478:337-342. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10452

Follong, B. M., E. Prieto-Rodriguez, A. Miller, C. E. Collins, and T. Bucher. 2020. Integrating nutrition into the mathematics curriculum in Australian primary schools: protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Nutrition Journal 19:128. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12937-020-00640-x

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 2014. Strengthening the links between resilience and nutrition in food and agriculture A discussion paper. FAO, Rome, Italy.

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 2015. Handbook for monitoring and evaluation of child labor in agriculture. FAO, Rome, Italy.

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 2018. Sustainable food systems – concept and framework. FAO, Rome, Italy.

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 2019. Land use in agriculture by the numbers. FAO, Rome, Italy.

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 2020. Legal guide on school food and nutrition. FAO, Rome, Italy.

Food and Agriculture Organization, Food Security Cluster, and World Food Programme. 2021. Food security, nutrition, and ending child labor in agriculture for recovery and resilience. https://www.fao.org/3/cb5187en/cb5187en.pdf

Food and Agriculture Organization and International Labour Organization (FAO/ILO). 2021. Tackling child labor through decent youth employment in agri-food systems. Background paper. FAO, Rome, Italy. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb7441en

Forbes News. 2020. Prohibir venta de comida chatarra a niños afecta libertad de comercio: Coparmex. Forbes, 14th August. https://www.forbes.com.mx/negocios-prohibir-venta-comida-chatarra-ninos-afecta-libertad-comercio-coparmex/

Galli, F., P. Prosperi, E. Favilli, S. D’Amico, F. Bartolini, and G. Brunori. 2020. How can policy processes remove barriers to sustainable food systems in Europe? Contributing to a policy framework for agri-food transitions. Food Policy 96:101871. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2020.101871

Gamble, S. 2022. A corporate human rights due diligence law for California. UC Davis Law Review 55:2421-2462.

Garry, V. 2004. Pesticides and children. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 198(2):152-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2003.11.027

Gilson, E., and S. Kenehan. 2018. Food, environment, and climate change: justice at the intersections. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Lanham, Maryland, USA.

Glennie, C., and A. H. Alkon. 2018. Food justice: cultivating the field. Environmental Research Letters 13:073003. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aac4b2

Global Child Forum. 2022. The state of children’s rights and business 2022. Food, Beverage and Personal Care. Global Child Forum, Stockholm, Sweden. https://globalchildforum.org/the-state-of-childrens-rights-and-business-2022-food-beverage-personal-care/

Global Youth Biodiversity Network. 2022. No nature without justice. Youth Recommendations for the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. https://www.gybn.org/advocacy-paper-cop15

Goldmann, L. 2004. Childhood pesticide poisoning: information for advocacy and action. Chemicals Programme of the United Nations Environment Programme, Châtelaine, Switzerland. https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/childrens-environmental-health/pestpoisoning.pdf?sfvrsn=4317cd2f_1

González, D., K. Bon-Padilla, M. I. Grijalva, and M. I. Ortega. 2020. Impacto de un programa de promoción de la salud nutricional y ambiente alimentario escolar en escuelas primarias públicas. Revista Chilena de Salud Pública 24(2):137-138. https://doi.org/10.5354/0719-5281.2020.61270

Gottlieb, R., and A. Joshi. 2010. Food justice. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.

Government of Nepal. 2014. Nepal National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 2014-2020. Government of Nepal, Kathmandu, Nepal. https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/nep163672.pdf

Grear, A. 2011. The vulnerable living order: human rights and the environment in a critical and philosophical perspective. Journal of Human Rights and the Environment 2(1):23-44. https://doi.org/10.4337/jhre.2011.01.02

Greenpeace.org. 2023. Water is sacred too. How a pesticide banned in Europe robbed a Costa Rican town of its drinking water. Greenpeace.org. https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2023/06/22/pesticide-chlorothalonil-water-contamination-costa-rica-banned-europe-syngenta/

Gressier, M., F. Sassi, and G. Frost. 2020. Healthy foods and healthy diets. How government policies can steer food reformulation. Nutrients 12(7):1992. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu12071992

Gupta, A., L. Alston, C. Needham, E. Robinson, J. Marshall, T. Boelsen-Robinson, M. R. Blake, C. E. Huggins, and A. Peeters. 2022. Factors influencing implementation, sustainability and scalability of healthy food retail interventions: a systematic review of reviews. Nutrients 14(2):294. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14020294

Gwynn, J., V. M. Flood, C. A. DʼEste, J. Attia, N. Turner, J. Cochrane, J. C. Louie, and J. H. Wiggers. 2012. Poor food and nutrient intake among indigenous and non-indigenous rural Australian children. BMC Pediatrics 12:12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2431-12-12

