sustainability-logo

Journal Browser

Journal Browser

Environmentally Sustainable Diets

A special issue of Sustainability (ISSN 2071-1050).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (15 September 2020) | Viewed by 19499

Special Issue Editor


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Division of Human Nutrition and Health, Wageningen University, Stippeneng 4, 6708 WE Wageningen, The Netherlands
Interests: nutrition; dietary patterns; sustainable diets

Special Issue Information

Dear colleagues,

The purpose of the Special Issue on Environmentally Sustainable Diets is to focus on how future diets could affect health and the environmental impact. Changing from an animal-based diet to a plant-forward diet such as suggested by the EAT-Lancet diet [1] is anticipated to have major health and environmental effects. The EAT-Lancet diet is a mark on the horizon, since the current dietary patterns in most countries are far off these guidelines. There is a need for short-term effective changes in consumption and production towards healthy and more sustainable diets.

The aim of this Special Issue is to deliver key findings and insights that aid individuals, businesses, communities, and governments to make the healthy and sustainable choice an informed choice. Changing current diets towards healthier and more sustainable diets is not only a responsibility of the consumer. The food environment (availability), food pricing, and marketing (affordability) as well as liking (preferability) play a major role.

In this Special Issue, the role of different stakeholders will be assessed on how this transition could be shaped. Therefore, different perspectives on how to impact dietary changes should be investigated. We welcome innovative studies that include food system approaches, dietary scenario analysis, trade-off analysis between different health and environmental indicators, effectiveness of policy scenarios using true price/cost, as well as insights in consumer preferences around healthy and sustainable diets.

The focus should be on how small steps and actions could aid in starting the transition toward a healthier and more sustainable diet today and not tomorrow.

1. Willett W, Rockström J, Loken B, Springmann M, Lang T, Vermeulen S, Garnett T, Tilman D, DeClerck F, Wood A: Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT–Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. The Lancet 2019, 393(10170):447-492.

Dr. Sander Biesbroek
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Sustainability is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • dietary patterns
  • dietary change
  • future diets
  • health
  • transition

Published Papers (3 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

12 pages, 799 KiB  
Article
Potential Impact of Meat Replacers on Nutrient Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Diets in Four European Countries
by Elly Mertens, Sander Biesbroek, Marcela Dofková, Lorenza Mistura, Laura D’Addezio, Aida Turrini, Carine Dubuisson, Sabrina Havard, Ellen Trolle, Johanna M. Geleijnse and Pieter van ’t Veer
Sustainability 2020, 12(17), 6838; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12176838 - 23 Aug 2020
Cited by 26 | Viewed by 4807
Abstract
Meat replacers could play a role in achieving more plant-based diets, but their current consumption is limited. The present modelling study aimed to explore the nutritional and greenhouse gas emissions impacts of meat replacers. Using dietary surveys from Denmark, Czech Republic, Italy and [...] Read more.
Meat replacers could play a role in achieving more plant-based diets, but their current consumption is limited. The present modelling study aimed to explore the nutritional and greenhouse gas emissions impacts of meat replacers. Using dietary surveys from Denmark, Czech Republic, Italy and France (~6500 adults), we composed alternative diets in which all the meat in the observed diet (in grams) was substituted by similar use meat replacers (with and without fortification). Starting from the observed diets and meat-replacement diets, diets with improved adherence to food-based dietary guidelines (FBDGs) were modelled using Data Envelopment Analysis. These improved diets were then further optimised for dietary preferences (MaxP, diet similarity index), nutrient quality (MaxH, Nutrient Rich Diet score, NRD15.3) or diet-related greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE) (MaxS, CO2 equivalents). In all optimised modelled diets, the total amount of meat was lower than in the observed diets, i.e., 30% lower in the MaxP, 50% lower in the MaxH, and 75% lower in the MaxS diets. In the MaxP diet, NRD15.3 was ~6% higher, GHGE was ~9% lower, and ~83% of food intake remained similar. In the MaxH diet, NRD15.3 was ~17% higher, GHGE was ~15% lower, and ~66% of food intake remained similar. In the MaxS diet, NRD15.3 was ~9% higher, GHGE was ~33% lower, and ~65% of food intake remained similar. When using fortified meat replacers, for all modelled diets, the diet similarity was on average 2% lower and the GHGE reduction was on average 3% higher as compared with the same scenarios without fortification. This analysis showed that meat replacers, provided their preference is similar to meat, can provide benefits for GHGE, without necessarily compromising nutrient quality. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Environmentally Sustainable Diets)
Show Figures

