fondazionebarilla.com
What fondazionebarilla.com is (and what it’s trying to do)
Fondazionebarilla.com is the public home of Fondazione Barilla, a non-profit based in Parma, Italy, focused on the intersection of food, health, and sustainability. Their stated direction is pretty consistent across the places they describe themselves: promote responsible behavior and healthier food choices, with the idea that everyday decisions add up to social and environmental change.
A practical way to think about the site is as a hub for two kinds of work:
- Research and frameworks that explain how diets connect to environmental impact, public health, and food systems.
- Public-facing tools meant to be usable by normal people, educators, and organizations without needing a technical background.
You’ll see the same themes coming up again and again: food waste, nutrition patterns, agricultural sustainability, and how policy can push food systems in a better direction.
The foundation’s “flagship” idea: health and environmental impact in one picture
If you’ve ever heard of the “Double Pyramid,” that’s one of the best-known concepts linked to the foundation’s work. The core claim is simple: foods that are generally recommended more often for health reasons (plant-forward staples like vegetables, grains, legumes, fruit) also tend to have lower environmental impacts, while foods advised in moderation (especially red and processed meats) tend to sit higher on impact.
What matters here isn’t just the graphic. The Double Pyramid is meant as a decision aid, so someone can connect “healthy diet guidance” with “sustainability consequences” without reading a full report. It’s also designed to be adaptable, since food cultures differ and dietary guidance isn’t one-size-fits-all.
It’s worth noting the foundation doesn’t present this as the final word on every detail. Even in supportive academic coverage, you’ll see acknowledgements that some underlying data points (and topics like sustainable fishing) are debated, while still arguing the overall alignment between health-forward diets and lower impact holds broadly.
How they connect “One Health” to food
A big part of the framing is a “One Health” approach, meaning food is treated as something that affects human health, environmental health, and broader system resilience at the same time, not as separate topics. You’ll see this referenced in research literature describing their work around connecting food culture, health outcomes, and climate impact.
This matters because it shifts the conversation away from purity tests. Instead of “eat this, never eat that,” the lens is closer to: what patterns are realistic, culturally workable, nutritionally solid, and less damaging over time. It also makes room for policy and institutional choices, not just personal responsibility.
Food Sustainability Index: what it measures and why it exists
Another major piece you’ll run into around Fondazione Barilla is the Food Sustainability Index (FSI), produced by Economist Impact with the foundation’s support. The FSI examines country-level food-system sustainability across three pillars: food loss and waste, sustainable agriculture, and nutritional challenges. It uses dozens of indicators and sub-indicators to compare performance across a large set of countries.
On the FSI platform, the point isn’t only ranking. It’s also about making the underlying categories visible so policymakers, researchers, and advocates can argue more concretely: where is a country strong, where is it weak, and what kinds of interventions are even on the table? The site includes an interactive map and a content library that supports that kind of use, including explainers and themed papers.
If you’re using it, the smart move is to treat it as a benchmarking tool, not a scoreboard. Index design always involves choices: what gets measured, what doesn’t, and how weights get assigned. Even groups that like the FSI concept have raised typical index concerns like data timeliness and indicator weighting.
Policy work: the Milan Protocol and the “paradoxes” it targets
Fondazione Barilla is also associated with policy-facing work through the BCFN (Barilla Center for Food & Nutrition) ecosystem, including the Milan Protocol. In the “Fixing Food” materials tied to the broader work around food sustainability, the Milan Protocol is described as a proposal developed in 2014 to encourage stakeholder commitments on three big global food-system problems: food waste, challenges for sustainable agriculture, and the coexistence of hunger and obesity.
One detail that stands out is how it was positioned: not as a closed expert document, but as something built through multi-stakeholder input, drawing on hundreds of experts and organizations, with a public petition component.
Those policy threads connect to larger international agendas, particularly the UN Sustainable Development Goals, where food, health, climate, and agriculture overlap heavily. The foundation’s work routinely sits in that overlap zone, trying to keep discussions tied to actions ordinary institutions can take.
Practical resources: food waste and everyday behavior change
Not everything is policy papers and global indexes. The foundation also pushes practical guidance for citizens, like a food-waste tips guide described by Barilla Group as “The Savings Book,” framed as concrete actions to reduce waste with immediate household benefits. That kind of resource fits their overall approach: make the sustainable choice feel doable, not abstract.
This is also where fondazionebarilla.com becomes useful for non-specialists. People don’t always need a new study; they need a simple checklist, a menu idea, or a reminder of what “less waste” looks like in a weekly routine. The foundation’s public-facing material tends to aim at that middle space between “academic” and “influencer content.”
Who the site is useful for (beyond curious readers)
If you’re an educator, health communicator, or sustainability lead inside an organization, fondazionebarilla.com is basically a library you can borrow from. The reason is the material is packaged around frameworks people recognize:
- dietary patterns (often Mediterranean-style guidance as a reference point)
- environmental impact logic that can be explained visually
- system-level metrics for institutions and governments
- policy narratives that link personal habits to structural levers
And if you’re doing communications work, the Double Pyramid and the FSI are both “explainable objects.” They’re not perfect, but they’re easy to point to when you need to get a room aligned on what the problem even is.
Key takeaways
- Fondazionebarilla.com is the public hub of Fondazione Barilla, a Parma-based non-profit focused on healthy diets and sustainable food systems.
- The “Double Pyramid” is a core framework linking nutritional guidance with environmental impact in a simple visual model.
- The Food Sustainability Index (with Economist Impact) benchmarks countries across food waste, sustainable agriculture, and nutritional challenges.
- Their policy work includes the Milan Protocol, aimed at mobilizing stakeholders around major food-system “paradoxes.”
- They also publish practical resources, including guidance focused on reducing food waste in daily life.
FAQ
Is Fondazione Barilla the same thing as Barilla Group?
They’re connected, but not identical. Fondazione Barilla is presented as a non-profit foundation, while Barilla Group is the company; Barilla Group hosts a page describing the foundation’s mission and activities.
What is the Double Pyramid, in one sentence?
It’s a model suggesting that foods recommended more often for health tend to have lower environmental impact, while foods advised in moderation tend to have higher impact.
What does the Food Sustainability Index actually measure?
It evaluates country food-system sustainability across three pillars: food loss and waste, sustainable agriculture, and nutritional challenges, using many indicators and sub-indicators to compare performance.
Is the Food Sustainability Index meant to “name and shame” countries?
It’s better used as benchmarking and diagnosis than as a scoreboard. Even supporters note the usual limits of indexes: weighting choices, data gaps, and timeliness issues.
What is the Milan Protocol trying to do?
It’s described as a policy proposal developed to encourage commitments across stakeholders on food waste, sustainable agriculture challenges, and the coexistence of hunger and obesity—framed as key global food-system problems.
Post a Comment