In a 30-year study of American adults published in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (Glenn et al., 2024), “researchers found that individuals who consumed the highest ratio of plant-based protein to animal-based protein had a 19% lower risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and a 27% lower risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) compared to those with the lowest ratio. The findings suggest that a plant-to-animal protein ratio of at least 1:2 is effective in preventing CVD, while an even higher ratio of 1:1.3 may be necessary to protect against CHD.” (Ionescu, 2024; Glenn et al., 2024)
Plant protein and heart health
“The research is the first of its kind to investigate how the specific ratio of plant to animal protein impacts heart health.
“The average American eats a 1:3 plant to animal protein ratio. Our findings suggest a ratio of at least 1:2 is much more effective in preventing CVD. For CHD prevention, a ratio of 1:1.3 or higher should come from plants,” said Glenn.” (Ionescu, 2024; Glenn et al., 2024)
Three decades of data
“The researchers analyzed 30 years of dietary, lifestyle, and heart health data from nearly 203,000 men and women enrolled in the Nurses’ Health Studies I and II and the Health Professionals’ Follow-up Study.
Participants reported their dietary intake every four years. The team calculated each participant’s total daily protein intake in grams, as well as their specific consumption of animal and plant proteins.
During the study period, there were 16,118 documented cases of CVD, including over 10,000 CHD cases and more than 6,000 stroke cases.” (Ionescu, 2024; Glenn et al., 2024)
Risk reduction with plant proteins
After adjusting for participants’ health history, demographic, and lifestyle factors, the study found that a higher ratio of plant to animal protein was associated with lower risks of CVD and CHD.
Compared to those who consumed the lowest plant-to-animal protein ratio (~1:4.2), individuals with the highest ratio (~1:1.3) experienced a 19% reduction in CVD risk and a 27% reduction in CHD risk.
These benefits were even greater among participants who consumed more protein overall. Those who obtained 21% of their energy from protein and maintained a higher plant-to-animal protein ratio saw a 28% lower risk of CVD and a 36% lower risk of CHD, compared to those consuming 16% of their energy from protein.” (Ionescu, 2024; Glenn et al., 2024)
Substituting meat with plant-based sources
“No significant associations were found between stroke risk and the protein ratio; however, substituting red and processed meats with plant-based sources like nuts was linked to a reduced risk of stroke.
The researchers explored whether there is a point where increasing plant protein intake no longer provides additional benefits or could have negative effects.
They found that the risk reduction for CVD begins to level off around a 1:2 ratio of plant to animal protein, but the risk of CHD continues to decrease at higher ratios.” (Ionescu, 2024; Glenn et al., 2024)
Dietary changes for heart health
“According to the researchers, these risk reductions are likely due to replacing red and processed meats with plant protein sources, especially nuts and legumes.”
“Such dietary changes have been shown to improve cardiometabolic risk factors like blood lipid levels, blood pressure, and inflammatory biomarkers. Plant proteins are often rich in fiber, antioxidant vitamins, minerals, and healthy fats, which contribute to these benefits.”
“Most of us need to begin shifting our diets toward plant-based proteins,” said senior author Frank Hu, Fredrick J. Stare Professor of Nutrition and Epidemiology at Harvard Chan School.
“We can do so by cutting down on meat, especially red and processed meats, and eating more legumes and nuts. Such a dietary pattern is beneficial not just for human health but also the health of our planet.”
“The researchers emphasized that the ratios identified are estimates, and additional studies are necessary to determine the optimal balance between plant and animal protein. Further research is also needed to understand how protein intake may affect stroke risk.” (Ionescu, 2024; Glenn et al., 2024)
Glenn AJ, Wang F, Tessier AJ, Manson JE, Rimm EB, Mukamal KJ, Sun Q, Willett WC, Rexrode KM, Jenkins DJ, Hu FB. Dietary plant-to-animal protein ratio and risk of cardiovascular disease in 3 prospective cohorts. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2024;120(6): 1373-1386
A new review published in the journal Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology has concluded that microplastics may alter gut health (Bora et al., 2024). Microplastics are small particles of plastic less than five millimeters long; they are found in many food and beverage products including beer. They are also present in water bottles, seafood, table salt, and fruits and vegetables. Consumption of food and beverages is one of the main ways that individuals ingest microplastics (Bambridge-Sutton, 2024).
According to the researchers (Bora et al., 2024), when microplastics accumulate in the gastrointestinal tract (where they remain for a long time due to their resistance to digestion) dysbiosis can occur, which is an imbalance between beneficial and harmful, pathogenic bacteria. Such an imbalance has been linked to numerous health conditions such as weakened immunity, impaired gut function and increased risk of gastrointestinal disorders. (Bambridge-Sutton, 2024; Bora et al., 2024)
“Gut dysbiosis may lead to inflammatory responses and increase gut permeability, leading to the condition often known as ‘leaky gut.’ This can lead to leakage of pathogens into circulation, potentially resulting in autoimmunity (where the body’s immune system attacks the body’s own tissues). Microplastics also exacerbate this through microabrasions in the gut lining. They may also carry chemicals such as heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants (POPs) which can further damage the gut lining.” (Bambridge-Sutton, 2024; Bora et al., 2024)
Microplastics can disrupt the gut-heart axis and gut-kidney access, which are important components of heart and kidney health. In addition, the presence of microplastics can result in systemic inflammation, which in turn can lead to diabetes, obesity as well as cardiovascular and autoimmune diseases. Finally, according to this newly published review, microplastics may lead to imbalances in energy storage and expenditure. (Bambridge-Sutton, 2024; Bora et al., 2024)
The authors recommend that policy makers respond with improvements in public policy including regulating plastic production and disposal more effectively, improving waste management, and developing alternatives to plastic such as biodegradable materials. Finally, it is recommended that microplastic levels in air, water, and food be monitored, water be filtered, and air quality be improved (Bambridge-Sutton, 2024; Bora et al., 2024)
How to Limit Plastic Pollution: Strategies that Work
There are several evidence-based strategies that can help stop plastic pollution (Jones, 2024). Of course, some of these strategies come with caveats and/or unexpected consequences demonstrating that such policies, once adopted, need to be monitored over time. These strategies include 1) banning single-use plastics; 2) taxing plastics and/or requiring plastic producers pay a fee to encourage recycling, 3) cut down on microplastic use (Jones, 2024) and 4) limit the use of plastic in your kitchen (Nowell, 2024). Learn more below about each of these strategies to limit plastic pollution.
