A/HRC/19/59 2005 World Summit listed ―the expansion of local school meal programmes, using homegrown foods where possible‖ as part of the ―quick-impact initiatives‖ for the realization of the Millennium Development Goals.75 In Brazil, where the National School Feeding Program (Programa Nacional de Alimentação Escolar) is a major component of the Zero Hunger strategy, municipalities in charge of implementing the programme increasingly take into account the need to combat overweight and obesity in their sourcing policies. 76 In the United States, the 2010 Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act tasks the Department of Agriculture with developing nutritional guidelines for ―all foods provided on each school campus‖ (sect. 9A (b)(2)). In 2008, WHO presented its School Policy Framework, providing useful guidance for the development of nutritional standards for school food. School gardens can also serve this objective. 3. The role of a human rights framework 46. Premature deaths resulting from non-communicable diseases linked to bad diets are deaths that can be avoided, and States have a duty to protect in this regard. By implementing the Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding and the Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health, as well as the Political Declaration of the High-level Meeting of the General Assembly on the Prevention and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases, States are not only making political commitments but also discharging their duty under international human rights law to guarantee the right to adequate food. 47. As such, States should set binding targets in pursuing a double-track approach: (a) protecting the right to adequate diets; and (b) ensuring a transition towards more sustainable diets. They should ensure accountability, in accordance with the WHO Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health, 77 by establishing independent monitoring mechanisms and allowing individual victims or organizations to file claims against any failures to take the measures required under the national strategy for the realization of the right to food; this is what distinguishes legal obligations from mere policy commitments. Among the indicators that should be used to monitor the implementation of national strategies to prevent non-communicable diseases,78 WHO should therefore include the existence of a binding legal framework, clearly allocating responsibilities, and including sanctions where the measures that are pledged are not adopted, and it should include the requirements of participation and non-discrimination that form part of an approach based on human rights. V. Conclusions and recommendations 48. The Special Rapporteur concludes that current food systems are deeply dysfunctional. The world is paying an exorbitant price for the failure to consider health impacts in designing food systems, and a change of course must be taken as a matter of urgency. In OECD countries in particular, where farm subsidies remain at high levels, the current system is one in which taxpayers pay three times for a system that is a recipe 75 76 77 78 20 2005 World Summit Outcome, para. 34. K. Otsuki and A. Arce, Brazil: A Desk Review of the National School Feeding Program (World Food Programme, 2007), p. 4. See para. 31 (―All partners need to be accountable for framing policies and implementing programmes that will effectively reduce preventable risks to health. Evaluation, monitoring and surveillance are essential components of such actions.‖). Political Declaration of the High-level Meeting of the General Assembly (footnote 22 above), paras. 61-62 (defining the role of WHO in the establishment of a comprehensive global monitoring framework).