By Megan Quiñones, ASU sustainable food systems graduate student
This past January, I had the opportunity to role-play as a journalist for Model USDA in “Scenario A: Healthy and sustainable Dietary Guidelines for Americans.” Dietary Guidelines for Americans, or DGAs, provide advice on what to eat and drink to meet nutrient needs, promote health, and prevent disease. DGAs were responsible for the iconic food pyramid, which I remember learning in elementary school, which has since been reimagined as MyPlate.
In Model USDA: Scenario A insights from Kathleen Merrigan, Dr. Merrigan shared: “I was also very involved in the 2015 debate over Dietary Guidelines for Americans because for the first time, the Citizen’s Advisory Committee recommended that sustainability be among the criteria for deciding what’s in a healthy diet. That was a recommendation that was ultimately rejected by the Secretaries.”
In my early research of DGAs and sustainability, I discovered a joint statement from 2015 where the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Health and Human Services shared: “we do not believe that the 2015 DGAs are the appropriate vehicle for this important policy conversation about sustainability.”
My biggest curiosity going to the Model USDA simulation was whether there would be a place for sustainability in Scenario A’s outcomes.
During the opening ceremony, there was a lot of discussion around accessibility, culturally relevant foods, human health, soil health, and environmental sustainability. However, as the weekend progressed, the topics students initially spoke about so passionately became polarizing. In the midst of this polarization, many of my initial questions as a journalist became irrelevant as participants discussed tools and tactics to incorporate sustainability without naming sustainability.
By early Saturday, some students formed a SMART Foods Coalition. This group coalesced around the inclusion of whole foods in the DGAs which they defined as plant-based proteins, seafood, and animal-based products. The politicization of language permeated each breakout room as participants prepared their recommendations for the Secretaries.
Saturday evening ended with a contentious discussion on soil health and nutrient density. Hannah, a student role-playing as the Director of Food and Environment at the Union of Concerned Scientists, was unyielding in her desire to incorporate soil health in the DGAs. Hannah also described the link between nutrient density and the taste of food despite the disinterest and disagreement among others in the SMART Foods Coalition.
Early Sunday, Jayme, role-playing as the President of the Seafood Nutrition Partnership and a member of the SMART Foods Coalition, uploaded a flyer in the comments condemning any mention of soil health in the DGAs.
Sustainability was not the only topic of contention. The importance of culturally relevant foods relative to DGAs as well Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) and Indigenous Food Sovereignty was amplified by Hina, role-playing as the Director of the Office of Tribal Relations. However, any mention of culturally relevant foods was removed from the final outcome document after Carolyn, role-playing as the Secretary of Agriculture, sent a link to Executive Order 14173 “Ending Illegal Discrimination And Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity” in the Zoom chat and encouraged more expansive language which would include stakeholders in a nonpartisan way.
In the end, Hannah did not support the recommendation and shared: “We are concerned these recommendations may be short sighted given the drastic decrease of nutrient density in produce given current production practices.” Hina was in support of the recommendation stating: “Though the steps made toward TEK and Indigenous Food Sovereignty were small, we are moving in the right direction for substantial change regarding the health of Indigenous communities”.
As a journalist, my participation in Model USDA often felt peripheral. One aspect of the simulation that interested me was the variety of assigned roles. As the weekend progressed, crisis emerged, and discontent for buzzwords persisted, many students grew more comfortable in their roles. When conversations became heated, some students would even pause and remind the group of the department, or organization they were representing.
One of the merits of being assigned a role you do not align with is that you have to think differently. Throughout the weekend, students grew more confident, putting links in the chat which supported the perspectives of their assigned role, all while leveraging tools and tactics that may otherwise be unconsidered.
But, as a sustainable food systems student, I cannot help but wonder: what do we lose when we skirt around sustainability? What do we gain? In this instance, students gained the Secretaries’ approval after being willing to compromise.
These are the very topics I am intentional about uplifting in class discussions and in my research. My own lived experiences with food insecurity ignited my passion for sustainable food systems and I have been intrigued by teachings around equity, being the forgotten “E” in food policy. I also still cringe each time I hear someone disparage the choices of SNAP recipients一simulation or not一because as James Baldwin once stated: “Anyone who has ever struggled with poverty knows how extremely expensive it is to be poor."
But in this compromise, we lost sustainability, we lost accessibility. Equity was once again the forgotten E. When we dilute what we mean, there is risk for loss and those who experience this loss most deeply are rarely ever at the table.
During the closing ceremony, I concluded my final report by asking: Not in 2015 and not in 2025 were the DGAs regarded as the appropriate vehicle for sustainability. Will they ever be? This is not an answer I have, but is a critical question to consider as the future leaders of food.
This blog is part of a series written by ASU graduate students who role-played as journalists in the Swette Center's inaugural Model USDA, held virtually from January 31 to February 2, 2025.