Ban single-use plastics
“More than 90 nations and territories have passed full or partial bans on single-use plastic products such as carrier bags. These bans can be very effective. One analysis showed that bans in five US states and cities together cut consumption of single-use plastic bags by about six billion bags per year. Several studies have also shown huge reductions in plastic litter in waterways, says McCauley. Even fees can work. A litter survey in the United Kingdom found that the number of plastic bags found on beaches dropped by 80% after the nation introduced a mandatory fee for single-use carrier bags, although other forms of litter had increased.
But bans that are poorly designed or enforced are likely to be ineffective. California, for example, allowed shops to switch to thicker, reusable carrier bags — but people still threw them away, leading to a higher rate of plastic disposal than before. Policies need to be monitored and reviewed, says McCauley. “You have to put a policy in place, take data and then whack-a-mole the loopholes.”” (Jones, 2024)
Tax plastics and require that companies pay a fee for plastic packaging to be recycled
Tax Plastics
Numerous countries around the world have either passed a tax on plastics or proposed such a tax.
For a summary, see: Plastic Tax, Levy & Penalty (2024)
Based on a recent ruling, Colombia taxes single-use plastics both for domestic use and exports. “In a landmark decision, Colombia’s tax authority (DIAN) published Ruling 294 on 25 April 2024, marking a significant turn in the country’s battle against single-use plastics. This ruling clarifies the application of taxes on the sales of single-use plastic products used in packaging.”
“The ruling also confirms that the tax extends beyond Colombia’s borders, impacting sales of single-use plastic products in international markets; meaning that exports of such products will now also be subject to taxation. The ruling underscores the government’s commitment to environmental conservation and a cohesive approach toward curbing plastic waste, both domestically and internationally.” (Reg Follower, 2024)
Pay a fee for plastic packing to be recycled
“Many nations and US states require companies that produce plastic packaging to pay for it to be recycled, which can boost recycling rates. In Spain, for example, the government introduced an ‘extended producer responsibilities’ policy, and the recycling of paper and plastics rose from 5% up to 81%.”
“Such policies are also meant to incentivize companies to redesign their packaging, but because most of the fees are based on weight, they mainly influence the amount of packaging used rather than its composition. A good idea, says Richard Thompson, a marine scientist at the University of Plymouth, UK, and a co-lead of the scientists’ coalition, is to have a policy that rewards or mandates inclusion of recycled content in products: in the United Kingdom, for example, plastic producers pay a tax of £217.85 (US$274) per tonne of plastic, but only for packaging that’s less than 30% recycled.” Such incentives “will pull demand in the right way”, says Thompson.
“As with all policies, there are some good, some bad, says Farrelly. She has seen policies that end up increasing the use of recycling centers in the Pacific islands that don’t have high safety standards for their workers, for example.” (Jones, 2024)
It is worth noting that not everyone is a proponent of recycling plastics, without strict regulations for doing so, because of the leaching of toxic chemicals. This point is illustrated in an article written by Dr. Bethanie Carney, Almroth Associate Professor, Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Gothenburg and Dr. Eric Carmona Martinez, Scientist at the Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research-UFZ, which you can read here:
Dangerous chemicals found in recycled plastics, making them unsafe for use – experts explain the hazards (2024)
“In designing rules for managing plastic, it’s important to understand that plastic materials and waste streams are complex. Not all plastics are the same. And recycled plastics are not necessarily “better” – less harmful – than virgin plastics. If they contained harmful chemicals to begin with, recycling doesn’t make them less harmful. And sometimes they are contaminated by other substances.”
“[These authors] conducted a study identifying and measuring the concentration of contaminants in recycled pellets from 28 small-scale recycling facilities in the global south. Plastic waste is often exported from high income countries to less developed countries, with few to no requirements for reporting their makeup.”
[Their] investigation covered facilities in Cameroon, Mauritius, Nigeria, Tanzania and Togo in Africa as well others in Asia, Europe and South America.
[They] found 191 pesticides, 107 pharmaceuticals and 81 industrial compounds among many others in the recycled plastic pellets. Many of these chemicals could be hazardous and make the plastics unsuitable for reuse.
This finding can inform regulations for recycled plastics. The chemical composition of the plastic should be checked before it is recycled…
[Their] findings emphasize the importance of regulating mechanical recycling, as many of the substances measured were contaminants and not plastic additives. Many of the chemicals we identified may have contaminated the materials during use. For example, a jug used for storing pesticides will absorb some of the pesticides and will contaminate the recycling waste stream. Plastics in the environment are also known to absorb organic pollutants.
To assess the quality of recycled plastics, it’s crucial to know which chemicals are present and in what concentrations. This information can guide regulations about how recycled plastics may be used. It will also be valuable for plastics producers, waste management workers (including recyclers), consumers, and the scientific community.” (Carney Almroth and Carmona Martinez, 2024)
Cut down microplastics use
“One of the most pernicious forms of plastic pollution is microplastics: tiny chunks that are, for example, abraded off car tires, washed out of textiles or released from products such as cosmetics. Microplastics are thought to make up 15–31% of the estimated 9.5 million tons of plastic released into the oceans each year. More than a dozen countries have banned microbeads from cosmetics, which has put significant pressure on companies to stop using them, says Thompson.
France has become first country to mandate that new washing machines have a microfiber filter, a policy that’s due to come into effect in January next year. Thompson’s group tested six such filters and found that some can be reasonably effective3; one reduced the amount of microfiber content in the wastewater by more than 75%.
