This report arises from the “SALUS” project which has received funding from the European Union in theframework of the Health Programme. This report has been prepared for the European Commissionhowever it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for anyuse which may be made of the information contained therein.

1

“A EUROPEAN NETWORK TO FOLLOW-UP THE REFORMULATION OF FOOD.IDENTIFICATION AND EXCHANGE OF GOOD PRACTICES FOR SMEs AND

CONSUMERS - SALUS”

1st Project Meeting

Helsinki, 6-7 September 2011

This report arises from the “SALUS” project which has received funding from the European Union in theframework of the Health Programme. This report has been prepared for the European Commissionhowever it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for anyuse which may be made of the information contained therein.

2

PROJECT TEAM

This report arises from the “SALUS” project which has received funding from the European Union in theframework of the Health Programme. This report has been prepared for the European Commissionhowever it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for anyuse which may be made of the information contained therein.

3

MINUTES

Participants

1. Tecnogranda, ItalyMr. Dario Vallauri

2. MTT Agrifood Research, FinlandMrs. Latvala, TerhiMrs. Järvinen Maija

3. Institute of Bioresources, RomaniaMrs. Nastasia Belc

4. AGRO-HALL, FranceMrs. Lylia Guerouaou

5. Campden BRI Hungary, HungaryMrs. Erika Horváth

6. State Food and Veterinary Service, LithuaniaMr. Zenonas Stanevicius

7. BOKU - University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, AustriaMr. Wolfgang KneifelMr. Andreas Hoehl

8. Associazione ISES, Italy

Mr. Carmine Falanga

9. Food Research and Development Institute, BulgariaMrs. Pavlina Paraskova- TabakovaMr. Gabor Zsivanovits

10. Codacons, ItalyMr. Marco Ramadori

11. Emona Nutrition Research & Development Department, SloveniaMr. Matjaz Cervek

12. Technische Universität Berlin, GermanyMr. Dietrich Knorr

13. Universitat de les Illes Balears, SpainMrs. M. Luisa Bonet

Mrs. Adriana Macri

Mrs. Dolores Forgione

This report arises from the “SALUS” project which has received funding from the European Union in theframework of the Health Programme. This report has been prepared for the European Commissionhowever it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for anyuse which may be made of the information contained therein.

4

14. University of Hohenheim, Germany

Mr. Lutz Graeve

External Experts

1. Pro&Do srl

Mrs. Paola Bazzoni

2. UCD Institute of Food and Health, University College Dublin

Mrs. Dolores O’Riordan

3. Inst f Livsmedelsvetenskap (Department of Food Science) Sverigeslantbruksuniversitet

Mr. Andres Andrén

4. Department of Agro-technology and Food Sciences, Wageningen University

Mr. Matthijs Dekker

This report arises from the “SALUS” project which has received funding from the European Union in theframework of the Health Programme. This report has been prepared for the European Commissionhowever it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for anyuse which may be made of the information contained therein.

5

1st PROJECT MEETING

6 SEPTEMBER 2012

HELSINKI (FINLAND)

Meeting Venue: Info-center Korona (Viikinkaari 11, Viikki) Room 511

1. Welcome, Registration and Introduction

Mrs. Latvala opened the 1st project meeting and introduced herself. She welcomed the partners inFinland and thanked her colleague Mrs. Järvinen for the support in the organisation of themeeting.

Mr. Vallauri introduced himself and welcomed the partner’s representatives thanking them forthe collaboration and introduced to the participants the external experts selected for thismeeting. He thanked Mrs. Latvala and Mrs. Jarvinen for the support and the organisation of themeeting.

He also informed the participants that due to an unexpected illness Mr. Gary Tucker from UK(CAMPDEN) was not able to participate in the meeting.

This report arises from the “SALUS” project which has received funding from the European Union in theframework of the Health Programme. This report has been prepared for the European Commissionhowever it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for anyuse which may be made of the information contained therein.

6

2. MTT’s welcome: Director Dr. Sari Forsman-Hugg

Mrs. Latvala introduced the Director of MTT Mrs. Sari Forsman-Hugg. She welcomed theparticipants, introduced herself and presented the MTT departments, activities, goals and rules inthe food research activities in Finland. She thanked all the participants who attended the meetingand she invited them to contribute to the project implementation in the best way. She wished thebest for the project and invited the partners to enjoy the country as well.

