Table 3.

Examples of challenges and opportunities for the five Nordic countries according to Principles #9 – 16 in the FAO/WHO Guiding Principles for Sustainable Healthy Diets (11) described in Fig. 1

Denmark	Finland	Iceland	Norway	Sweden
Challenges
Principle # 9: Maintain a) greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, b) water and c) land use, d) nitrogen, and e) phosphorus application, and f) chemical pollution within set targets (interpreted as targets within a country).
Cross country: None of the countries on track to reach the 2030 SDG environmental goals. All countries have a large spill-over effect because of food and feed imports. Drained peatlands due to agricultural land use change are major emitters of GHG.
a) Implementation of the government plan to substantially reduce agricultural GHG emissions and rewet drained peatlands is going slower than anticipated and is needed to meet goals. Changes in consumption (including reducing consumption of meat and dairy) are also needed (66). b) Polluted groundwater levels (pesticides, pharmaceuticals, nutrients, metals) (229) c) High dependency on imported vegetables and legumes. Most land is used for feed crops to support animal-based food exports. d) – e) Agricultural activities have contributed to nutrient pollution of coastal waters (230) and of groundwater with nitrates (231). f) Pesticide residues are found in food, mainly fruits and vegetables (84). In general complying with applicable regulations, but a few excesses (232). Domestically and organic grown products have low or no content.	a) Not on track (233). Drained peatlands cause major emissions (234, 235). Animal-source proteins, primarily from meat and milk, dominate the protein supply (138). b) Not a challenge c) Cultivated peatlands are a major challenge (235). A downward trend in agricultural land use resulting from reduced livestock production. d-f) Only partly tackled. Major pollution of agricultural N and P to Baltic Sea (235)	a) Not on track, LULUCF accounts for 2/3 of total emissions (68). Large subsidises to meat but not to plant production (35, 98). b) Not a major challenge c) Soil erosion and over-grazing is a major challenge, but also drained wetlands (35, 236). d) Not a challenge e) Not a challenge f) Not a challenge	a) Not on track, too high consumption of meat and dairy. Approx. 90% of arable land are used for meat production directly or indirectly (49). b) Historically not a challenge, but severe drought in Eastern Norway in 2018 and spring 2023 more than halved harvests. c) Too much soil suitable for human food production is converted to grassland for fodder (237). Arable land also threatened by other areal changes. d) – e) High eutrophication in inner coastal areas due to overuse of N and P (238). f) Pesticide residues both in domestic and imported foods remains a challenge (239).	a) Not on track to reach the national objectives on climate (240) b) Availability and water quality is an issue in certain regions and identified as a future risk associated with climate change. c) Overall, a reduction in land used for agriculture. Drained peatlands accounts for 20% of territorial GHG emissions (241) d) – e) Generally, emissions of agricultural N and P to the Baltic Sea and lakes are below set maximum levels but remain a challenge (242).
Principle # 10: Preserve biodiversity, including that of crops, livestock, forest-derived foods and aquatic genetic resources, and avoid overfishing and overhunting.
Cross country: Imported foods impact biodiversity loss in the countries of origin, for example, coffee, cocoa, and bananas. None of the countries seem to be on track to reach the EU Biodiversity strategy goal of 30% protection (hereof 10% highly protected) within 2030 (243, 244).
Declining biodiversity in the agricultural landscape, mostly due to increase in intensive agricultural production, chemical pollution, and too little grazing (245). Maximum 2.3% of the land area is protected, while additional 5.3% may be assessed as protected after a more detailed process of evaluation.	Species decline in rural biotopes due to changes in agricultural practises. Large impact on biodiversity declines abroad through imported foods, for example, soy for fodder (246, 247).	Dramatic ecosystem degradation due to livestock over-grazing (35). - Increase of traditionally grown and wild vegetation for food is a challenge but boosts preserving of biodiversity. - Land-use of imported foods often impacts biodiversity loss in the countries of origin.	Land-use of imported foods and feeds impacts biodiversity loss in the countries of origin. - Intensive agriculture, monocultures, and domestic land use change are the largest inland threats (248, 249). - Within aquaculture, land use of imported feed (e.g. soy) impacts land use and biodiversity in the countries of origin (54). - Waste from fish farming (faeces, feed spillovers, etc.) influences the seabed (250). - Bottom trawling impacts the sea floor (212).	The agricultural landscape’s ecosystem services are in generally good state but not secured on a long-term basis and the Swedish environmental objectives related to biodiversity cannot be reached with current means of control (102). - Too high consumption of certain seafoods may contribute to biodiversity loss (251).
Principle #11: Minimize the use of a) antibiotics and b) hormones in food production.
Cross country: All five Nordic countries are in the forefront in low use of antibiotics, Norway, Iceland, and Sweden ranking lowest in Europe (121). The achievement is the result of good collaboration between primary industries, authorities, and research. Hormones are forbidden by EU law; the prohibition applies to member states and imports from third countries alike (252)
Principle #12: Minimize the use of plastics and derivatives in food packaging
Cross country: Alike most other countries, also the Nordics have plastics and their chemical components integrated in all areas of daily lives, with plastic pollution being a major challenge, not least in marine environments (253). A recently published Nordic report on the issue illustrates the Nordic countries will to support common global rules set out in an international, legally binding instrument on ending plastic pollution (254).
Principle #13: Reduce food loss and waste
Cross country: Food loss and waste is a major challenge in all Nordic countries, with household waste being the largest contributor, see Table 1 for gross household waste per country, which includes peel, skin, and bones.
The food loss in Denmark is about 540,000 tons per year (255). About 46% of the loss is in the household and the rest in the primary production, food industry, and retail.	Total amount of food waste in the Finnish food chain is about 641 million kg/year. The amount of originally edible food waste is estimated to be about 361 million kg/year (256).	Iceland has an action plan on behalf of the government to diminish food waste. A large study and plan for further action is on-going (257).	Total food loss and waste is approx. 450,000 tons in 2021. Almost half came from households (equivalent to ~ 40kg/person/year), 19% from the food industry, 14% from food retail sector and 9% from agriculture (258). Agreement on 50% reduction by 2030 (135).	Household food loss and waste was about 619,000 tonnes in 2021 ~ 59 kg/person/year, about 26% of that is estimated to be avoidable food waste (259).
Principle #14: Are built on and respect a) local culture, culinary practices, knowledge, and consumption patterns, and b) values on the way food is sourced, produced, and consumed.
Cross country: Culinary practices are a moving target and very diverse, thus what is local culture is challenging to capture. All five countries have a common history of high milk and dairy consumption and are presently among the world top 15 regarding milk consumption/capita (260). Existing dietary habits and individuals’ resistance to change slow down transformation to sustainable food system (261).
The prevalence of vegetarian diets has increased recently, although still on a very low level. The average diet is still high in meat and relatively high in milk and cheese. Plant-based meat and milk alternatives increased by 46% from 2018 to 2019 but stagnated in 2020 (262).	The prevalence of plant-dominated diets remains modest (182). Food culture, traditions and identity are deeply rooted in milk and meat production and consumption, presently having the 2nd largest consumption of milk in the world (98 kg/person/year).	Knowledge on current dietary habits is based on a new study making comparison to a couple of former studies available (263). Plant-based diet is more favoured among younger than older people. New ways are both welcome and not, depending on the group, but the average intake of, for example, red meat is still high (263)	Food culture has changed dramatically over the last 100 years (264, 265), illustrated by Norway having the weird record of having the largest consumption of SSB and frozen pizza per capita in the world (ref) Too few eat according to FBDG, for example, only ~ 15% eat 3 potions vegetables and 2 fruits/day (266).	Consumption patterns are lower than current recommendations on vegetables, fruits and whole grain while higher in sweets and snacks and red and processed meat (267).
#15: Are accessible and desirable.
Cross country: Food costs as share of total expenses of households is an issue in all five countries. Socioeconomic status influences the ability to access and purchase healthy foods. Overconsumption of convenience foods high in energy and low in nutrients is a challenge.
Social inequality with regard to unhealthy dietary patterns is seen in both men and women in 2021. The relative inequality decreased from 2010 for both genders, but there was an increase in absolute inequality (268). Few people eat according to the FBDG (DANSDA 2011–2013). However, it may not be more expensive to eat according to the FBDG than the current omnivore average diet (172).	Food consumption, the sustainability of food choices, and food security differ by sociodemographic groups, including income level, education level, gender, and place of residence (157, 269–271). The food retail market is dominated by two domestic chains (the ‘S’ and the ‘K’) leading to a power-imbalance in the food chain, the farming sector having least power to secure prices and income (272, 273).	- Single parents and low-income households are especially vulnerable. - Domestic food production at acceptable prices is a challenge.	The share of household income to be spent on food if following FBDG would be 39% for people in the lowest decile group compared to 11% in the highest decile group in 2022 (171).	Swedish children’s food environment is dominated by fast food, snacks, and sweets as the majority of advertisements are about highly processed, unhealthy foods (274). Fast food, snacks, and sweets were easily available in shops nearby schools (275).