Filters aren’t a panacea for microplastics in clothes, says Thompson, because about half of a garment’s fibres are shed during wear. A shift in how textiles are made would be more effective, he says, but this has proven a hard task for national legislation to tackle. “This is a classic example of why we need an international treaty,” says Thompson.” (Jones, 2024)
Tips to Cut Down Plastic Use in Your Kitchen: Reduce, Reuse and Refuse
“Cutting boards, non-stick pans, mixing bowls, even tea bags: in the kitchen, plastics can be hidden in plain sight.” (Nowell, 2024)
According to Jessica Brinkworth, an anthropology professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign:
“Large macroplastics are a problem worldwide because we dump them on the shores of other nations,” she says, where things like plastic bottles block access to food for coastal nations and kill about a million people a year due to flooding, landslides and other environmental disasters. Much smaller plastics, like micro and nanoplastics, which are tinier than a grain of rice, “pose a whole other level of problem. Many types of plastic are endocrine disruptors,” meaning they disrupt the excretion and use of insulin, which can lead to obesity and reproductive health disorders.
Every year, we dump 10m tons of plastic into the ocean, killing a million marine animals annually. That plastic can work its way into our bodies from both the food we eat (most of our seafood contains microplastics) to how we cook in the kitchen.”
Shopping
The first and most important way to cut back on plastic use at the grocery store or supermarket, is to simply buy less. “Make a conscious choice to avoid buying products you don’t need and when you do, look for products that are made from sustainably sourced natural materials.” The more you cook from scratch, the less plastic you’ll use from packaged or highly processed foods.
If you haven’t already gotten in the habit of taking your own bags to the grocery store, start – and while you’re at it, consider adding your own reusable bags, which can be used for produce and other items.
Shopping at traditional grocery stores isn’t your only option: more zero-waste shops are springing up (where you can bring your own containers or use non-plastic ones the store offers to take home exactly as many lentils or bunches of broccoli as you’ll use) and plenty of farmers’ markets allow customers to bring their own glass jars or produce bags so you’re not toting home plastic cartons. Depending on where you live, you might even be able to swap plastic milk cartons for glass bottles (and rekindle the nostalgia of a visit from the milkman) by opting into a milk delivery service.
Cooking
You might not think there’s very much plastic in your kitchen if you’re only thinking about clear packaging, but almost every household is home to at least some plastic kitchen appliances. Think about your cutting board, mixing bowls, non-stick (Teflon-coated) pans, spatulas, blender or food processor. Plastic appliances can release high levels of micro and nanoplastics, especially if your heating with, chopping on or blending in them.
Earlier this year, researchers at North Dakota State University published a study that found that chopping on plastic cutting boards can release millions of microplastics each year. Other recent research has counted the microplastics released from using plastic mixing bowls, blenders, kettles and non-stick pans.
The best way to avoid that? Switch your plastic appliances out for metal, glass or wooden ones where possible, says Brinkworth. But be careful when looking at wood or bamboo appliances that you consider the glue used to hold them together. Even just the glue used to seal a tea bag can release billions of microplastics. (Nowell, 2024)
Big Heart Tea offers plastic-free tea tags. Learn more at:
Plastic wrap has easily one of the greatest impacts on the environment: we only ever use it once and it can take close to 1,000 years to decompose in landfills. And plastic packaging – think cling wrap, sandwich bags and candy wrappers – makes up almost half of the plastic waste that ends up in the ocean. Therefore, it is important to think about reusable alternatives.
You can pick up reusable beeswax cling wrap at many grocery stores. Reuseable cling wrap is easy to clean but will eventually start to flake. However, a simpler solution for most people would be just to use mason jars,” which you can find for about a dollar a piece at many thrift stores. In general, switching to glass jars (or glass storage containers, if they’re in your budget) is better for the environment and your body. Plastic containers can leech cancer-causing and hormone-disrupting chemicals into your food. (Nowell, 2024)
Cleaning
If you thought you had cleared your kitchen of plastics, the prevalence of plastic in your cleaning routine might surprise you. Dishwasher pods get the worst rap (the polyvinyl alcohol wrapping doesn’t break down in water treatment plants), but if the interior of your dishwasher is made out of plastic, it’s releasing microplastics with every wash. Few dishwashers have no plastic whatsoever. Splurge for a stainless-steel interior (dishwasher) if you can afford it (or hand washing when your life allows).
Handwashing won’t get rid of all the plastics in your kitchen though either – if you’re using liquid dish soap, it’s likely packaged in a plastic bottle. Fortunately, a few brands have started selling dish soap bars and liquid dish soap packaged in cardboard. Most sponges are made of plastic too, but more stores are selling natural sponges and dishcloths as demand increases. Those can be worthwhile alternatives to keep plastic out of your own body, and from plastic slipping down the drain. (Nowell, 2024)
References
Bora SS, Gogoi R, Sharma MR, et al. Microplastics and human health: unveiling the gut microbiome disruption and chronic disease risks. Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology. 2024;14:1492759.
Globally, approximately 40% of food is either lost or wasted along the value chain, exposing a major blind spot in food systems. And while 40% of the world’s food is wasted or lost annually, millions of people across the globe face hunger. This fact alone should help us think more critically about the food on our plates. This statistic should also help us think about how to use our food purchases to support more equitable food systems, plan portions wisely, and get creative with leftovers. (Goodwin and Lipinski, 2024)
The Consequences of Food Waste
“The consequences of this food waste, even at the lower end of the estimates, are huge. It means that an amount of land larger than China is used every year to produce food that no one will eat — especially egregious in a world where nearly 1 in 3 people face some level of food insecurity. About 45 trillion gallons of water, almost one-quarter of all water used in agriculture, is consumed in the process. And food waste is linked to about 8%-10% of the greenhouse gas emissions warming the planet.
The UN has set a goal to halve food loss and waste globally by 2030. But countries and companies can’t begin to tackle the issue unless they know how much food is really lost or wasted — and where and why.” (Goodwin and Lipinski, 2024)
Why Is It So Hard to Measure Food Loss and Waste?
“Today, we have only a rough idea of how much food is lost or wasted around the world. The widely used ‘one-third’ statistic is based on data from the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), but it is only an estimate. This figure doesn’t include food that is lost before it leaves the farm, such as crops that aren’t fully harvested or spoil in storage.
More recent data from Tesco and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) suggests that about 40% of the world’s food supply goes to waste when on-farm losses are also considered.