3. Participants Presentations

Mr. Vallauri invited the 3 External Experts (Mrs. Dolores O’Riordan, Mr. Andres Andrén and Mr.Matthijs Dekker) who introduced their selves and their experiences in the project fields. Heintroduced also Mrs. Bazzoni, External Evaluator, selected with a public tender by Tecnogranda toperform and coordinate the external evaluation of the project.

Mr. Vallauri introduced the session “Partners Presentations” asking the partners to be short intheir round table presentation to respect the meeting tight schedule.

4. WP 1 - Presentation of the first project year: results, commitment andchallenges

Mr. Vallauri presented to the external experts the detailed structure and activities of the projectand all the activities implemented in the first project year. He also presented the planning for thenext months. Then, he showed to the participants some letters received by TECNOGRANDA froma German company named SALUS that sells health products. This company invitedTECNOGRANDA to avoid to continue to use the acronym SALUS because the lawyer of thiscompany declared that they registered the acronym SALUS and they did not accept that wecontinued to use this acronym. Mr. Vallauri showed to the partners the reply prepared byTECNOGRANDA’s lawyer.

Mr. Ramadori expressed his opinion about this really strange situation and he explained that it isnot possible to register as a trade mark a Latin word so, the request of the German company isnot valid. Mr. Vallauri thanked him for his contribution and clarification.

Mr. Vallauri showed to the participants the updated Work Plan overview (Tasks and Deliverables)and SALUS GANTT.

Question 1: Mr. Andrén asked “Did you plan to share all the meeting presentations?”

Reply: Mr. Vallauri clarified that at the end of the meeting, he will share all the participantspresentations.

5. Coffee/Tea break

6. WP 4 - Overview of the Analysis of the local contexts

Mrs. Macri thanked all the partners for their commitment in the implementation of this reallycomplex WP. She briefly presented to the external experts the methodology used to perform the

This report arises from the “SALUS” project which has received funding from the European Union in theframework of the Health Programme. This report has been prepared for the European Commissionhowever it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for anyuse which may be made of the information contained therein.

7

research and then, presented to the participants the results of the “WP 4 Analysis of the localcontexts participating in the project”.

Question 1: Mr. Knorr “SALUS project is dealing with the food reformulation, but I think that alsothe communication with the consumers and SMEs is fundamental, what do you think about that?”

Reply: Mr. Ramadori highlighted the add value of the right communication to the SMEs about thehealth benefits of the food reformulation.

However, Mr. Vallauri reminded that the target of the project is the food reformulation.

Question 2: Mrs. Bonet asked for an extension of the deadline to send the comments, changes orrevisions to Mrs. Macri.

Reply: Mr. Vallauri suggested 15 September and all the partners agreed with his proposal. Mr.Vallauri also invited the partners to send the list of the national authors and the acknowledgmentsby the 15 September 2012.

Reply: Mrs. Macri fixed as final deadline to release the final report the 30 September 2012.

Question 3: Mr. Falanga suggested to upload on the project website both the full and short report.

Reply: all the partners agreed with Mr. Falanga’s suggestion.

Question 4: Mrs. O’Riordan asked to Mrs. Macri “Why did you decide to analyse the localcontexts? What are the goals of this WP?”

Reply: Mrs. Macri explained that it is very important for the project to have a picture (state of theart) of the contexts participating in the project for a better planning of the implementation of WP6, WP 7 and WP8. From the analysis of the local contexts, Mrs. Macri highlighted that there are nofunding mechanism that will motivate SME’s to reformulate their products. Mrs. O’Riordansuggested to include the consumers in the project dissemination activities, because according herexperiences it is important to inform them and to influence their behaviours/choices.

Mr. Vallauri clarified that the original proposal was focused also on consumers but during thenegotiation phase all these activities were deleted by EC/EAHC.

Question 5: Mrs. O’Riordan asked to Mrs. Macri “How do you want to link this WP with otherWPs?”

Reply: Mr. Vallauri explained that this WP is the fundamental step to perform WP5 and WP6considering the needs and the specificities of the local contexts.

Question 6: Mr. Andrén “Why have you excluded retailers?”

