Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Oct;19(14):2662-74.
doi: 10.1017/S1368980016000653. Epub 2016 Apr 6.

How low can dietary greenhouse gas emissions be reduced without impairing nutritional adequacy, affordability and acceptability of the diet? A modelling study to guide sustainable food choices

Marlène Perignon  1 , Gabriel Masset  1 , Gaël Ferrari  1 , Tangui Barré  1 , Florent Vieux  2 , Matthieu Maillot  2 , Marie-Josèphe Amiot  1 , Nicole Darmon  1
Affiliations

How low can dietary greenhouse gas emissions be reduced without impairing nutritional adequacy, affordability and acceptability of the diet? A modelling study to guide sustainable food choices

Marlène Perignon et al. Public Health Nutr. 2016 Oct.

Abstract

Objective: To assess the compatibility between reduction of diet-related greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE) and nutritional adequacy, acceptability and affordability dimensions of diet sustainability.

Design: Dietary intake, nutritional composition, GHGE and prices were combined for 402 foods selected among those most consumed by participants of the Individual National Study on Food Consumption. Linear programming was used to model diets with stepwise GHGE reductions, minimized departure from observed diet and three scenarios of nutritional constraints: none (FREE), on macronutrients (MACRO) and for all nutrient recommendations (ADEQ). Nutritional quality was assessed using the mean adequacy ratio (MAR) and solid energy density (SED).

Setting: France.

Subjects: Adults (n 1899).

Results: In FREE and MACRO scenarios, imposing up to 30 % GHGE reduction did not affect the MAR, SED and food group pattern of the observed diet, but required substitutions within food groups; higher GHGE reductions decreased diet cost, but also nutritional quality, even with constraints on macronutrients. Imposing all nutritional recommendations (ADEQ) increased the fruits and vegetables quantity, reduced SED and slightly increased diet cost without additional modifications induced by the GHGE constraint up to 30 % reduction; higher GHGE reductions decreased diet cost but required non-trivial dietary shifts from the observed diet. Not all the nutritional recommendations could be met for GHGE reductions ≥70 %.

Conclusions: Moderate GHGE reductions (≤30 %) were compatible with nutritional adequacy and affordability without adding major food group shifts to those induced by nutritional recommendations. Higher GHGE reductions either impaired nutritional quality, even when macronutrient recommendations were imposed, or required non-trivial dietary shifts compromising acceptability to reach nutritional adequacy.

Keywords: Affordability; Cultural acceptability; Diet cost; Diet sustainability; Diet-related greenhouse gas emissions; Dietary changes; Food choices; Food consumption; Linear programming modelling; Nutritional quality.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
(a) Mean adequacy ratio (MAR), (b) mean excess ratio (MER), (c) solid energy density (SED), (d) diet cost, (e) mean departure from the observed diet at food level and (f) mean departure from the observed diet at food group level, for the mean observed diet (formula image) and for modelled diets at different levels of dietary GHGE reduction under the FREE (formula image), MACRO (formula image) and ADEQ (formula image) scenario, for French women (GHGE, greenhouse gas emissions; FREE; no nutritional constraints; MACRO, constraints on macronutrients only; ADEQ, constraints on all nutrients; minFREE, maximal GHGE reduction (82·6 %) achievable under the constraints of the FREE scenario; minMACRO, maximal GHGE reduction (82·2 %) achievable under the constraints of the MACRO scenario; minADEQ, maximal GHGE reduction (69·7 %) achievable under the constraints of the ADEQ scenario; 1 kcal=4·184 kJ)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Food group quantities (g/d) in the mean observed diet and at different levels of dietary GHGE reduction from the value of the mean observed diet under the FREE (a), MACRO (b) and ADEQ (c) modelled diets for French women (GHGE, greenhouse gas emissions; FREE; no nutritional constraints; MACRO, constraints on macronutrients only; ADEQ, constraints on all nutrients; FV, Fruits and Vegetables; Dairy, Dairy Products; HFSS, Foods High in Fat/Sugar/Salt; MFE, Meat/Fish/Eggs; minFREE, maximal GHGE reduction (82·6 %) achievable under the constraints of the FREE scenario; minMACRO, maximal GHGE reduction (82·2 %) achievable under the constraints of the MACRO scenario; minADEQ, maximal GHGE reduction (69·7 %) achievable under the constraints of the ADEQ scenario)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Departure from subgroup quantities in the observed diet (%) for the ADEQ scenario at different levels of dietary GHGE reduction (% GHGE reduction: formula image, 0; formula image, 10; formula image, 20; formula image, 30; formula image, 40; formula image, 50; formula image, 60; formula image, min) for French women, according to food group: (a) Fruits and Vegetables; (b) Starch; (c) Dairy Products; (d) Foods High in Fat/Sugar/Salt; (e) Mixed Dishes; (f) Meat/Fish/Eggs; (g) Seasonings; (h) Drinks (ADEQ, constraints on all nutrients; GHGE, greenhouse gas emissions; min: maximal GHGE reduction (69·7 %) achievable under the constraints of the ADEQ scenario; PPE, pork, poultry and eggs)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2010) Sustainable diets and biodiversity – directions and solutions for policy, research and action. In International Scientific Symposium ‘Biodiversity and Sustainable Diets United Against Hunger’. http://www.fao.org/ag/humannutrition/28507-0e8d8dc364ee46865d5841c48976e... (accessed July 2015).
    1. European Commission (2011) Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: A Roadmap for Moving to a Competitive Low Carbon Economy in 2050. Brussels: European Commission.
    1. Parliament of the United Kingdom (2008) Climate Change Act 2008 (c. 27). http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2008/27/contents (accessed March 2016).
    1. République Française (2009) LOI n° 2009-967 du 3 août 2009 de programmation relative à la mise en œuvre du Grenelle de l’environnement. https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000020949... (accessed March 2016).
    1. Stehfest E, Bouwman L, van Vuuren D et al. (2009) Climate benefits of changing diet. Climatic Change 95, 83–102.

Substances

LinkOut - more resources