But these numbers can only be so useful. Most are extrapolated from global data that isn’t complete, relying on individual studies from various years to produce broad estimates. This can provide a general picture of food loss and waste within a region, but it is less helpful for pinpointing where exactly waste occurs and taking targeted action to reduce it.
In some cases, the data is also decades old; FAO’s estimate is based on a 2011 study. Updated and more precise data just isn’t available, as only 12% of the global population lives in countries currently tracking food loss and waste within their borders.” (Goodwin and Lipinski, 2024)
“Accurately gauging how much food is lost or wasted involves measuring a lot of things across the supply chain — from how much fruit is left unharvested in the fields, to the vegetable scraps that a line cook throws out, to the questionable cheese in the back of your fridge. Almost no one is measuring on-farm food loss, in part because it can be difficult to determine the boundary between different causes, such as poor harvesting techniques or disease.” (Goodwin and Lipinski, 2024)
“On top of that, many companies are still extremely reluctant to publish their food waste data due to possible reputational risks. Businesses may be worried about the public reaction and how their waste will compare with other companies. Or they may know they’re wasting a lot and want to start improving before they publish any data.
On the other side of the supply chain, household waste is especially difficult to measure. People generally aren’t very good at estimating how much food they throw out; one study found that almost half of Britons surveyed underestimated the economic cost of the food they wasted. In fact, most U.K. consumers say they don’t waste food at all, but research by the Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) shows that 70% of food waste in the U.K. comes from households.” (Goodwin and Lipinski, 2024)
“The reality is that most people do waste food. It’s not a problem limited to higher-income countries, either; research has shown food waste to be a growing issue in cities worldwide. And because organic waste isn’t collected separately in most places, the only way to get accurate data on household food waste is to go through bins manually and analyze what is in them, an expensive and time-consuming process.” (Goodwin and Lipinski, 2024)
Major Companies Have Shown that Tracking and Reducing Food Waste Yields Big Benefits
“So far, most progress on measuring and reducing food loss and waste has come from the private sector. Not only do big companies have the power to address waste up and down the supply chain, but they also have a financial incentive to do so. Research suggests that when food-related businesses such as restaurants and hotels invest in waste reduction programs, they can see up to a 14-fold return on their investment.” (Goodwin and Lipinski, 2024)
About the 10x20x30 Initiative
Both “IKEA and Danone are part of the 10x20x30 initiative, through which major global food retailers are working with at least 20 of their suppliers each to halve food loss and waste by 2030. 10x20x30 is part of Champions 12.3, a coalition of governments, businesses and others working to accelerate food loss and waste solutions worldwide. WRI is the Co-Secretariat of Champions 12.3. Learn more.
IKEA is a front-runner here. After pledging to halve food loss and waste by 2030, IKEA became the first global company to do so in all its restaurants in 2023 — reducing waste by 54%, years ahead of schedule. The company invested significant resources toward this goal, from hiring a dedicated team; to outfitting its restaurants with smart scales to measure food waste; to partnering with the Too Good to Go app, which allows customers to purchase discounted food that would otherwise be thrown out. But the payoff was big: In addition to saving more than 20 million meals and avoiding 36,000 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions — equivalent to the emissions from more than 8,000 cars — every year, this shift is saving IKEA $37 million annually.” (Goodwin and Lipinski, 2024)
Governments Need to Play a Bigger Role to Address Waste on a Global Scale
“While private sector progress is important, it’s piecemeal by nature. Governments need to do more to promote tracking and reduction of food loss and waste across the entire value chain, from farms and factories to businesses and households.
Governments often struggle to understand what their role should be when it comes to reducing food waste. For example, should they focus on farmers or consumers, which require different approaches and different communications strategies? Which tactics will be most effective: requiring businesses to report on food loss and waste and work with their suppliers to reduce it? Incentivizing farmers to minimize losses in their fields? Or developing public behavior-change campaigns to slash waste in people’s homes? Recent global events — including the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — also made food loss and waste less of a priority issue for many governments as they focused on food security, price spikes and supply disruptions.
Still, some countries have made more progress than others on collecting national-level data and implementing solutions.” (Goodwin and Lipinski, 2024)
“The U.K. has made great strides on measuring household food waste using periodic surveys and data from waste management authorities. It also developed the first-ever voluntary agreement with companies to address food loss and waste, known as the Courtauld Agreement. More than 300 food businesses have joined the effort, which is also helping farmers measure on-farm losses, promoting public behavior change and more. Recently, over 30 major companies have urged the U.K. government to go further and mandate reporting on food loss and waste.
In addition, all EU countries now measure food waste along supply chains (although not on farms) to some degree. And last year the European Commission proposed setting legally binding targets requiring EU member states to reduce food waste by 10% in processing and manufacturing and by 30% (per capita) jointly across restaurants, food service establishments and households by the end of 2030. The United States also recently announced a national strategy to reduce food loss and waste.” (Goodwin and Lipinski, 2024)
“Other governments should follow these examples, using a combination of policy, education and financial levers to both mandate food waste tracking and support farmers, businesses and others in doing so. An immediate step countries can take is to incorporate food loss and waste reduction into their next national climate commitments (known as Nationally Determined Contributions), which are due in 2025.” (Goodwin and Lipinski, 2024)
Moving from Measurement to Action
“Too often, it can be easy to get hung up on new “miracle” technologies for addressing food waste — such as smart fridges that can track expiration dates and suggest recipes based on the food you already have. But as useful as emerging technologies may be, they can also be a distraction from doing things that we already know work: processing and storing food properly, planning meals, freezing leftovers and donating to food banks.
The solutions are not rocket science; simple things like training employees with proper food handling skills or making small changes to the manufacturing process can have a huge impact. But they need much better communication up and down the chain. Right now, one end doesn’t know what the other end is doing, which means solving a problem at one stage might result in worse problems elsewhere — like switching to a crop strain with higher yields that ends up being more susceptible to damage during transportation or storage.