Reply: Mrs. Macri explained that the project target group was: Universities and/or Research,technical staff from ministries of health and representatives from food manufacturers,professional associations and catering industry representatives and Nongovernmentalorganizations. Furthermore, the reformulation activities will deal only with the company. Mr.

This report arises from the “SALUS” project which has received funding from the European Union in theframework of the Health Programme. This report has been prepared for the European Commissionhowever it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for anyuse which may be made of the information contained therein.

8

Vallauri added that the project starting point was the White Paper on Nutrition, Overweight andObesity related health issues so what the partners have to investigate with the project is the stateof the art of the reformulation and the identification of best practices (in terms of majorreformulations) to transfer this knowledge to European SMEs.

Mr. Stanevicius pointed out that the retailers are the distributors and not the producers so theyare out of the project. He also added that SALUS project led to the collection of many informationand now all the partners have to find the best way to disseminate it.

Question 7: Mr. Falanga asked “We have a report of more than 300 pages but in the projectbudget we have the money only to translate 80 pages, how we will manage it?”

Reply: Mrs. Macri replied that according her experience, also in other EU projects, it is possible tohave a short version of the report with the conclusions, key findings and figures in more or less 80pages. Mrs. Macri asked to the partner “Do you agree to translate only these 80 pages?”

Reply from the floor: All the partners agreed with Mrs. Macri’s suggestion. Mrs. Macri informedthe participants that the short version of the report would have been delivered in the next week.

Mrs. O’Riordan suggested to include also a brief description of the methodology applied toperform the analysis.

Mrs. Macri confirmed that she would have included this section in the report.

Mr. Vallauri suggested to use the results of WP4 to prepare the 1st Scientific Publication of theproject. He also invited BOKU and University of Hohenheim to decide who would have preparedthe 1st and who the 2nd Scientific publication.

Question 8: Mr. Kneifel suggested to publish a book instead of a Scientific publication.

Reply from the floor: the partners did not agree with this suggestion. Mr. Kneifel suggested todecide for this article later. The partners agreed to rethink about this issue.

7. WP 5 - Identification and exchange of good practices: validation of criteria andmethodology

Mr. Stanevicius presented to the participants the developed methodology (by SFVS team) toperform the identification and exchange of good practices. In particular, he presented to theparticipants the objective of WP 5 and the methodology to identify good practices and analysethem. He presented to the participants 5 different questionnaires (templates):

A questionnaire collect data on the definition of good practices in the food reformulation(Template 1).

A questionnaire on good practice campaigns in food reformulations (Template 2. Form forcollecting information on good practice campaigns in the food reformulation conducted inthe last 5 years that have given positive results).

This report arises from the “SALUS” project which has received funding from the European Union in theframework of the Health Programme. This report has been prepared for the European Commissionhowever it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for anyuse which may be made of the information contained therein.

9

A questionnaire on examples of good practice in manufacture of reformulated food(Template 3. Form for collecting information on good practice in manufacture ofreformulated food conducted in the last 5 years that have given positive results).

Evaluation criteria of the information supplied on good practice campaigns in foodreformulations conducted in the last 5 years that have given positive results (Template 4).

Evaluation criteria of the information supplied on good practice in manufacture ofreformulated food in the last 5 years that have given positive results (Template 5).

The partners commented these templates and Mr. Stanevicius collected all the inputs from thefloor.

Question 1: Mr. Vallauri asked “Should we have to select one product or a panel of products?”.

Reply: Mr. Stanevicius clarified that in the Technical annex, the methodology was not described indepth so the partners were able to decide about it.

Mrs. Bonet suggested to work on precise food group.

Mr. Kneifel suggested to coordinate the questionnaires for WP 5 and WP 6 to avoid anyoverlapping in the data and information collection. He also suggested not to bother SMEs withmany and similar questionnaires to avoid the lack of participation of SMEs in the survey.

Mr. Knorr suggested to work on 3 categories: salt, sugar and fat.

Mrs. Bonet and Mrs. O’Riordan suggested to analyse the campaign starting from the data andinformation collected with WP4.

Mr. Stanevicius invited the participants to consider also the confidentiality of the information anddata about the reformulated food, so please consider how to guarantee the confidentiality to theSMEs.

Mr. Vallauri suggested to include in the analysis also large companies, but remembering thatSMEs are the project target group.

