Systemic Altruism
← Back to the cohort
Global healthPreliminary editorial review

Open Food Facts

The French nonprofit association maintains a collaborative food-products database and reusable software. Shared infrastructure could lower research and public-information costs; database size does not demonstrate better health.

Visit the organization ↗

Systemic Altruism practice potential: 74–84/100
90% of weighted axes reviewed. A mechanism hypothesis, not proven effectiveness or a donation recommendation.

Who this work enables

Tools & support for charities: Reusable food-data software and a shared product database can support nonprofit research and public-information applications with less duplicated collection work.

Open-source evidence · license checked

  • Open Food Facts server — AGPL-3.0 license file. Organization’s role: maintainer.
    Inspected the named server software license and repository status. Database, individual contents, photos, trademarks and hosted API/service terms have separate conditions; no accuracy, medical or food-safety audit was performed. License-file snapshot: be3f7b28e564e7dd05eaf59d64adba1a4065ac0e.

License checked 2026-10-27. This is not a security audit, proof of current support or effectiveness, or a promise of free hosting. A sponsor or steward is not necessarily the sole developer. Unchecked profiles are not evidence of closed code. No extra score points are added.

Humanity’s Checklist source match

Gatekeepers · Coordination — editorial, partial alignment.

A shared food-information commons can reduce data gatekeeping and coordinate collection across implementers. This is a partial design link, not proof of reliable data or healthier behavior.

Explicit checklist adoption: not verified. A mechanism match is not an affiliation, endorsement, evidence of effectiveness or a scoring bonus. Read the practice.

Focus classification: 2026-10-27. Based on the organization’s dated official sources below; earlier axis-review dates are unchanged.

Compare alternatives for a funder →

The proposed pathway

Build a reusable food-information commons for public-interest research and tools

Six dimensions, with rationale

Structural depth

3 / 4

A shared data and software commons can reduce information bottlenecks and duplicated collection, but information alone need not alter food-system incentives.

Institutional reach

4 / 4

The infrastructure can be reused by researchers, public-interest implementers and consumers across many products and jurisdictions.

Durability

2 / 4

Reusable code and data can persist, while product changes, moderation, hosting and data-quality work require constant renewal.

Scalability

4 / 4

A common database and server code can support many downstream applications without every team rebuilding data infrastructure.

Funding additionality

Unreviewed

No current marginal funding gap or comparison with other public food-data investments was audited.

Community agency

Unreviewed

Volunteer contribution and open access do not establish binding decision rights for communities exposed to food-system harms.

Evidence and selection

Organization reported; current primary mechanism sources inspected; named repository and license file checked

Illustrative inclusion to examine this mechanism. Inclusion is not an external recommendation or a verified comparative ranking.

A testable next question

Do public-interest teams reusing this commons produce more accurate, usable food-information interventions at lower lifecycle cost than teams collecting their own data, and do users benefit without increased misinformation risk?

Review confidence: Moderate for documented design; low for systemic attribution. The French Open Food Facts association and its shared server/data infrastructure; not Open Food Foundation or a clinical assessment of consumer apps.

What remains uncertain

The legal page identifies a French Loi 1901 nonprofit association. AGPL-3.0 applies to the inspected server software, not all data or images: the legal page separately specifies ODbL, Database Contents License and image/content terms. Crowd-contributed records can be incomplete or wrong, including allergen and nutrition fields. This is not medical advice, a food-safety certification, an accuracy audit or proof of causal health benefit.

Sources to inspect

Propose a sourced correction →

Axis review: 2026-10-27 · weighting method v0.2 (2026-10-26) · Method, conflicts and coverage