Ultimately, the success of any strategy to reduce food waste will depend on accurate and timely data to reveal issues and inform solutions.” (Goodwin and Lipinski, 2024)
“Through the Champions 12.3 coalition, [World Resources Institute] WRI encourages a “target-measure-act” approach. The global target to cut food loss and waste in half has been set. Now, both countries and companies need to step up by connecting ambitious food loss and waste reduction targets to their climate strategies. If they haven’t already, they must first quantify a base-year amount of food loss and waste inside their operations or borders and then begin monitoring change over time — and publicly reporting how much food they are wasting. It’s the only way we can get to the next step: ramping up actions that save more food from garbage bins and landfills and put it into the hands of people who need it.” (Goodwin and Lipinski, 2024)
Reducing Household Food Waste: Simple Tips that Generate Win-Wins for People and the Planet
These tips from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) can help you reduce food waste in your household.
A recent study conducted by researchers at Hokkaido University and the University of Sydney has unveiled the health benefits of sorghum. “The team identified unique lipids that were known to have anti-diabetic and anti-inflammatory properties” named fatty acid esters of hydroxy fatty acids (FAHFAs) and characterized the diverse lipid profiles among six sorghum cultivars. This research was published in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry.
Photo Credit: Luis Rodriguez/Unsplash
Sorghum, a lesser-known grain fed to animals in developed countries, boasts significant nutritional potential that remains largely untapped for human consumption. “This oversight presents a critical challenge for health-conscious consumers and nutritionists who are increasingly searching for sustainable food options to address chronic health issues. Sorghum is not only abundant but also resilient, requiring fewer resources than many other crops, making it environmentally friendly.” (Technology Networks Applied Sciences, 2024; Nath et al. 2024)
This new research by Nath et al. 2024 suggests that incorporating sorghum into diets could promote cardiovascular health, reduce inflammation, and enhance metabolic health.
The primary objective of these scientists’ research is to identify comparable compounds in a variety of cereals and food sources, thereby improving our comprehension of these lipids and their functions in human health, nutrition, and agriculture.
“Sorghum is a grain that is both versatile and has substantial health benefits,” concludes Professor Shu-Ping Hui, the other corresponding author.
“This research not only addresses the demand for sustainable food alternatives but also fosters the development of functional foods.” (Technology Networks Applied Sciences, 2024; Nath et al., 2024)
Sorghum Recipes
If you are unfamiliar with how to use sorghum in cooking, be sure to check out Bob’s Red Mill for sorghum-based recipes – which are available on their website at:
Nath LR, B. Gowda SG, Roberts TH, Gowda D, Khoddami A, Hui SP. Nontargeted lipidomics of sorghum grain reveals novel fatty acid esters of hydroxy fatty acids and cultivar differences in lipid profiles. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2024;72(37):20690-20703. doi:10.1021/acs.jafc.4c05919
In a study published in Frontiers in Toxicology on September 24, 2024 (Parkinson et al., 2024), researchers from the Food Packaging Forum identified 189 potential and confirmed mammary carcinogens that have been detected in food contact materials (FCMs) on the market.
This study “shows that there is a huge opportunity for prevention of human exposure to breast cancer-causing chemicals,” said Jane Muncke, Managing Director of the Food Packaging Forum and co-author of the study. “The potential for cancer prevention by reducing hazardous chemicals in your daily life is underexplored and deserves much more attention.”
By comparing a recently published list of potential breast carcinogens developed by scientists at the Silent Spring Institute with the Food Packaging Forum’s own Database on migrating and extractable food contact chemicals (FCCmigex), the authors found that 189 potential and confirmed breast carcinogens have been detected in FCMs, including 143 in plastics and 89 in paper or board (Figure 1).
Figure 1. The number of potential mammary carcinogens as identified by Kay et al. (2024) that have been detected in migration or extraction studies of five food contact material groups (Source: Parkinson et al., 2024)
“Identifying the presence of these hazardous chemicals in food contact materials was possible thanks to our FCCmigex Database,” said Lindsey Parkinson, Data Scientist and Scientific Editor at the Food Packaging Forum and co-author of the study. “This resource brings valuable information from thousands of published scientific studies on chemicals in food contact materials together into a single and easily explorable place.”
“When limiting the comparison to the most recently available studies in FCCmigex (2020-2022) that used migration experiments , which mimic realistic conditions, there is evidence of exposure to 76 potential and confirmed mammary carcinogens from FCMs, 61 of which (80%) are from plastics.”
“In all, the 76 recently detected potential and confirmed mammary carcinogens were in FCMs purchased from markets all over the world including Brazil, Canada, China, Ghana, Egypt, the European Union (Austria, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Spain), India, Iran, Malaysia, Mexico, Nigeria, Syria, Turkey, and the United States. This indicates continued exposure of the global population to these chemicals under realistic use conditions.”
“Despite existing regulations intended to limit carcinogenic substances in FCMs, the study highlights gaps in current regulatory frameworks. The food contact articles were purchased within the last few years from markets in highly regulated regions, including the EU and the US.”
“Our findings imply that chronic exposure of the entire population to suspected mammary carcinogens from FCMs is the norm and highlights an important, but currently underappreciated, opportunity for prevention,” the authors explain.
This mammary carcinogens study was published with other articles in the theme of “emerging topics on chemical safety assessment”. The editors of the research topic published an opinion piece on what they consider outdated testing and risk management procedures in US federal risk assessments. (Parkinson et al., 2024; Parkinson, 2024)
How to Reduce Possible Health Risks from Packaged Foods
Several ways to reduce the health risks from packaged foods include the following:
Choose Packaging-Free Options – You can reduce health risks from food packaging by minimizing reliance on packaged foods. Grocery stores and farmers’ markets offer packaging-free options for important items including fruits, vegetables and grains. Shopping in bulk, bringing your own containers and resuable bags, and opting for fresh, unpackaged fruits and vegetables, are easy ways to avoid exposure to harmful chemicals in packaging materials. To summarize:
Go Bulk: Shop at bulk food stores and fill your own containers with dry goods like grains, nuts, and legumes.
Go Local: Visit farmers’ markets and buy produce directly from local farmers, many of whom offer packaging-free products.
Go Local(er): Grow your own vegetables or fruits at home to avoid packaging entirely. Reuse: Reusable cloth bags, jars, and containers keep food safer, reduce waste and help the environment.