Mr. Falanga expressed his doubts about the participation of the large company in the survey.Furthermore, he had some doubts about the transferability of the practices from the largecompany to SMEs.

8. Q&A panel: All participants

All the questions were reported under the relative sections.

9. Lunch

The partners had a break of about 1 hour.

10. WP 6 - Organization of the follow-up of the food reformulation among SMEs

This report arises from the “SALUS” project which has received funding from the European Union in theframework of the Health Programme. This report has been prepared for the European Commissionhowever it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for anyuse which may be made of the information contained therein.

10

Mr. Hoel presented to the participants the aims and the proposed methodology to perform thefollow-up of the food reformulation among the SMEs in the participating countries. In particular,he presented the invitation letter text for the SMEs and the tool to perform the follow-up(questionnare) of the major reformulation identified at national level. Mr. Hoel also asked to thepartners to define the deadlines and to approve the invitation letter for the SMEs. By the way insome countries there were two or more partners he suggested to identify a national contact pointin charge of the coordination of the local activities.

This is the list of national contact points selected and approved in the meeting:

COUNTRY PARTNERS NATIONAL CONTACT

Italy TECNOGRANDA, ISES, Codacons TECNOGRANDA

Finland MTT MTT

Romania IBA IBA

UK Campden BRI Campden BRI

France Agro-Hall Agro-Hall

Hungary CBHU CBHU

Lithuania SFVS SFVS

Austria BOKU BOKU

Bulgaria CANRI CANRI

Slovenia Jata-Emona Jata-Emona

Germany TUB, UHOH TUB

Spain UIB UIB

Comments from the floor

Mr. Hoel presented the software (SurveyMonkey and Moodle) to analyse the questionnairesresults. All the partners agreed to use SurveyMonkey.

This report arises from the “SALUS” project which has received funding from the European Union in theframework of the Health Programme. This report has been prepared for the European Commissionhowever it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for anyuse which may be made of the information contained therein.

11

Mr. Hoel invited SALUS partners to decide how to share the 1.000 questionnaires among thepartners.

Mr. Falanga presented to the partners the section of the website that will host the questionnaireto perform the follow-up (http://www.salus-project.eu/en/web/salus-questionnaires-30) and thefunctioning of the registration form.

Mr. Falanga suggested to prepare the simplest and easiest questionnaire for the SMEs to avoid tobother them.

Mrs. Horváth suggested to add to the questionnaire the following question “Did you reformulateyour products? Are you reformulating your products? Yes or No + brief description”. All thepartners agreed with her.

Mr. Dekker suggested to describe better, in the invitation letter, what SALUS means with “reformulation”.

Mr. Graeve invited the partners and WP Leaders (5-6) to work together to merge and coordinatethe questionnaires of these WPs.

Mr. Vallauri suggested to contact the SMEs with the letter and a phone-call. All the partnersagreed with his suggestion.

Question 1: Mrs. Bonet asked “Would be possible to prepare different questions for the differentproducts?”

Reply: Mr. Kneifel “We would try to do it”.

Question 2: Mrs. Forgione asked “How do you want to share the 1000 questionnaires among theproject countries?”

Reply: Mrs. Guerouaou replied “We should share the questionnaires on the basis of the size ofcountry population”. All the partners agreed with this suggestion.

It was agreed among the partners that a table with a target number of questionnaire to becollected by each participating country will be elaborated and circulated, based on the countrypopulation.

Question 3: Mrs. O’Riordan asked “How do SMEs receive the survey results?”

Reply: Mr. Falanga explained that the website page that will host the questionnaire has on theright side a form that each company could fill in to receive the results of the project.

Question 4: Mr. Dekker asked “Do you want to collect also data about the sales and earnings?”

Reply: Mr. Hoel explained that these figures will be considered in the questionnaires revision. Mr.Ramadori invited the partners to include in the questionnaire the privacy disclaimer (consideringthe different national laws).

This report arises from the “SALUS” project which has received funding from the European Union in theframework of the Health Programme. This report has been prepared for the European Commissionhowever it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for anyuse which may be made of the information contained therein.