Figure 1

23 pages, 1830 KiB  
Article
Increasing the Proportion of Plant-Based Foods Available to Shift Social Consumption Norms and Food Choice among Non-Vegetarians
by Sanne Raghoebar, Ellen Van Kleef and Emely De Vet
Sustainability 2020, 12(13), 5371; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12135371 - 2 Jul 2020
Cited by 20 | Viewed by 5338
Abstract
Increasing the relative availability of plant-based (versus animal source) foods seems promising in shifting consumption, but it remains unknown how and under what circumstances this happens. We performed two availability manipulations including different foods. The impact on food choice, social norm perceptions about [...] Read more.
Increasing the relative availability of plant-based (versus animal source) foods seems promising in shifting consumption, but it remains unknown how and under what circumstances this happens. We performed two availability manipulations including different foods. The impact on food choice, social norm perceptions about what others do (descriptive) or approve of (injunctive), and salience was assessed. Non-vegetarian participants were visually (Study 1, n = 184) or physically (Study 2, n = 276) exposed to (a) four plant-based and two animal source foods or (b) vice versa. Participants chose one food item, either hypothetically (Study 1) or actually (Study 2), and reported the perceived social norms and salience of plant-based and animal source foods. The results showed no direct effects on food choice, injunctive norms, or salience. An increased proportion of plant-based (versus animal source) foods was interpreted in Study 1 as plant-based foods being less often chosen by others, whereas in Study 2, these foods were interpreted as being more often chosen (marginally significant), while animal source foods were interpreted as being less often chosen. The results suggest that a higher availability of plant-based foods influences descriptive norms, but future research should examine aspects potentially contributing to the contradictory normative interpretations (e.g., norm salience). Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Environmentally Sustainable Diets)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

19 pages, 1287 KiB  
Review
Demand-Side Food Policies for Public and Planetary Health
by Elisabeth H.M. Temme, Reina E. Vellinga, Henri de Ruiter, Susanna Kugelberg, Mirjam van de Kamp, Anna Milford, Roberta Alessandrini, Fabio Bartolini, Alberto Sanz-Cobena and Adrian Leip
Sustainability 2020, 12(15), 5924; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12155924 - 23 Jul 2020
Cited by 22 | Viewed by 8999
Abstract
Background: The current food system has major consequences for the environment and for human health. Alignment of the food policy areas of mitigating climate change and public health will ensure coherent and effective policy interventions for sustaining human health and the environment. This [...] Read more.
Background: The current food system has major consequences for the environment and for human health. Alignment of the food policy areas of mitigating climate change and public health will ensure coherent and effective policy interventions for sustaining human health and the environment. This paper explores literature on demand-side policies that aim to reduce consumption of animal-based foods, increase plant-based foods, and reduce overconsumption. Methods: We searched for publications, published between January 2000 and December 2019, considering the above policy domains. Articles were distinguished for type of policy instrument, for topic via keywords and examples were given. Results: The majority of demand-side policies focus on preventing overweight and obesity, using all types of policy instruments including more forceful market-based policies. Hardly any examples of public policies explicitly aiming to lower animal-based foods consumption were found. Policies combining health and sustainability objectives are few and mainly of the information type. Discussion: Moving towards environmentally sustainable and healthy diets is challenging as the implemented demand-side policies focus largely on human health, and not yet on environmental outcomes, or on win-wins. Policies targeting foods from the health perspective can contribute to lower environmental impacts, by indicating suitable animal-based food replacers, and aiming at avoiding overconsumption of energy dense-nutrient poor foods. Preferred policies include a variety of instruments, including strong measures. Conclusions: Working solutions are available to ensure coherent and effective demand side food policies aligning public health and environmental aims. Implementation of aligned and effective policy packages is urgent and needed. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Environmentally Sustainable Diets)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop