Boycott of the General Law on Adequate and Sustainable Food (LGAAS) due to Corporate Interests

by Mercedes López Martínez

Government interests, linked to transnational food corporations such as Coca-Cola, have halted the publication and approval of the regulations for the LGAAS, which should have been published in October 2025. As a result, the Mexican government is in breach of its obligations and is preventing the exercise of human rights related to “the consumption of nutritious, sufficient, quality, safe, and culturally appropriate food; the strengthening of self-sufficiency, sovereignty, and food security; the foundations for social participation; and the creation of sustainable food environments and the promotion of breastfeeding” (Decree issuing the LGAAS, April 2024).

From civil society, various groups such as Vía Orgánica have participated in the drafting and implementation of this law. Despite the fact that its regulations were agreed upon with the previous Mexican administration, their publication has been blocked by members of the current government from the Ministries of Health and of Agriculture and Rural Development (SADER). This has been done to prevent the enforcement of labeling for foods and beverages derived from genetically modified organisms; to inhibit the participation of civil society members free from corporate interests who have been involved in shaping the law for years, through the obstruction of the National Intersectoral System for Health, Food, Environment, and Competitiveness (SINSAMAC); and to favor purely commercial interests of transnational corporations that have created a global pandemic of obesity and malnutrition with their industrial products and beverages, in addition to generating massive plastic pollution.

Learn More

Agroecology Case Studies from Around the World

by Pesticide Action Agroecology Network

“PAN International’s Agroecology Workgroup recently published a series of case studies spotlighting agroecology in action around the world. Agroecology provides a robust set of solutions to the ecological, environmental, social, and economic pressures we face when it comes to growing food.

These case studies illustrate the validity of agroecology as a climate-resilient solution. Agrichemical corporations spend millions of dollars trying to convince us that the Indigenous wisdom that lays the foundation for the principles of agroecology is unrealistic for modern agriculture. But the truth is, farmers around the world are already using these methods to successfully transition away from the toxic pesticides and fertilizers that pollute soil and water and endanger farmworkers and communities.”

Learn More

Bovaer® (3-Nitrooxypropanol): Regulatory Failure and Incomplete Scientific Understanding

by Don Want, PhD

“The approval of Bovaer® (3-nitrooxypropanol) as a methane-reducing cattle feed additive underscores a troubling failure of regulatory oversight despite incomplete scientific understanding. This analysis explores significant gaps in our knowledge of rumen microbiome complexity, the critical flaw of diet-dependent efficacy that regulators overlooked, the simplified approach used in studies of Bovaer®, and the shortcomings of safety testing protocols.
 
The natural methane cycle indicates that cattle emissions constitute a small fraction of the global methane flux relative to natural sources such as wetlands and permafrost. Yet regulatory bodies target cattle as a primary source of emissions without addressing systemic issues in industrial farming. Notably, research indicates Bovaer®’s effectiveness drops with higher fibre intake, ranging from 40-50% in low-fibre systems to only 7% in high-fibre grazing systems—a 500-700% variation that regulators ignored when approving its broad use across all production types. The 2025 Danish crisis, where Bovaer® was introduced under a government methane-reduction mandate and was followed by widespread reports of cattle health issues from over 350 farms—mostly pasture-based with high-fibre diets—demonstrates the real-world consequences of approving interventions without thorough testing across different dietary conditions.”

Learn More