12

11. WP 2 - Dissemination of the project results: general overview and futureactivities

Mrs. Guerouaou presented to the partners all the results achieved in the framework of this WP.Furthermore, she presented the Dissemination plan tools prepared for the interim and finalreport. Mrs. Guerouaou suggested to prepare the annual e-Magazine including the informationalready sent with the newsletters and to include some articles about the food reformulation inEU. All the partners agreed with her suggestion.

12. WP 3 - Internal and External Evaluation of the project: general overview andfuture activities

Mrs. Bazzoni presented to the partners the External evaluation of SALUS, in particular:

• Objectives

• Main external indicators

• Activities and key moments

• Outputs

• Role of partners and external experts.

Mrs. Latvala presented to the participants the Internal evaluation of SALUS and the evaluationplan elaborated to perform this WP.

Mrs. Latvala and Mrs. Bazzoni had the opportunity to coordinate their work to avoid anyoverlapping in the WP implementation.

13. Coffee/Tea break

The partners had a break of about 15 minutes.

14. WP 7 - Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) of the major reformulations identified

Mr. Vallauri presented to the partners the goals and activities of this WP. In particular, he pointedout that the WP aims to analyse the Cost-Effectiveness of the major food reformulations atEuropean and International level. In particular, the analysis will be targeted on the specific needsof SMEs. He also presented to the partners the TECNOGRANDA’s responsibilities and the partnersinvolvement in the WP implementation.

Question 1: Mrs. Stanevicius asked “How do you want to provide technological information (interms of reformulation) to SMEs?

Reply: Mr. Kneifel “We should try to analyse also the technological implication and to deliver thesecrucial information to the company. A SME when decide to reformulate a food product the firstaspect that investigate is the economic (cost for technology)”.

Mr. Andrén suggested also to analyse all the marketing aspects.

This report arises from the “SALUS” project which has received funding from the European Union in theframework of the Health Programme. This report has been prepared for the European Commissionhowever it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for anyuse which may be made of the information contained therein.

13

15. CODACONS: actions and lawsuits to protect consumers health

Mr. Ramadori presented to the participants his experience in terms of health consumersprotection, in particular, he presented the JUNK FOOD project and the recent proposals of lawfrom the Italian Ministry of Health to introduce a tax on the soft drinks.

16. Q&A panel: All participants

All the questions were reported under the relative section.

17. Meeting closure

Mrs. Latvala tanked all the participants in the meeting and inform them that the second meetingday had been opened by three speeches of Finnish experts working in the project fields.

1st PROJECT MEETING

7 SEPTEMBER 2012

HELSINKI (FINLAND)

Meeting Venue: Info-center Korona (Viikinkaari 11, Viikki) Room 3

1. Welcome to the Workshop about the food reformulation in Finland andcomparison with the EU experiences come from the project

Mrs. Latvala opened the second meeting day introduced the speakers of the first part of day. Shestressed the importance to compare the Finnish experiences in the project field with theexperiences of SALUS participating countries.

2. Nutrition recommendations and Nutrition Council in Finland

Mrs. Raija Kara (Secretary General at National Nutrition Council) presented to the participants theNational Nutrition Council history, activities and members. In particular, the main goal of theCouncil is to revise general Finnish nutrition recommendations on the basis of the Nordic nutritionrecommendations. The main tasks are:

- to monitor and develop the nutrition of the population by issuing other nutritionrecommendations, if necessary, and by making proposals for specific measures andmonitoring the implementation of such measures and their impact on public health;

- to take initiatives and provide statements as well as express opinions on issues related tothe nutrition of the population and public health with regard to the entire food chain.

Question 1: Mr. Dekker “What kind of recommendations do you use?”

Reply: Mrs. Kara “Nordic Recommendations.”

This report arises from the “SALUS” project which has received funding from the European Union in theframework of the Health Programme. This report has been prepared for the European Commissionhowever it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for anyuse which may be made of the information contained therein.

14

Question 2: Mrs. Paraskova “Do you have figures about low cholesterol products consumption?”

Reply: Mrs. Kara “We have just an estimation about the decrease of consumption of thisproducts.”