#16: Avoid adverse gender-related impacts, especially with regard to time and allocation.
Cross country: The Nordics have come far in gender equality, but there are still many differences in various fields. According to the Global Gender Gap Report, Iceland remains the only economy to have closed more than 90% of its gender gap. Other Nordic countries such as Finland (86%, 2nd), Norway (84.5%, 3rd), and Sweden (82.2%, 5th) feature among the top 5 (276), while Demark comes on the 32nd place.
Men have on average a higher energy intake than women, and a much higher intake of meat and meat products than women, but not higher intake of fruits and vegetables (277). However, when adjusted for energy intake there is no difference between men and women in the GHG emissions per MJ (278).	Agricultural labour force is dominated by men. Most women have work outside home but are still having more responsibility for grocery shopping, meal planning and cooking (45). Long family leaves affect women’s pension levels and career trajectories. A substantial disparity in the healthiness and sustainability of food consumption between genders (270–272).	According to the most recent study women are closer to the recommended FBDG than men (279).	Young men pull the average meat and dairy consumption up (280).Young women (18–24 years old) are much more likely to eat a vegetarian dinner than men (266).	Young men consume more meat than young women (267). Newer data confirms a difference in attitude where more men say they prefer to eat meat, while the consumer group ‘flexitarian’ is dominated by women (281).
Opportunities
Principle # 9: Maintain greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, water, and c) land use, nitrogen and phosphorus application, and chemical pollution within set targets (interpreted as targets within a country).
Cross country: All five countries have high ambitions for GHG reductions, less water and land use changes, more careful use of N and P and increased production of organic foods to reduce pesticide use and improve soil health. All five countries also rank avoidance of peatland conversion high on the agenda.
- Technological measures on way, for example, feed additives reducing methane emissions from cows, better biogas handling, etc. - Dietary shifts with less meat and dairy - Cleaning programs are successful - Rewetting of peatlands on way - Gradual replacement of synthetic pesticides in agriculture by integrated pest management (IPM) and organic farming (e.g. mechanical pest control)	- Incentives to abandon cultivation of peatlands (282) and implementation of high nature-value farming systems (104) - Increased consumption of domestically caught fish (283). - Increased production and consumption of legumes (284). - Free school meals and sustainability criteria in public procurement (52). - High self-sufficiency rate (see Table 1) allows better management of environmental impacts through domestic policy (285).	- Balanced grazing strategies, restoration of drained peatlands. - Increasing and diversifying production of vegetables. - Geothermal heat keeps energy prices relatively low. - Changed subsidisation scheme towards vegetable and fruit production	- (Flexible) ban on peatland conversion, potential changes in production (reduced animal and feed, increased plant-based food), changing subsidies, import tax, procurement agreement for plant foods, greenhouses (hydro-energy) – but challenge for latter: up front investments! - Stronger regulations, commitments to protection (EU, IPBES) and increased soil health and (various) carbon capture (EU, National climate targets) - Nitrate directive (max. nitrate load), crop rotations with legumes - Crop rotations to avoid pests/diseases - Stronger regulations, technological solutions (drones, monitoring, crop/time specific applications)	- Fiscal measures or other policy for the reduction of CO2, fertilizers and pesticides. - Changes in consumption patterns with more plant-based and low impact blue foods - Increased focus on growing and processing for increased value products of for example legumes - Support for rewetting peatlands (286) - Methods for more specific nitrogen application may be useful (287) Work within the EU on chemical pollution emphasizing producer responsibility (288).
Principle # 10: Preserve biodiversity, including that of crops, livestock, forest-derived foods, and aquatic genetic resources, and avoid overfishing and overhunting.
Cross country: All five countries ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity in 1994, agreed to implement the Aichi biodiversity targets in 2010 (289) and signed the Montreal Kunming agreement in 2022 (90). All five countries have a knowledge gap in terms of documenting the food production’s impact on biodiversity both on land and at sea but have resources to fill this gap.