Avoid Plastic Packaging – Plastic is the most common materials used in food packaging, but often contains harmful BPA, phthalates, and other harmful chemical additives, which can find their way into your food. These substances are known endocrine disruptors and have been linked to various health issues such as cancer, as well as obesity, infertility, and developmental disorders. Reducing use of plastic packaging can significantly lower exposure to the effects of these chemicals.
Check out these easy-to-use eco-friendly organic produce bags at the link below:
If you are using products that come in cardboard packaging, avoid ones treated with water-resistant coatings or contains plastic linings. When you can’t avoid using plastics, look for ones that are labeled BPA-free. They may still contain other harmful chemicals like BPS (bisphenol-S).
Pay Attention to Recycling Codes – Some types of plastics are more harmful than others. Understanding recycling codes on plastic packaging can help avoid them. The recycling code number, typically between 1 and 7, is found on the bottom of plastic containers. Each number represents a different type of plastic. Some are more prone to releasing harmful chemicals. Try to avoid materials using the following recycling codes:
#3 (PVC): PVC, or polyvinyl chloride, often contains harmful additives like phthalates, which can get into food.
#6 (Polystyrene): Commonly found in foam take-out containers and disposable cups, polystyrene may release styrene, a chemical linked to cancer.
#7 (Other): This category includes polycarbonate plastics, which often contain BPA. Be cautious of packaging labeled with this number.
Limit Exposure to Canned Foods – Canned foods are convenient, but they often come with health risks due to lining of their cans. Cans can be coated with a resin that contains BPA. BPA can get into the food, acidic products like tomatoes, has been linked to hormone disruption, reproductive issues, and an increased risk of cancer.
Store Food Safely – Storing food properly at home can help reduce your exposure to harmful chemicals. If food packaging is unavoidable at the store, take steps to store food more safely once it’s in your home. Heat, in particular, can accelerate the chemicals from packaging getting into food. It’s important to take the time to use safe storage practices by doing the following:
Transfer Food to Glass or Stainless-Steel Containers: After purchasing food, transfer out of plastic packaging and into glass or stainless-steel containers for storage. This reduces the risk of chemical leaching over time.
Avoid Heating Food in Plastic: Never microwave food in plastic containers or plastic wrap. The heat can cause chemicals to leach into the food. Always use microwave-safe glass or ceramic containers for reheating food
Freeze Food in Safe Materials: If freezing food, don’t use plastic wrap or bags. Instead, use freezer-safe glass containers or stainless steel.
Be Cautious with Takeout and Disposable Packaging – Most takeout containers are made from polystyrene foam, plastics, and other materials that may release harmful chemicals. Frequent consumption of food from these sources increases exposure to potentially toxic substances.
You can be better informed and make smarter choices by looking out for certain brands who offer options with fewer toxins. This includes brands that use sustainable, compostable, or biodegradable packaging materials. A good place to start learning about options for safer packaging can be found in this article. From there, do your own research to buy as smart as possible.
Reducing health risks associated with food packaging is possible through informed decision-making and lifestyle changes. By choosing packaging-free or safer alternatives, avoiding harmful plastics, limiting exposure to canned foods, and adopting better storage practices, consumers can significantly reduce their risk of exposure to toxic chemicals. Moreover, supporting companies that prioritize safer packaging can drive industry-wide change, ultimately leading to healthier food systems for everyone. (Comprehensive Cancer Centers, 2024)
Yates, J., Kadiyala, S., Deeney, M. et al. A toxic relationship: ultra-processed foods & plastics. Globalization and Health. 2024;20:74. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-024-01078-0
Kliemann N, Al Nahas A, Vamos EP, Touvier M, Kesse-Guyot E, Gunter MJ, Millett C, Huybrechts I. Ultra-processed foods and cancer risk: from global food systems to individual exposures and mechanisms. British Journal of Cancer. 2022:14-20. doi: 10.1038/s41416-022-01749-y
UN FAO and WHO. What are healthy diets? Joint statement by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations and the World Health Organization (WHO). Geneva: World Health Organization and Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2024. https://doi.org/10.4060/cd2223en
“This year’s #WorldFoodDay theme, “Right to foods for a better life and a better future” spotlights the importance of diversity, nutrition, affordability, accessibility as well as the safety and sustainability of foods, raising awareness about how a greater diversity of nutritious foods should be available in our fields, fishing nets, markets, and on our tables, for the benefit of all. Today, hunger is often worsened by frequent weather changes, economic downturns and conflicts. World Food Day 2024 looks at solutions to ensure that all people have enough adequate and regular access to diverse, safe, nutritious food, leaving no one behind.”
Consult the World Food Day website to learn more about the theme and how to join the campaign.
Don’t miss out! Register now to join the live webcast of the World Food Day global ceremony on 16 October at 10:00 CET, and be part of the action at the Junior World Food Day School Assembly during the World Food Forum on 17 October at 10:00 CET.
September 29, 2024 is the fifth observance of the International Day of Awareness of Food Loss and Waste (IDAFLW). This year’s theme is: ‘Climate Finance for Food Loss and Waste Reduction.’
This day highlights the critical need for financing to bolster efforts to reduce food loss and waste, contribute to achieving climate goals and advancing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
The world produces enough food to feed everyone, and yet millions suffer from hunger and malnutrition. Food loss and waste exacerbate this problem by reducing the amount of food available for consumption, thus contributing to food insecurity. Many of the most highly nutritious foods, such as fresh produce, fishery, and animal products are highly perishable and sustain high levels of food loss.
Reducing food losses and waste is essential in a world where the number of people affected by hunger has been slowly on the rise since 2014, and tons and tons of edible food are lost and/or wasted every day.
Globally, around 13.2 percent of food produced is lost between harvest and retail, while an estimated 19 percent of total global food production is wasted in households, in the food service and in retail all together.
Food loss and waste also translate into a substantial economic loss. This impacts not only producers but also consumers and nations, not to mention livelihoods and economic stability. Moreover, food waste in landfills contributes to 8 to 10 percent of total agrifood system emissions, impacting climate change and environmental sustainability.