Hafner-Burton, E. 2005. Trading human rights: how preferential trade agreements influence government repression. International Organization 59(3):593-629. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818305050216

Handsley, E., and B. Reeve. 2018. Holding food companies responsible for unhealthy food marketing to children: can international human rights instruments provide a new approach? University of New South Wales Law Journal 41(2):449-489. https://doi.org/10.53637/OXLV4395

Hanson, K., and L. Lundy. 2017. Does exactly what it says on the tin? International Journal of Children’s Rights 25(2):285-306. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718182-02502011

Harwatt, H. 2019. Including animal to plant protein shifts in climate change mitigation policy: a proposed three-step strategy. Climate Policy 19(5):533-541. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2018.1528965

Hathaway, O. A. 2002. Do human rights treaties make a difference? Yale Law Journal 111(8):1935-2042. https://doi.org/10.2307/797642

Hawkes, C., E. Fox, S. M. Downs, J. Fanzo, and K. Neve. 2020. Child-centered food systems: reorienting food systems towards healthy diets for children. Global Food Security 27:100414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100414

Hayek, M. N., H. Harwatt, W. J. Ripple, and N. D. Mueller. 2021. The carbon opportunity cost of animal-sourced food production on land. Nature Sustainability 4:21-24. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-00603-4

Headey, D., R. Heidkamp, S. Osendarp, M. Ruel, N. Scott, R. Black, M. Shekar, H. Bouis, A. Flory, L. Haddad, N. Walker, and Standing Together for Nutrition consortium. 2020. Impacts of COVID-19 on childhood malnutrition and nutrition-related mortality. Lancet 369:519-521. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31647-0

Henry, T. A. 2020. Hunger in the United States. English Department: Research for Change - Wicked Problems in Our World 35. https://research.library.kutztown.edu/wickedproblems/35

Houska, D. 2022. Sustainability principles embedded in contracts: an example of European food supply chain. European Food and Feed Law Review 17(2):120-125.

Huebler, F. 2008. Child labor and school attendance: evidence from MICS and DHS surveys. UNICEF, Geneva, Switzerland. https://resourcecentre.savethechildren.net/document/child-labour-and-school-attendance-evidence-mics-and-dhs-surveys/

Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC). 2019. Climate Change and Land: an IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems. P. R. Shukla, J. Skea, E. Calvo Buendia, V. Masson-Delmotte, H.- O. Pörtner, D. C. Roberts, P. Zhai, R. Slade, S. Connors, R. van Diemen, M. Ferrat, E. Haughey, S. Luz, S. Neogi, M. Pathak, J. Petzold, J. Portugal Pereira, P. Vyas, E. Huntley, K. Kissick, M. Belkacemi, J. Malley, editors.

Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). 2019. Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. E. S. Brondizio, J. Settele, S. Díaz, and H. T. Ngo, editors. IPBES Secretariat, Bonn, Germany. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3831673

International Labour Organization (ILO). 1999. Worst forms of child labor convention. C182. ILO, Geneva, Switzerland.

International Labour Organization (ILO). 2009. Combating child labor through education: a resource kit for policy-makers and practitioners - user guide. ILO, Geneva, Switzerland.

International Labour Organization (ILO). 2015. Guidelines for a just transition towards environmentally sustainable economies and societies for all. ILO, Geneva, Switzerland. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/@ed_emp/@emp_ent/documents/publication/wcms_432859.pdf

International Labour Organization (ILO). [date unknown]. Child labor in agriculture. ILO, Geneva, Switzerland. https://www.ilo.org/ipec/areas/Agriculture/lang--en/index.htm

International Labour Organization, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, International Organization for Migration, United Nations Children’s Fund (ILO/OECD/IOM/UNICEF). 2019. Ending child labor, forced labor and human trafficking in global supply chains. Geneva, Switzerland. https://www.ilo.org/ipec/Informationresources/WCMS_716930/lang--en/index.htm

International Labour Organization and United Nations Children’s Fund (ILO/UNICEF). 2021. Child labor: global estimates 2020, trends and the road forward. ILO/UNICEF, New York, New York, USA.