3. School meals in Finland

Mrs. Marjaana Manninen (Finnish National Board of Education) presented to the participants theFinnish experience in the preparation and delivering of school meals. In particular, she highlightedthat school meals are an integral part of national core curricula for basic and pre-primaryeducation, before- and after-school activities as well as schools’ student welfare services and foodeducation. Local and school-level curricula define the central principles of arranging schoolcatering. The curricula also describe the objectives for education in health, nutrition and manners.The health-related and social role of school meals, the objectives of nutritional education andlearning of manners as well as the recreational aspect of lunch breaks will be taken into accountwhen arranging school meals and any snacks that may be offered during the school day.Pupils have the opportunity to participate in planning and implementing school meals, whichfosters involvement and community spirit. Regular meals constitute significantly to children andyoung people’s wellbeing, their ability to learn and to their healthy growth and development.Meal breaks should allow pupils and students to enjoy their meals in a calm, enjoyable andunhurried manner. Breaks must also give pupils and students a chance to interact with others andtake a break from teaching.

Question 1: Mr. Knorr “Do you have evidence about a correlation between the students schoolsresults and their meals? Do you know if the teachers inform students about the benefit of a goodnutrition?”

Reply: Mrs. Manninen “Unfortunately we have no evidence of this. The Finnish teachers informyoung people of the benefit of healthy food.”

Question 2: Mr. Falanga “What is the role of the parents in the choice of the measls?”

Reply: Mrs. Manninen “Parents are involved in this process and they are also invited to vote forthe meals provided to their children with regular open days in the schools..”

Question 3: Mr. Graeve “Are the parents involved in the meals preparation?

Reply: Mrs. Manninen “No only professionals prepare the meals. In schools we regularly organisecourse about food education involving also the parents”

Question 2: Mr. Ramadori “Did you ever have a problem with the quality of food?

Reply: Mrs. Manninen “Yes but just one time with carrots.”

4. Heart Symbol (Sydänmerkki) as a sign of healthy food

Mrs. Anna Kara (Finnish Heart Association) presented to the participants the Finnish HeartAssociation. The Finnish Heart Association is a public health and patient organisation promotingheart health. The Association provides information on health, encourages towards a healthy

This report arises from the “SALUS” project which has received funding from the European Union in theframework of the Health Programme. This report has been prepared for the European Commissionhowever it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for anyuse which may be made of the information contained therein.

15

lifestyle and supports rehabilitation. The Finnish Heart Association comprises over 80 000individual members, 19 regions, 238 local societies and the nation-wide organisations for youngheart patients), heart or lung transplanted patients and cardiomyopathy patients. The goal of theFinnish Heart Association is that, in 20 years' time, cardiovascular diseases will no longer be asignificant health problem among working-age adults and that people experience more healthyand active years in their lives.

Mrs. Kara presented the Heart Symbol to the project partners. The symbol was introduced on2000 to help Finnish consumers to make better choices at groceries stores. Hearth symbol is andeasy to notice addition to the nutritional information in food packages, the symbol is well knownby the Finnish consumers. For food industry it is an effective means of marketing products thathave been given the right to use this symbol. Use of Heart Symbol —products is recommended byNational Nutrition Council in the dietary guidelines for consumers.

Question 1: Mrs. Belc “Who does support this initiative?”

Reply: Mrs. Kara “The Ministry of Social Affairs.”

Question 2: Mr. Wolfgang “Did EFSA approved this logo?”

Reply: Mrs. Kara “We are waiting for the approval from EFSA.”

Question 3: Mrs. Macri “Who will verify the rules’ respecting?”

Reply: Mrs. Kara “The Ministry and an External Agency.”

Question 4: Mr. Dekker “How many companies adopted your logo?”

Reply: Mrs. Kara “More than 100.”

Question 5: Mr. Kneifel “Is it possible to use this logo outside Finland?”

Reply: Mrs. Kara “Yes, it is possible.”

5. Q&A panel: All participants

All the questions were reported under the relative section.

6. Closing of the Workshop

Mrs. Latvala thanked the experts for their participation in the meeting and the very interestingspeeches.

7. Lunch

This report arises from the “SALUS” project which has received funding from the European Union in theframework of the Health Programme. This report has been prepared for the European Commissionhowever it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for anyuse which may be made of the information contained therein.

16

The partners had a break of about ½ hour.

8. Wrap-up and Evaluation of the meeting

Mrs. Latvala and Mrs. Bazzoni managed this session informing the partners how to fill in thequestionnaires. A parallel session with the External Experts will be arranged.