Reducing food loss and waste is a climate solution, which countries and communities can employ to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Successfully doing so will require a significant increase in the quality and quantity of accessible climate finance.
IDAFLW 2024 – Key messages
A significant increase in the quality and quantity of accessible climate finance is needed to improve financing of projects and programs to reduce food loss and waste.
Investments that reduce food loss and waste contribute to improving food security, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, enable healthy diets, and contribute to ensuring a future where food availability is not threatened by climate.
Equipping value chain stakeholders with climate smart funding can contribute to achieving significant incremental impacts in mitigating GHG emissions and building resilience.
Investing in the circular economy to reduce food loss and waste, contributes to reducing GHG emissions while generating returns for investors and benefits that outweigh the costs.
Countries must take action to reduce food loss and waste.
Profound change in the prevention and reduction of food loss and waste can only take place when countries develop and allocate sufficient human, organizational and institutional capacity to tackle the issues from production to consumption.
An inside look at Brazil’s push to end food waste (2024)
At age 19, Regina Tchelly left her small hometown in north-east Brazil and arrived in Rio de Janeiro with a dream: to become a famous chef.
When she got there, Tchelly, who was raised to never waste food, was saddened to see how often street vendors threw away good food.
That set Tchelly on a new culinary path. She began taking home discarded food from her work as a maid and created innovative recipes, like banana peel gingerbread and broccoli stalk quiche. That experience would eventually lead her to found Favela Orgânica. The organization has taught thousands of low-income individuals, street vendors and chefs how to waste less food, counter hunger and tackle the often devastating environmental effects that come with food waste.
“There should be no such thing as throwing away,” says Tchelly, now 42. “We’re throwing away our planet. We need to change our behaviour. We’re in a climate crisis. Here, people learn how healthy food and sustainable habits can benefit both our health and the planet.”
Tchelly is part of a growing movement in Brazil to cut down on food waste, which is quickly spreading around the world.
Learn more about Favela Orgánica in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil at:
Favela Orgánica started in an informal settlement in Rio to encourage food sovereignty through healthy eating habits in low-income communities. Since 2011, Regina Tchelly, the founder of the initiative, organizes workshops to teach people how to prepare healthy meals using parts of the vegetables they would normally throw away (peels, stalks, etc.), reducing food waste and making them conscious of the benefits that organic agriculture brings to our health and to the environment.
The project also offers information on how to make compost and encourages people to create vegetable gardens in their houses.
Test Your Knowledge: Why Does Food Loss and Waste Matter:
If more than half of the currently overconsuming population starts eating a planet-friendly, healthy diet, including consuming less red meat, this could reduce emissions from global diets by as much as 17%, according to a new study published in Nature Climate Change.
More specifically, the authors of the study reported that:
“On the basis of detailed household-expenditure data, we evaluate the unequal distribution of dietary emissions from 140 food products in 139 countries or areas and further model changes in emissions of global diet shifts. Within countries, consumer groups with higher expenditures generally cause more dietary emissions due to higher red meat and dairy intake. Such inequality is more pronounced in low-income countries.
The present global annual dietary emissions would fall by 17% with the worldwide adoption of the EAT-Lancet planetary health diet, primarily attributed to shifts from red meat to legumes and nuts as principal protein sources. More than half (56.9%) of the global population, which is presently overconsuming, would save 32.4% of global emissions through diet shifts, offsetting the 15.4% increase in global emissions from presently underconsuming populations moving towards healthier diets.” (Li et al., 2024)
“Earlier this year, as many as 200 climate scientists from 48 countries expressed their views on this topic through a Harvard Law School survey, and 85% agreed that shifts to healthier diets are essential to limit global warming.” (Thambi, 2024)
“Healthy dietary choices can help you keep negative health conditions such as obesity and diabetes at bay but also help reduce the greenhouse gases causing our planet to warm up. Our food system contributes to about a third of global emissions, according to a study in Nature Food. So, our choices and decisions about what sits on our plates are essential for both our bodies and the planet.” (Thambi, 2024)
“Based on the scientific literature highlighting the importance of diet shifts toward healthy diets, there are two simple things you can start acting on today to help reduce the adverse impact of your diet on climate.” (Thambi, 2024) These include:
1. Reduce Overconsumption of Animal-based Proteins and Starchy Vegetables
Overconsumption is particularly high in the case of certain commodities, such as animal-based proteins and starchy food. For instance, North America— including the United States—currently consumes six times more beef and roughly two times more dairy, chicken, eggs and potatoes than needed for a healthy diet. The findings are based on a first-of-its-kind assessment by the EAT-Lancet report, published a few years ago by 37 world-leading health and climate scientists from 16 countries, who defined targets for healthy diets and sustainable food production.
“High consumption is more prevalent among the people in the higher expenditure brackets of countries, particularly for animal-based products. The new paper in Nature Climate Change shows that the greenhouse gas footprint of people in the higher expenditure groups of the US, Canada and Australia is up to three to seven times higher than the global average, much of which is from animal-based proteins. It also shows that if more than half of the people who are currently overconsuming start eating healthy diets, they could free up space for emissions of diets in under-consuming poorer countries—saving 32.4% of global emissions, offsetting the 15.4% increase in global emissions from presently under consuming countries.” (Thambi, 2024)
Lower-income groups in Sub-Saharan African countries underconsume some products, leading to nutrient deficiency of essential proteins and vitamins. It is important to note that this only applies to poorer income groups in those countries, as the above study shows that even in these countries, the high-expenditure groups could still be overconsuming and, therefore, have a higher emission footprint for animal-based foods than the global average.” (Thambi, 2024)
“Overconsumption of animal-based proteins is often driven by the misconception that any amount of protein benefits the body. Studies on clinical medicine led by researchers at the University of Cambridge found that high protein intake has adverse effects, such as raising blood insulin levels. When protein intake exceeds what the body requires for general repair functions, excess protein is converted by the liver into fat, according to recent research on protein and nutrition by the FAIRR Initiative, a London-based organization that works with global investors to define the material sustainability issues linked to intensive animal agriculture through research, tools, and engagement with food companies. This response is similar to the body’s response to excess consumption of things such as starch and sugar, the research report added.” (Thambi, 2024)
2. Make Flexitarian Diets Part Of Your Daily Meal Routine
A flexitarian diet—primarily plant-based but can optionally include modest amounts of fish, meat, and dairy foods—benefits your health and global efforts to cut warming. Evidence supports the benefits of a flexitarian diet for improving metabolic health and blood pressure, reducing the risk of Type 2 diabetes, and offsetting the adverse impacts of high animal-based diets on global emissions. For instance, research in Nature Food indicates that animal-based products contribute twice as much to local greenhouse gas emissions as plant-based food.