Rewetting drained peatlands, increase percentage of protected land, rewilding (290). More protected land must be prioritized. Biodiversity impact abroad from the Danish dietary intake should be paid more attention in future guidelines.	Over 85–90% of the environmental impact of Finnish food consumption in terms of reducing global species richness is associated with imported products (247, 248). Thus, the focus should be on these imports. Decreased consumption of the foods with the largest global biodiversity impact in the Finnish diet: for example, poultry, imported aged cheese, pork and beef, and coffee (291). Advancement of novel agricultural methods, the upkeep and the establishment of new environments that promote biodiversity (291).	- Fishing strategy to be followed by law (292). Measuring fish stocks to avoid endangering (292). - Changing of eating habits to preserve and boost biodiversity both abroad (imported foods) and within Iceland is an opportunity which could support health and diminish land erosion - Indications for opportunities for increased vegetation and biodiversity is the fact that 65% of the country was covered by vegetation some centuries ago (293) and lowering consumption of sheep meat (294). - Continuous work on sustainability of fish stocks, preserving fish stocks and species to prevent overfishing and support biodiversity	- Biodiversity can be increased through implementation of flowerbeds along crop fields, crop rotations, and intercropping. - Reduced pesticide/chemical use - Increased outfield grazing but avoiding overgrazing and reducing total numbers of ruminants to not increase GHG). - Improved catch methods (fisheries), solutions to catch precipitation from fish farms	Development of new agricultural methods, maintenance, renovation of land and creation of new biodiversity rich environments are needed, along with monitoring of progress to reach the set objectives for biodiversity in agricultural landscapes (102).
Principle #11: Minimize the use of a) antibiotics and b) hormones in food production.
Cross country: All five Nordic countries are in the forefront in low use of antibiotics, Norway, Iceland, and Sweden ranking lowest in Europe. The achievement is the result of good collaboration between primary industries, authorities, and research. Hormones in meat production is forbidden. The situation may be used as an opportunity to inspire other countries.
Principle #12: Minimize the use of plastics and derivatives in food packaging.
Cross country: 169 countries have recently agreed on an action plan to reach the plastic targets (295). The European Green Deal agreement 2022–2027 aims to reduce the consumption of single-use plastic cups and certain food packages (129). In addition, the individual Nordic countries have their own ambitions, for example, Iceland, with regulations and actions to reduce the usage of plastics (296). Opportunities include reusable packaging options, get rid of unnecessary packaging, limit overpackaging, and provide clear labels to support correct recycling.
Principle #13: Reduce food loss and waste.
Cross country: Table 1 gives numbers for gross household waste per country. An opportunity taken by all five countries is their monitoring and reporting of food waste, enabled by better collaboration throughout the food chain. This enables targeted actions (297). Sweden reports a decreasing trend for food waste in households (136). Opportunities include smarter public and private procurement (buy what you need), smaller plates when serving, food waste agreements, product date marking ‘best before not bad after …’
Principle #14: Are built on and respect a) local culture, culinary practices, knowledge, and consumption patterns, and b) values on the way food is sourced, produced, and consumed.
Cross country: There is an increased interest in healthy, sustainable, and locally produced foods in all five countries. This is reflected in a high interest in more plant-based, organic, and locally produced food in public meals, especially among the young (264, 298). Politicians may see this as an opportunity to increase self-sufficiency. The trends increase the opportunity for national resource-based plant-based food innovation and general awareness raising. System innovation initiatives on school meals with local prototypes are underway. There is also experimenting with locally sourced food, education and student involvement (299), for example, unconventional seafood (300). People generally rank domestic origin as one of top-quality aspects for meat as well as plant-based foods (281).
#15: Are accessible and desirable.
Cross country: As shown in Table 4, four of the five Nordic countries rank among the top 15 countries on the Global Food Security Index (GFSI), Finland being #1, in spite of the countries having very varying degrees of self-sufficiency (see Table 1). Reduce dependency on imported fodder ingredients would increase food security, thus ensuring accessibility also in more extreme situations. Both Finland and Sweden serve free school lunches to pre-primary, basic and upper secondary education pupils, an opportunity for the rest of the Nordics to make healthy and sustainable meals available for children from all socioeconomic groups (301, 302). A variety of plant-based foods should be accessible and affordable regardless of income (182), but market access is often a limiting factor for small-scale farmers. There are promising initiatives to improve social and physical environment to better support sustainable and healthy food choices (e.g. (303)). The Norwegian Government has recently agreed to follow up on two issues: 1) to legislate a ban on the marketing of unhealthy food and drink aimed at children and young people under the age of 18 AND 2) to put forward a proposal to introduce a 16-year age limit for the purchase and sale of energy drinks (304).
#16: Avoid adverse gender-related impacts, especially with regard to time and allocation.
Cross country: Not stigmatizing use of convenience foods (as this may affect women more than men) but rather work for healthier convenience foods available? This could be a subject for innovation in Nordic countries. Family leave policies that aim to an equal distribution of child-care related leaves between spouses could be supported and further developed.

For all tables: Examples of domestic challenges and opportunities when incorporating sustainability into food-based dietary guidelines in the Nordics: Green = environmental aspects, yellow = sociocultural aspects.