9. Next tasks, meetings, envisaged milestones

Mr. Vallauri presented to the participants the next project tasks and deadlines.

10. SALUS administrative aspects

Mr. Vallauri and Mr. Falanga organized this session to refresh all the administrative aspects of theproject and to fix the next deadlines in terms of administrative practices.

11. Closing and goodbye, end of the meeting

Mr. Vallauri and Mrs. Latvala as hosting partner thanked all participants and external experts fortheir active collaboration.

At the following link http://share.associazioneises.org/SALUS/Partners-Presentations-Helsinki-1st-meeting.zip you will find all the power points presentations mentioned in the report exceptthe presentation of Mrs. Manninen that for confidentiality reasons did not give us a copy of herpresentation.

This report arises from the “SALUS” project which has received funding from the European Union in theframework of the Health Programme. This report has been prepared for the European Commissionhowever it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for anyuse which may be made of the information contained therein.

17

Agenda

1st PROJECT MEETING

6 SEPTEMBER 2012

HELSINKI (FINLAND)

Meeting Venue: Info-center Korona (Viikinkaari 11, Viikki) Room 511

09:00-09:30 Welcome, registration and introductionFacilitated by Ms. Terhi Latvala (MTT) and Dario Vallauri (TECNOGRANDA)

09:30-09:40 MTT’s welcome: Director Dr. Sari Forsman-Hugg

9:40- 10:00 Participants presentations- External Expert- Partners

10:00-10:30 WP 1: Presentation of the first project year: results, commitment and challenges-Presentation by Dario Vallauri (TECNOGRANDA)

10:30-10:45 Coffee/Tea break

10:45-11:30 WP 4: Overview of the Analysis of the local contexts-Presentations by Adriana Macri (IBA)

11:30-12:15 WP 5: Identification and exchange of good practices: validation of criteria andmethodology

-Presentation by Zenonas Stanevicius (SFVS)

12:15-13:00 Q&A panel: All participants

13:00-14:00 Lunch

14:00-15:30 WP 6: Organization of the follow-up of the food reformulation among SMEs- Presentation by Andreas Hohl (BOKU)

15:30-16:00 WP 2: Dissemination of the project results: general overview and futureactivities

-Presentation by Lylia Guerouaou (AGRO-HALL)

16:00-16:45 WP 3: Internal and External Evaluation of the project: general overview andfuture activities

-Presentation by Terhi Latvala (MTT) and Mrs. Bazzoni

16:45-17:00 Coffee/Tea break

17:00-17:30 WP 7: Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) of the major reformulations identified-Presentation by Dario Vallauri (TECNOGRANDA)

This report arises from the “SALUS” project which has received funding from the European Union in theframework of the Health Programme. This report has been prepared for the European Commissionhowever it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for anyuse which may be made of the information contained therein.

18

17:30-18:00 CODACONS: actions and lawsuits to protect consumers health-Presentation by Marco Ramadori (CODACONS)

18:00-18:15 Q&A panel: All participants

18:15 Meeting closure

1st PROJECT MEETING

7 SEPTEMBER 2012

HELSINKI (FINLAND)

Meeting Venue: Info-center Korona (Viikinkaari 11, Viikki) Room 3

09:00-09:30 Welcome to the Workshop about the food reformulation in Finland andcomparison with the EU experiences come from the project

-Presentation by Terhi Latvala

9:30-10:15 Nutrition recommendations and Nutrition Council in Finland-Presentation by Mrs. Raija Kara (Nutrition Council in Finland)

10:15-11.00 School meals in Finland-Presentation by Mrs. Marjaana Manninen (Finnish National Board of Education)

11:00-11:45 Heart Symbol (Sydänmerkki) as a sign of healthy food-Presentation by Mrs. Anna Kara (Finnish Heart Association)

11:45-12:15 Q&A panel: All participants

12.15-12:30 Closing of the Workshop

12:30-13:00 Lunch

13:00-14:00 Wrap-up and Evaluation of the meeting-Presentation by MTT and Mrs. Bazzoni

14:00-15:00 Next tasks, meetings, envisaged milestones

15:00-16:00 SALUS administrative aspects-Presentation by Dario Vallauri (TECNOGRANDA)

16:00-16:30 Closing and goodbye, end of the meeting