By José Graziano da Silva | 28/08/2026

My recent participation with Professor Shenggen Fan , from China Agricultural University, in the VII GEPAD Winter School, organized by the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul , offered a valuable opportunity to discuss the current global crises and food systems.

Our dialogue reinforced a central conviction: Brazil and China have already demonstrated that hunger and extreme poverty can be overcome when political commitment is translated into coordinated public policies. But obesity is becoming another expression of poverty and inequality in both countries. They must now apply that experience to the new frontier of food insecurity: ensuring healthy and sustainable diets for all.

China’s achievement in reducing poverty is historically unprecedented. Over four decades, the country lifted close to 800 million people out of extreme poverty, accounting for nearly three-quarters of the global reduction. This transformation combined economic growth, rural development, agricultural investment, infrastructure, technological innovation and targeted assistance to populations left behind.

Brazil followed a different but equally instructive path. From 2003 onwards, the Zero Hunger strategy integrated income transfers, school meals, support for family farming, access to water, minimum-wage increases and social participation. Rather than treating hunger simply as insufficient agriculture production, Brazil recognized it as primarily a problem of access to food. More recently, after a period of regression, coordinated action across social protection, health, education and agriculture enabled the country to leave the FAO Hunger Map again in 2025.

These experiences demonstrate that hunger is not eliminated by markets alone. It requires governmental intervention with strong political will, functioning institutions, reliable data, public budgets and mechanisms that allow society to monitor government commitments.

From insufficient calories to unhealthy diets

However, success against hunger combat has produced a new and more complex challenge. The problem is no longer only whether people consume enough calories. Increasingly, it is whether families can afford and access food that supports good health.

Brazil and China are experiencing a rapid nutritional transition. Undernutrition and micronutrient deficiencies persist among vulnerable groups, while overweight, obesity and diet-related noncommunicable diseases are expanding. This is the “double burden” of malnutrition: deprivation and excess coexisting in the same country, community and sometimes the same household.

In China, more than 400 million adults were estimated to be living with overweight or obesity in 2021. National projections indicate that nearly two-thirds of adults could be affected by 2030. China has recognized the seriousness of the situation through the Healthy China 2030 strategy, its Food and Nutrition Development Guidelines for 2025–2030 and the national “Weight Management Years” campaign.

Professor Shenggen Fan’s presentation showed how China is seeking a healthier and more sustainable dietary transition: increasing the consumption of whole grains, legumes, plant-based proteins, fruits and vegetables while reducing refined grains and excessive meat consumption. Particularly relevant is the principle that nutrition should guide consumption; and consumption should guide production. This reverses the conventional logic under which agricultural and industrial production determine what people are encouraged to eat.

Brazil, for its part, has developed internationally recognized policy innovations. Its Dietary Guidelines classify foods according to the nature and purpose of processing, using the NOVA classification developed by researchers at the University of São Paulo. Brazil also has front-of-package nutrition warnings, restrictions on unhealthy food in school environments and the National School Feeding Programme, which connects school meals with purchases from family farmers.

Nevertheless, ultra-processed products are occupying an increasing share of Brazilian and Chinese diets, particularly among children and low-income urban populations. Their expansion is not simply the result of individual choices. These products are inexpensive, convenient, aggressively advertised and available almost everywhere. Meanwhile, fresh and minimally processed foods are frequently less accessible in poorer neighbourhoods.

Cooperation beyond commodities

Brazil–China agricultural relations remain heavily concentrated on commodities, trade, logistics and infrastructure. These areas are important, but the partnership must become broader. The two countries can develop joint research, exchange regulatory experience, support sustainable production and invest in value chains that deliver diversified and nutritious foods.

Their cooperation should also create more space for family farmers, small and medium-sized food enterprises, women and young people. Technology is valuable only when it is accessible, affordable and adapted to the needs of vulnerable communities.

Through the Global Alliance Against Hunger and Poverty, BRICS+, the China–CELAC Forum and FAO’s South–South Cooperation programmes, Brazil and China could help other developing countries adapt proven policies to their own circumstances. This cooperation should unite what both countries do well: Chinese experience in planning, infrastructure, technology and implementation at scale, and Brazilian experience in social protection, school feeding, family farming, civil-society participation and rights-based food governance.

The lesson from both countries is clear. Hunger and malnutrition are not inevitable outcomes of scarcity; they are produced or prevented by political and institutional choices.

The next chapter of Brazil–China cooperation should therefore be more ambitious than increasing agricultural trade. It should be about protecting the human right to adequate food, regulating the commercial determinants of poor diets and making healthy food accessible to everyone.

Brazil and China helped show the world that extreme hunger and poverty can be defeated. They can now demonstrate that food security means more than having enough to eat: it means guaranteeing healthy, sustainable and culturally appropriate diets for all.

A common agenda on ultra-processed foods is needed

Brazil and China should place the regulation of ultra-processed foods at the centre of their bilateral and multilateral cooperation. Their combined demographic, agricultural, scientific and political weight could substantially influence the global food agenda.

The World Health Organization has established a Guideline Development Group to formulate recommendations on ultra-processed food consumption. In April 2026, a WHO discussion on “Ultra-processed foods: a One Health agenda for action and accountability” demonstrated why the issue cannot be confined to personal nutrition. Ultra-processed food systems affect human health, agricultural production, biodiversity, plastic use, chemical exposure, animal health and the environment.

This is precisely where the One Health approach becomes essential. One Health recognizes the interdependence of human, animal, plant and ecosystem health. Consequently, policies addressing ultra-processed foods must go beyond medical treatment and consumer education.

• Brazil and China could cooperate on a concrete package of measures:
• mandatory and easily understandable front-of-package warnings;
• restrictions on the marketing of unhealthy products to children;
• healthy food standards for schools, hospitals and other public institutions;
• fiscal policies that make unhealthy products less attractive and fresh foods more affordable;
• incentives for reformulation, without allowing reformulation to substitute for reductions in ultra-processed food consumption;
• public procurement from family farmers, cooperatives and local food enterprises;
• independent research on processing, additives, food packaging and long-term health effects;
• safeguards against conflicts of interest in nutrition policymaking.

Public policies must reshape food environments. Telling people to “make better choices” is insufficient when the least healthy products are the cheapest, most heavily promoted and most readily available.

References

CAIXETA, Marina Bolfarine. É a hora da segurança alimentar e da agricultura sustentável na cooperação do Brasil com a China!. Boletim Lua Nova – CEDEC, 25 Aug. 2026.

FAN, Shenggen. China’s national vision and strategy for food security and nutrition. Presentation at the VII GEPAD Winter School. Porto Alegre: UFRGS; China Agricultural University, 2026.

FAO – FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS. From Fome Zero to Zero Hunger: a global perspective. Edited by José Graziano da Silva. Rome: FAO, 2019.

GEPAD – GRUPO DE ESTUDOS EM AGRICULTURA, ALIMENTAÇÃO E DESENVOLVIMENTO. Segunda aula confirmada da VII Escola de Inverno GEPAD. Porto Alegre: UFRGS, 28 July 2026. Available at: GEPAD. Accessed on: 28 Aug. 2026.

JANK, Marcos Sawaya; GUO, Pei; MIRANDA, Silvia Helena Galvão de (eds.). China–Brazil partnership on agriculture and food security. Piracicaba: ESALQ/USP; Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2021.

NCD RISK FACTOR COLLABORATION. Worldwide trends in underweight and obesity from 1990 to 2022: a pooled analysis of 3,663 population-representative studies. The Lancet, London, v. 403, 2024.

TORERO-CULLEN, Máximo. Closing remarks: Deepening International Cooperation on Poverty Reduction. World Food Forum Side Event. Rome: FAO, 15 Oct. 2025.

WHO – WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION. Guideline Development Group for ultra-processed foods. Geneva: WHO, 2025. Available at: WHO. Accessed on: 28 Aug. 2026.

WHO – WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION. One Health. Geneva: WHO, 2026. Available at: WHO. Accessed on: 28 Aug. 2026.

WHO – WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION. Ultra-processed foods: a One Health agenda for action and accountability. Geneva: WHO, 10 Apr. 2026. Available at: WHO. Accessed on: 28 Aug. 2026.