Ituarte-Lima, C. 2023. Biosphere defenders leveraging the human right to healthy environment for transformative change. Environmental Policy and Law 53(2):139-151. https://doi.org/10.3233/EPL-239003

Ituarte-Lima, C., M. A. Nardi, and L. Varumo. 2023. Just pathways to sustainability: from environmental human rights defenders to biosphere defenders. Environmental Policy and Law 53(5-6):347-366. https://doi.org/10.3233/EPL-239009

Jonsson, U. 1996. Nutrition and the convention on the rights of the child. Food Policy 21(1):41-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-9192(95)00071-2

Kagie, R., S. Y. N. Lin, A. Hussain, and S. C. Thompson. 2019. A pragmatic review to assist planning and practice in delivering nutrition education to indigenous youth. Nutrients 11(3):510. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11030510

Kälin, W., and J. Künzli. 2019. The law of international human rights protection. Second edition. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780198825685.001.0001

Kaljonen, M., T. Kortetmäki, T. Tribaldos, S. Huttunen, K. Karttunen, R. S. Maluf, J. Niemi, M. Saarinen, J. Salminen, M. Vaalavuo, and L. Valsta. 2021. Justice in transitions: Widening considerations of justice in dietary transition, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 40:474-485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2021.10.007

Kanetake, M. 2018. UN Human rights treaty monitoring bodies before domestic courts. International and Comparative Law Quarterly 67(1):201-232. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002058931700046X

Kim, B. F., R. E. Santo, A. P. Scatterday, J. P. Fry, C. M. Synk, S. R. Cebron, M. M. Mekonnen, A. Y. Hoekstra, S. de Pee, M. W. Bloem, R. A. Neff, and K. E. Nachman. 2020. Country-specific dietary shifts to mitigate climate and water crises. Global Environmental Change 62:101926. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.05.010

Kim, E. K., M. J. Furlong, Z. J. Ng, and E. S. Huebner. 2020. Child well-being and children’s rights: balancing positive and negative indicators in assessments. Pages 157-173 in B. Nastasi, S. Hart, and S. Naser, editors. International handbook on child rights and school psychology. Springer, Cham, Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37119-7_11

Kindornay, S., J. Ron, and C. Carpenter. 2012. Rights-based approaches to development: implications for NGOs. Human Rights Quarterly 34(2):472-506. https://doi.org/10.1353/hrq.2012.0036

Koh, N., C. Ituarte-Lima, and T. Hahn. 2022. Mind the compliance gap: how insights from international human rights mechanisms can help to implement the Convention on Biological Diversity. Transnational Environmental Law 11(1):39-67. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2047102521000169

Krawchenko, T. A., and M. Gordon. 2021. How do we manage a just transition? A comparative review of national and regional just transition initiatives. Sustainability 13:6070. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116070

Kulp, S. A., and B. H. Strauss. 2019. New elevation data triple estimates of global vulnerability to sea-level rise and coastal flooding. Nature Communications 10:4844. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-12808-z

Lähteenmäki-Uutela, A., A. Lonkila, S. Huttunen, and N. Grmelová. 2021. Legal rights of private property owners vs. sustainability transitions? Journal of Cleaner Production 323:129179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129179

Lewis, B. 2023. Protecting environmental human rights for future generations. Pages 31-51 in W. F. Baber and J. May, editors. Environmental human rights in the Anthropocene: concepts, contexts, and challenges. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009039642.003

Ley 26/1992, de 10 de noviembre, por la que se aprueba el Acuerdo de Cooperación del Estado con la Comisión Islámica de España. Agencia Estatal Boletín Oficial del Estado, Madrid, Spain. https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-1992-24855

Libert Amico, A., C. Ituarte-Lima, and T. Elmqvist. 2020. Learning from social-ecological crisis for legal resilience building: multi-scale dynamics in the coffee rust epidemic. Sustainability Science 15:485-501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-019-00703-x

Liefaard, T. 2019. Access to justice for children: towards a specific research and implementation agenda. International Journal of Children’s Rights 27(2):195-227. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718182-02702002

Lundy, L., and B. Bronagh. 2017. The four general principles of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: the potential value of the approach in other areas of human rights law. Pages 52-70 in E. Brems, E. Desmet, and W. Vandenhole, editors. Children’s rights law in the global human rights landscape. Routledge, London, UK. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315637440-4

Lynch, J., M. Cain, D. Frame, and R. Pierrehumbert. 2021. Agriculture’s contribution to climate change and role in mitigation is distinct from predominantly fossil CO₂-emitting sectors. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 4:518039. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2020.518039

Malawi Human Rights Commission. [date unknown]. Call for input by the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights on the role of national human rights institutions in facilitating access to effective remedy for business and human rights abuses: Answers. Malawi Human Rights Commission, Lilongwe, Malawi. https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/Business/Remedy/Malawi_HumanRightsCommission_Malawi.pdf

Martin-Ortega, O., and C. O’Brien. 2017. Advancing respect for labor rights globally through public procurement. Policy and Governance 5(4):69-79. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v5i4.1073

