Organic production and consumption provide a delineated food system that can be explored for its potential contribution to sustainable diets. While organic agriculture improves the sustainability performance on the production side, critical reflections are made on how organic consumption patterns, understood as the practice of people consuming significant amounts of organic produce, may also be taken as an example for sustainable food consumption. The consumption patterns of regular organic consumers seem to be close to the sustainable diet concept of FAO. Certain organic-related measures might therefore be useful in the sustainability assessment of diets, e.g., organic production and organic consumption. Since diets play a central role in shaping food systems and food systems shape diets, the role of organic consumption emerges as an essential topic to be addressed. This role may be based on four important organic achievements: organic agriculture and food production has a definition, well-established principles, public standards, and useful metrics. By 2015, data for organic production and consumption are recorded annually from more than 160 countries, and regulations are in force in more than 80 countries or regions. The organic food system puts the land (agri-cultura) back into the diet; it is the land from which the diet in toto is shaped. Therefore, the organic food system provides essential components of a sustainable diet.

The use of synthetic pesticides is very common in conventional agriculture as plant protection measures and for improving storage of food. For increasing food safety, monitoring programmes are taking place in each European Union Member State and in Norway and Iceland every year. The monitoring aims to detect samples from food exceeding the maximum residue level (MRL) and provides data for an assessment of consumer exposure to pesticide residues. Results from Estonian national monitoring programme conducted by Veterinary and Food Board are presented in this paper, used to find out the differences in pesticide residue occurrences and MRL exceedances in local and imported food consumed in Estonia. In 2008, residues of one or more pesticides were found in 35–53% of the total analysed samples of fruits, vegetables and cereals. Imported food contained more pesticide residues compared to local food. MRLs were exceeded by 1.6% in 2008 and 2.3% in 2009 out of all samples, residues exceeding the MRLs were found in imported samples only. In 2010, 2.1% of total samples were above MRL. In 2011, 0.7% of total samples exceeded MRL which were of domestic origin. The highest MRL exceedances from the years 2008 to 2011 were propargite in beans with pods from Estonia over 10 times, chlormequat in grapes from India 7.9 times and trifluralin in tea from China 7.5 times. MRL was most frequently exceeded by dithiocarbamates, in 12 cases out of 22. The highest number of different pesticide residues in a single sample was 10 in apple from Belgium, 9 in mandarin from South Africa, 8 in strawberries from Spain and in apple from Poland. The results of monitoring programme show that local food contains less pesticide residues than imported food. By consuming food locally, it is possible to reduce the consumption of pesticide residues.

The fashion and textile industry is undergoing profound transformation driven by regulatory, environmental and societal pressures to reduce its significant contributions to global waste, emissions and resource depletion. In the European Union (EU), this transition is being formalised through the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR), which introduces mandatory sustainability and circularity requirements for textile products, including the Digital Product Passport (DPP). The emerging DPP framework is expected to include product-specific, life-cycle-based environmental information requirements, creating new compliance obligations for garment manufacturers supplying the EU market, particularly those based outside the EU. This study examines the readiness of global garment manufacturers to meet these requirements, with a focus on data availability, supply chain traceability, and alignment with the methodological expectations of the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) framework. A mixed-methods approach is employed, combining a survey of garment manufacturers in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Turkey with a case study of upcycled garments produced for the Estonian national team for the Paris 2024 Olympic Games. The findings identify key barriers to generating DPP-compliant environmental data, including limited life cycle assessment (LCA) expertise, fragmented and inconsistent upstream datasets, insufficient digital data systems and the practical complexity of applying PEF Category Rules across diverse production contexts. The case study further demonstrates how data gaps constrain the assessment of innovative circular materials, revealing a mismatch between regulatory expectations and current industry capabilities. Overall, this study highlights the need for phased DPP implementation, simplified cradle-to-gate assessment approaches and clearer, more harmonised methodological guidance to support an achievable and equitable transition towards sustainable textile supply chains.

Biodiversity loss is a critical component of the current planetary crisis, yet it remains insufficiently represented in life cycle assessment (LCA) and in related sustainability metrics. This paper presents a narrative literature review of how biodiversity is currently incorporated into agricultural LCA, with particular attention to the extent to which field-based biodiversity monitoring data have been used to evaluate modelled indicators, and to whether environmental footprints are complemented by biodiversity handprints, that is, by positive-impact accounting. The literature was mapped narratively across four linked questions: (i) how biodiversity footprints are currently quantified in agricultural LCA; (ii) to what extent field-based biodiversity monitoring data have been used as reference or evaluation sources for these indicators; (iii) whether and how biodiversity handprints have been developed or applied within agricultural LCA; (iv) how biodiversity-inclusive LCA might be aligned with the planetary boundaries framework. Among the 106 articles reviewed in depth, four were identified that integrated independently collected field biodiversity data with modelled LCA indicators. Three of these evaluated an existing method against field observations, whereas the fourth used field records to derive new characterization factors rather than test existing model independently. No empirical application of the biodiversity handprint concept within agricultural LCA was identified in the literature reviewed here. The analysis indicates that current approaches are constrained by uneven taxonomic and geographic coverage, limited harmonisation across spatial scales, and a near-exclusive focus on negative impacts. Evidence relating modelled indicators to field observations is mixed: field-scale predictions of established methods, such as SALCA-BD, correspond reasonably well with observed richness for certain taxonomic groups but become less reliable when aggregated to landscape or regional scales, whereas regional characterization factors do not always correspond with field-scale observations. Although handprints are increasingly discussed in relation to carbon, the biodiversity handprint remains conceptually undeveloped and was not found to have been empirically applied or tested in agricultural systems in the literature retrieved by this review. Similarly, alignment of biodiversity-inclusive LCA with the planetary boundaries framework remains largely conceptual, as no operational indicators currently link product- or farm-level biodiversity assessments to global biosphere-integrity thresholds. Strengthening the empirical grounding and integration of biodiversity into LCA through field evidence, harmonised reference states, and transparent reporting of both biodiversity footprints and handprints is essential for improving impact assessment and supporting credible, science-based decision-making. Advancing harmonised biodiversity-inclusive LCA methods will enable more comprehensive sustainability assessments and help to guide transitions toward agricultural systems that operate within ecological limits while contributing to biodiversity conservation and restoration.