Mateo-Sagasta, J., S. Marjani Zadeh, and H. Turral. 2018. More people, more food… worse water? - Water Pollution from Agriculture: a global review. FAO. Rome, Italy. https://openknowledge.fao.org/handle/20.500.14283/ca0146en

McCauley, D. M., and R. Heffron. 2018. Just transition: integrating climate, energy and environmental justice. Energy Policy 119:1-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.04.014

Merchant, J. A., A. L. Naleway, E. R. Svendsen, K. M. Kelly, L. F. Burmeister, A. M. Stromquist, C. D. Taylor, P. S. Thorne, S. J. Reynolds, W. T. Sanderson, and E. A. Chrischilles. 2005. Asthma and farm exposures in a cohort of rural Iowa children. Environmental Health Perspectives 113(3):350-356. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.7240

Montes, F., R. Meinen, C. Dell, A. Rotz, A. N. Hristov, J. Oh, G. Waghorn, P. J. Gerber, B. Henderson, H. P. S. Makkar, and J. Dijkstra. 2013. Special topics — mitigation of methane and nitrous oxide emissions from animal operations: II. A review of manure management mitigation options. Journal of Animal Science 91(11):5070-5094. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2013-6584

Morris, C., M. Kaljonen, K. Aavik, B. Balázs, M. Cole, B. Coles, S. Efstathiou, T. Fallon, M. Foden, E. H. Giraud, et al. 2021. Priorities for social science and humanities research on the challenges of moving beyond animal-based food systems. Humanities and Social Science Communications 8:38. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00714-z

Morrow, V. 2010. Should the world really be free of “child labor”? some reflections. Childhood 17(4):435-440. https://doi.org/10.1177/0907568210387334

Moss, B. 2008. Water pollution by agriculture. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological sciences 363(1491):659-666. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2007.2176

Mottet, A., C. de Haan, A. Falcucci, G. Tempio, C. Opio, and P. Gerber. 2017. Livestock: on our plates or eating at our table? A new analysis of the feed/food debate. Global Food Security 14:1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2017.01.001

Moyn, S. L. 2018. Not enough: human rights in an unequal world. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.

Munguía-Serrano, A., L. Tolentino-Mayo, F. L. Théodore, and S. Vandevijvere. 2020. Nutritional quality of hidden food and beverage advertising directed to children: extent and nature of product placement in Mexican television programs. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17(9):3086. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17093086

Musera Lugonzo, H., F. Chege, and V. Wawire. 2017. Fisheries around Lake Victoria and attendance of girls in secondary schools of Nyangoma Division in Siaya County, Kenya. Greener Journal of Educational Research 7(4):37-48. https://doi.org/10.15580/GJER.2017.4.061817076

Naderer, B. 2021. Advertising unhealthy food to children: on the importance of regulations, parenting styles, and media literacy. Current Addiction Reports 8:12-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-020-00348-2

Nathenson, P., S. Slater, P. Higdon, C. Aldinger, and E. Ostheimer. 2017. No sex for fish: empowering women to promote health and economic opportunity in a localized place in Kenya. Health Promotion International 32(5):800-807. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daw012

The National Law Review. 2020. Multiple states in Mexico move to ban “junk food” to curb obesity in children. The National Law Review, 20 August. https://www.natlawreview.com/article/multiple-states-mexico-move-to-ban-junk-food-to-curb-obesity-children

Oberthür, S., C. Gerstetter, C. Lucha, K. McGlade, J. Pozarowska, F. Rabitz, and E. Tedsen. 2011. Intellectual property rights on generic resources and the fight against poverty. European Parliament, Brussels, Belgium. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2011/457063/EXPO-DEVE_ET(2011)457063_EN.pdf

O’Flaherty, M. 2006. The concluding observations of United Nations Human Rights Treaty Bodies. Human Rights Law Review 6(1):27-52. https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngi037

Onur, O. O., G. N. Nomikos, N. N. Nomikos, S. A. Gerda, and G. A. Paleviciute. 2021. The role of nutrition education in school-age children in the prevention of global obesity epidemic. American Journal of Public Health Research 9(3):114-119. https://doi.org/10.12691/ajphr-9-3-5

Open-Ended Intergovernmental Working Group on Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises With Respect to Human Rights. 2023. Updated draft legally binding instrument (clean version) to regulate, in international human rights law, the activities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises. United Nations Human Rights Council, Geneva, Switzerland. https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/hrbodies/hrcouncil/igwg-transcorp/session9/igwg-9th-updated-draft-lbi-clean.pdf

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2019. Child labor: causes, consequences and policies to tackle it. OECD, Paris, France. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/child-labour_f6883e26-en

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). [date unknown]. Water and agriculture. OECD, Paris, France. https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/water-and-agriculture.html

Ortiz, A. M. D., C. L. Outhwaite, C. Dalin, and T. Newbold. 2021. A review of the interactions between biodiversity, agriculture, climate change, and international trade: research and policy priorities. One Earth 4(1):88-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2020.12.008

Oshaug, A., B. W. Eide, and A. Eide. 1994. Human rights: a normative basis for food and nutrition-relevant policies. Food Policy 19(6):491-516. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-9192(94)90042-6

Pierik, R., and M. Houwerzijl. 2006. Western policies on child labor abroad. Ethics & International Affairs 20(2):193-218. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7093.2006.00014.x

Poirier, B., J. Hedges, L. G. Smithers, M. Moskos, and L. Jamieson. 2022. Child-, family-, and community-level facilitators for promoting oral health practices among indigenous children. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19(3):1150. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19031150

Pomareda García, F. 2022. 93% de los plaguicidas son de alta peligrosidad. PNUD: Costa Rica usa hasta 8 veces más plaguicidas que los demás países OCDE de América. Semanario Universidad, 18 May. https://semanariouniversidad.com/pais/pnud-costa-rica-usa-hasta-8-veces-mas-plaguicidas-que-los-demas-paises-ocde-de-america/

Pope, D. H., H. McMullen, A. Baschieri, A. Philipose, C. Udeh, J. Diallo, and D. McCoy. 2023. What is the current evidence for the relationship between the climate and environmental crises and child marriage? A scoping review. Global Public Health 18(1):2095655. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2022.2095655

Quennerstedt, A. 2013. Children’s rights research moving into the future – challenges on the way forward. International Journal of Children's Rights 21(2):233-247. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718182-02102006

Rao, M., A. Afshin, G. Singh, and D. Mozaffarian. 2013. Do healthier foods and diet patterns cost more than less healthy options? A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 3(12):e004277. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004277

Raza, A., E. L. Fox, S. S. Morris, R. Kupka, A. Timmer, N. Dalmiya, and J. Fanzo. 2020. Conceptual framework of food systems for children and adolescents. Global Food Security 27:100436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100436

Reading, R., S. Bissell, J. Goldhagen, J. Harwin, J. Masson, S. Moynihan, N. Parton, M. Santos Pais, J. Thoburn, and E. Webb. 2009. Promotion of children’s rights and prevention of child maltreatment. Lancet 373(9660):332-343. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61709-2

Ren, K., M. Xu, R. Li, L. Zheng, S. Liu, S. Reis, H. Wang, C. Lu, W. Zhang, H. Gao, Y. Duan, and B. Gu. 2022. Optimizing nitrogen fertilizer use for more grain and less pollution. Journal of Cleaner Production 360:132180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132180

Reynaert, D., M. Bouverne-De Bie, and S. Vandevelde. 2012. Between ‘believers’ and ‘opponents’: critical discussions on children’s rights. International Journal of Children's Rights 20(1):155-168. https://doi.org/10.1163/157181812X626417

Rintala, H., and P. Nokelainen. 2020. Vocational education and learners’ experienced workplace curriculum. Vocations and Learning 13:113-130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-019-09229-w

Roberts, J. R., C. J. Karr, and Council on Environmental Health. 2012. Pesticide exposure in children. Pediatrics 13:e1765-e1788. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2012-2758

Robles Guitiérrez, M. 2020. La alimentación por convicción en ámbitos de especial sujeción. Anuario de Derecho Eclesiástico del Estado XXXVI:137-193.

Rogers, N. 2020. Victim, litigant, activist, messiah: the child in a time of climate change. Journal of Human Rights and the Environment 11(3):103-121. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800881099.00009

Rural Health Information Hub. 2020. Approaches to increase access to foods that support healthy eating patterns. Rural Health Information Hub, Grand Forks, North Dakota, USA. https://www.ruralhealthinfo.org/toolkits/sdoh/2/built-environment/food-access

Saba, D., N. Manouchehri, S. Besançon, O. El Samad, R. Bou Khozam, L. Nafeh Kassir, A. Kassouf, H. Chebib, N. Ouaini, and P. Cambier. 2019. Bioaccessibility of lead in Dittrichia viscosa plants and risk assessment of human exposure around a fertilizer industry in Lebanon. Journal of Environmental Management 250:109537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109537

Santo, E. R., B. F. Kim, S. E. Goldman, J. Duthkiewicz, E. M. B. Biehl, M. T. Bloem, R. A. Neff, and K. E. Nachman. 2020. Considering plant-based meat substitutes and cell-based meats: a public health and food systems perspective. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 4:134. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2020.00134

Saphira, M., and P. Oliver. 2002. A review of literature on child prostitution. Social Policy Journal of New Zealand 19:141-163.

Saunders, J., T. Smith, and M. Stroud. 2015. Malnutrition and undernutrition. Medicine 43(2):112-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mpmed.2014.11.015

Schläpfer, F., and M. Lobsiger. 2023. Linking subsidies for agriculture and food to dietary styles: estimates for Switzerland. Sustainability 15(13):10428. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310428

Scrinis, G. 2020. Reframing malnutrition in all its forms: a critique of the tripartite classification of malnutrition. Global Food Security 26:100396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100396

Searchinger, T. 2020. Redirecting agricultural subsidies for a sustainable food future. World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C., USA. https://www.wri.org/insights/redirecting-agricultural-subsidies-sustainable-food-future

Secretaría de Salud. 2014. Comisión Federal para la Protección contra Riesgos Sanitarios. La Secretaria de Salud presenta las medidas regulatorias de la estrategia para la prevención y control del sobrepeso, la obesidad y la diabetes. Government of Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico. https://www.gob.mx/cofepris/prensa/la-secretaria-de-salud-presenta-las-medidas-regulatorias-de-la-estrategia-para-la-prevencion-y-control-del-sobrepeso-la-obesidad-y-la-diabetes?idiom=es

Semba, R. D., S. de Pee, B. Kim, S. McKenzie, K. Nachman, and M. W. Bloem. 2020. Adoption of the ‘planetary health diet’ has different impacts on countries’ greenhouse gas emissions. Nature Food 1:481-484. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-020-0128-4

Sexton, A. E., T. Garnett, and J. Lorimer. 2019. Framing the future of food: the contested promises of alternative proteins. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space 2:47-72. https://doi.org/10.1177/2514848619827009

Shelton, D., and A. Gould. 2013. Positive and negative obligations. Pages 562–584 in D. Shelton, editor. The Oxford handbook of international human rights law. Oxford Academic, Oxford, UK.

Shepherd, C., J. Li, M. N. Cooper, K. D. Hopkins, and B. M. Farrant. 2017. The impact of racial discrimination on the health of Australian Indigenous children aged 5-10 years: analysis of national longitudinal data. International Journal for Equity in Health 16:116. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-017-0612-0

Shetty, P. 2006. Malnutrition and undernutrition. Medicine 34(12):524-529. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.mpmed.2006.09.014

Sigurdarson, S. T., and J. N. Kline. 2006. School proximity to concentrated animal feeding operations and prevalence of asthma in students. CHEST Journal 129(6):1486-1491. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.129.6.1486

Silva, V., H. G. Mol, P. Zomer, M. Tienstra, C. J. Ritsema, and V. Geissen. 2019. Pesticide residues in European agricultural soils - a hidden reality unfolded. Science of the Total Environment 653:1532-1545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.441

Smith Taillie, L., E. Busey, F. M. Stoltze, and F. R. Dillmann Carpentier. 2019. Governmental policies to reduce unhealthy food marketing to children. Nutrition Reviews 7(11):787-816. https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuz021

Smits, J. M. 2017. What is legal doctrine? On the aims and methods of legal-dogmatic research. Pages 207-228 in R. van Gestel, H.-W. Micklitz, and E. L. Rubin, editors. Rethinking legal scholarship: a transatlantic dialogue. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2644088

Son, J.-Y., R. L. Muenich, D. Schaffer-Smith, M. L. Miranda, and M. L. Bell. 2021. Distribution of environmental justice metrics for exposure to CAFOs in North Carolina, USA. Environmental Research 195:110862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.110862

Sormunen, M. 2020. Understanding the best interests of the child as a procedural obligation: the example of the European Court of Human Rights. Human Rights Law Review 20(4):745-768. https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngaa034

Sovacool, B. 2021. Who are the victims of low-carbon transitions? Towards a political ecology of climate change mitigation. Energy Research and Social Science 73:101916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.101916

Tatlow-Golden, M., and A. Garde. 2020. Digital food marketing to children: exploitation, surveillance and rights violations. Global Food Security 27:100423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100423

Thrupp, L. A. 1991. Sterilization of workers from pesticide exposure: the causes and consequences of DBCP-induced damage in Costa Rica and beyond. International Journal of Social Determinants of Health and Health Services 21(4):731-757. https://doi.org/10.2190/25B9-QFMV-Y28P-L736

Tubiello, F. N., K. Karl, A. Flammini, J. Gütschow, G. Obli-Laryea, G. Conchedda, X. Pan, S. Yue Qi, H. H. Heiðarsdóttir, N. Wanner, et al. 2022. Pre- and post-production processes increasingly dominate greenhouse gas emissions from agri-food systems. Earth System Science Data 14:1795-1809. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-1795-2022

UNICEF. 2015. Unless we act now: the impact of climate change on children. UNICEF, New York, New York, USA. https://www.unicef.org/reports/unless-we-act-now-impact-climate-change-children

UNICEF. 2018. A child rights-based approach to food marketing: a guide for policy makers. UNICEF, New York, New York, USA. https://sites.unicef.org/csr/files/A_Child_Rights-Based_Approach_to_Food_Marketing_Report.pdf

UNICEF. 2019. Protecting children’s right to a healthy food environment. UNICEF, New York, New York, USA. https://www.unicef.org/media/96101/file/Protecting-Childrens-Right-Healthy-Food-Environment.pdf

UNICEF. 2021. One billion children at ‘extremely high risk’ of the impacts of the climate crisis. Press Release. UNICEF, New York, New York, USA. https://www.unicef.org/turkiye/en/press-releases/one-billion-children-extremely-high-risk-impacts-climate-crisis-unicef

UNICEF Philippines. 2017. Amicus Curiae brief to the Honourable Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines. National Inquiry on the Impact of Climate Change on the Human Rights of the Filipino People and the Responsibility therefore, if any, of the “Carbon Majors.” UNICEF Philippines, Mandaluyong City, Philippines.

UNICEF, World Health Organization, and World Bank Group. 2021. Levels and trends in child malnutrition. UNICEF, WHO, and World Bank Group, New York, New York, USA. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240025257

UNICEF, World Health Organization, and World Bank Group. 2023. Joint child malnutrition estimates (JME) — levels and trends — 2023 edition. UNICEF, WHO, and World Bank Group, New York, New York, USA. https://data.unicef.org/resources/jme-report-2023/

United Nations. 1966a. International covenant on civil and political rights. United Nations, New York, New York, USA. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-civil-and-political-rights

United Nations. 1966b. International covenant on economic, social and cultural rights. United Nations, New York, New York, USA. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-economic-social-and-cultural-rights

United Nations. 1969. Vienna Convention on the Law of the Treaties. Done at Vienna on 23 May 1969. Entered into force on 27 January 1980. Treaty Series, vol. 1155. https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/1_1_1969.pdf

United Nations. 1989. Convention on the rights of the child. United Nations, New York, New York, USA. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-rights-child

United Nations. 1992. Convention on biological diversity. United Nations, New York, New York, USA. https://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf

United Nations. 2011. Guiding principles on business and human rights. Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework. United Nations, New York, New York, USA. https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/publications/guidingprinciplesbusinesshr_en.pdf

United Nations. 2019. Joint Statement of five UN entities on Climate Change and Human Rights, 16 September 2019. United Nations, New York, New York, USA.

United Nations Climate Change Conference. 2021. Supporting the conditions for a just transition internationally. https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20230313132211/https://ukcop26.org/supporting-the-conditions-for-a-just-transition-internationally

United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child. 2012. Concluding observations: Seychelles. CRC/C/SYC/CO/2-4. United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, Geneva, Switzerland.

United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child. 2013a. General comment No 14 on the right of the child to have his or her best interests taken as a primary consideration (art. 3, para. 1) 29 May 2013. CRC/C/GC/14. United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, Geneva, Switzerland.

United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child. 2013b. General comment No. 15 on the right of the child to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health (art. 24). CRC/C/GC/15. United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, Geneva, Switzerland.

United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child. 2018. Concluding observations on the combined third to sixth periodic reports of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic. CRC/C/LAO/CO/3-6. United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, Geneva, Switzerland.

United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child. 2021. General comment No. 25 (2021) on children’s rights in relation to the digital environment. CRC/C/GC/25. United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, Geneva, Switzerland.

United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child. 2023. General comment No. 26 (2023) on children’s rights and the environment with a special focus on climate change. CRC/C/GC/26. United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, Geneva, Switzerland. https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/general-comments-and-recommendations/draft-general-comment-no-26-childrens-rights-and

United Nations General Assembly. 1989. Convention on the rights of the child. United Nations General Assembly, New York, New York, USA. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-rights-child

United Nations General Assembly. 2022. Resolution 76/300. The human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment. A/76/L.75. United Nations General Assembly, New York, New York, USA.

United Nations Human Rights Committee. 2019. General comment no. 36: Article 6, Right to life. 3 September 2019. CCPR/C/GC/36. United Nations Human Rights Council, Geneva, Switzerland.

United Nations Human Rights Council. 2008. Resolution 7/23, Human Rights and Climate Change. United Nations Human Rights Council, Geneva, Switzerland.

United Nations Human Rights Council. 2021. The human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment. 8 October 2021. A/HRC/RES/48/13. United Nations Human rights Council, Geneva, Switzerland.

United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. 2012. Human rights indicators: a guide to measurement and implementation. United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Geneva, Switzerland. https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/Human_rights_indicators_en.pdf

United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. 2017. Realizing human rights through government budgets. United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Geneva, Switzerland. https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/RealizingHRThroughGovernmentBudgets.pdf

United Nations Secretary General. 2020. The highest aspiration. A call to action for human rights António Guterres, United Nations Secretary-General on the occasion of the seventy-fifth anniversary of the United Nations. United Nations Secretary General, New York, New York, USA.

United Nations Security Council. 2022. Conflict, humanitarian crisis in Ukraine threatening future global food security as prices rise, production capacity shrinks, speakers warn Security Council. United Nations Security Council, New York, New York, USA. https://www.un.org/press/en/2022/sc14846.doc.htm

United Nations Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment. 2021. Healthy and sustainable food: reducing the environmental impacts of food systems on human rights. A/76/179.

United Nations Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment. 2020. Report to the General Assembly. Human Rights Depend on a Healthy Biosphere. A/75/161.

United Nations Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment. 2018. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the issue of human rights obligations relating to the enjoyment of a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment. A/HRC/37/584.

United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to food. 2017. A/HRC/34/48. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food.

Vallone, S., and E. F. Lambin. 2023. Public policies and vested interests preserve the animal farming status quo at the expense of animal product analogs. One Earth 6(9):1213-1226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2023.07.013

von Braun, J., K. Afsana, L. Fresco, M. Hassan, and M. Torero. 2021. Food systems—definition, concept and application for the UN Food Systems Summit. United Nations Food Systems Summit 2021 Scientific Group. https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/2020/12/food_systems_paper-draft_oct-25.pdf

Walker, S. 2017. Challenges of human rights measurement. Pages 306-332 in B. A. Andreassen, H.-O. Sano, and S. McInerney-Lankford, editors. Research methods in human rights. A handbook. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.

Walsh-Dilley, M., W. Wolford, and J. McCarthy. 2016. Rights for resilience: food sovereignty, power, and resilience in development practice. Ecology and Society 21(1):11. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-07981-210111

Waterston, T., and J. Goldhagen. 2007. Why children’s rights are central to international child health. Archives of Disease in Childhood 92(2):176-180. https://doi.org/10.1136/adc.2006.098228

White, A., and L. O. Callaghan-White. 2021. Taking governments to court. Climate Litigation and its Consequences. Institute of International & European Affairs, Dublin, Ireland. https://www.iiea.com/images/uploads/resources/Taking-Governments-to_Court_1.pdf

Willett, W., J. Rockström, B. Loken, M. Springmann, T. Lang, S. Vermeulen, T. Garnett, D. Tilman, F. DeClerck, A. Wood, et al. 2019. Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT-Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. Lancet 393:447-492. https://doi.org/0.1016/S0140-6736(18)31788-4

World Health Organization (WHO). 2010. Set of recommendations on the marketing of foods and non-alcoholic beverages to children. WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.

World Health Organization (WHO). 2016. Tackling food marketing to children in a digital world: trans-disciplinary perspectives. Children’s rights, evidence of impact, methodological challenges, regulatory options and policy implications for the WHO European region. WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.

World Health Organization (WHO). 2017. Don’t pollute my future! The impact of the environment on children’s health. WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.

World Health Organization (WHO). 2018. Evaluating implementation of the WHO set of recommendations on the marketing of foods and non-alcoholic beverages to children. Progress, challenges and guidance for next seps in the WHO European region. WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.

World Health Organization (WHO). 2021a. Fact sheet: malnutrition. WHO, Geneva, Switzerland. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/malnutrition

World Health Organization (WHO). 2021b. Fact sheet: obesity and overweight. WHO, Geneva, Switzerland. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/obesity-and-overweight

World Obesity Federation. 2019. Global atlas on childhood obesity. World Obesity Federation, London, UK. https://www.worldobesity.org/membersarea/global-atlas-on-childhood-obesity

World Wildlife Fund (WWF). 2018. Child safeguarding and protection of rights. WWF Network Standard. Final Version 1. WWF, Washington, D.C., USA.

Xiao, L., G. Wang, E. Wang, S. Liu, J. Chang, P. Zhang, H. Zhou, Y. Wei, H. Zhang, Y. Zhu, Z. Shi, and Z. Luo. 2024. Spatiotemporal co-optimization of agricultural management practices towards climate-smart crop production. Nature Food 5:59-71. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-023-00891-x