A flexitarian diet can also reduce the effort needed in other economic sectors to cut emissions to meet the 1.5-degree goal and limit global warming, according to a study in Science led by researchers from the Potsdam Institute of Climate Impact Research in Germany earlier this year.
So, next time you are at the supermarket, thinking about what to cook for your meal, remember that the small choices you make have significant impacts; what you buy matters for your health and the planet’s health. (Thambi, 2024)
References
Li, Y., He, P., Shan, Y. et al. Reducing climate change impacts from the global food system through diet shifts. Nature Climate Change. 2024;14: 943–953.
In its latest impact report, theGlobal Foodbanking Networkrevealed that it provided food and groceries to 40 million people in 45 countries in 2023. The impact of these actions not only helped meet an increase in food relief demand, but it also reduced food waste emissions, avoiding around 1.8 million metric tons of carbon emissions last year.
The organization was able to rescue food from farms and wholesalers and distribute it to those seeking food relief. According to the report, the network distributed 654 million kilograms of food, or around 1.7 billion meals, in 2023, a 25% increase in food distribution compared to the previous year.
In announcing the results from its annual network survey, the Global Foodbanking Network highlighted the fact that 2023 was Earth’s hottest year ever recorded and emphasized the high number of extreme climate-related events around the world, including wildfires, droughts and floods.
According to the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, humanitarian needs have reached record highs amid climate change and conflict, with one in every 33 people on Earth needing assistance to meet their needs, including hunger. (EcoWatch, 2024)
“The problem is not a shortage of food,” Douglas O’Brien, vice president of programs for the Global Foodbanking Network, wrote in a statement. “Rather it is a lack of affordable access to food for millions of vulnerable people in difficult circumstances who struggled to feed themselves and their families in 2023. But there is hope.” (Global Foodbanking Network, 2024)
To meet increasing demand for food relief, food banks looked for new ways to access more food to feed a higher number of people around the world. Food banks were able to form direct partnerships with farmers in order to provide fresh produce to those seeking food relief. This initiative was so successful for the network that fruits and vegetables became the largest volume of food distributed by the Global Foodbanking Network last year.
Further, by partnering with farmers, food banks increased agricultural recovery — or reducing the amount of produce lost on farms or after harvest — by 35% year-over-year, the network found.
Technology also played a more significant role to relieving hunger last year. According to the Global Foodbanking Network, technological initiatives, such as virtual food banks, made up 11% of distribution last year, up from 5% previously. Virtual food banks are able to quickly and directly connect businesses that have extra food products with food banks that can get the surplus food to their communities.
By collecting surplus food and rescuing produce from food loss on farms, food banks were able to feed more people while also mitigating climate-warming emissions. The report found that food banks within the Global Foodbanking Network helped avoid 1.8 million metric tons of emissions from food waste that would likely otherwise go to landfills. That equates to the impact of taking around 400,000 cars off the roads for one year.
O’Brien concluded, “The 2023 Network report shows that community-led food banks bring unique perspectives on the challenge of hunger, innovations such as virtual food banking, skills and capabilities to recover more food, and a wealth of knowledge and local support to the challenge of strengthening resilience, improving food security, and addressing climate change.”
See Figure 1: “Locally Led Action is Key” and Figure 2: “Impact in Action (2023)” for more information. (Global Foodbanking Network, 2024)
An informative editorial was published in the journal Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems on August 16, 2024. The editorial, written by Isabel Simoes Miguel, from Portugal, summarizes a collection of studies published as part of the research topic, “Exploring Consumers’ Willingness to Adopt Climate-Friendly Diets.”
“The urgency to mitigate climate change has propelled dietary shifts to the forefront of global sustainability efforts. Climate-friendly diets, characterized by reduced meat consumption, increased plant-based foods, and sustainable agricultural practices, present a significant opportunity for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. This Research Topic, “Exploring consumers’ willingness to adopt climate-friendly diets,” aggregates a diverse range of studies that collectively advance our understanding of the factors influencing consumer behaviors toward sustainable food consumption. By examining these various dimensions, the contributing articles offer valuable insights into the multifaceted nature of dietary transitions and their broader implications.”
“The scoping review by Srinivasan et al., on the factors that facilitate consumer uptake of sustainable dietary patterns in Western countries provides a comprehensive overview of the existing literature. This foundational piece identifies key motivators and barriers, such as environmental awareness, health benefits, and socio-economic influences. The review underscores the complexity of dietary behavior change, highlighting that a confluence of individual, social, and structural factors is essential to promote sustainable consumption effectively…
Cultural narratives and social movements play pivotal roles in shaping consumer attitudes toward climate-friendly diets. The historical exploration of the Meatless Monday movement by Semba et al., trace its origins and growth, demonstrating how grassroots initiatives can galvanize public interest and participation in sustainable eating practices. This cultural shift is further exemplified in the study from China by Chen et al., which identify drivers of consumers’ intentions to adopt sustainable healthy dietary patterns, revealing the influence of cultural norms and government policies.” (Miguel, 2024)
“Effective communication strategies are critical for fostering dietary shifts toward sustainability. The cross-national study on communicating dietary shifts associated with a 1.5◦C climate scenario for Brazil, China, Sweden, and the UK by Lee et al. underscore the importance of tailored messages that resonate with diverse cultural contexts. Furthermore, the exploration of perceived determinants of food purchasing behavior by Pšurný et al. highlight the potential for targeted behavioral change interventions to promote sustainable consumption.” (Miguel, 2024)
“Consumer perceptions significantly impact the adoption of climate-friendly diets. The study on food producer labels by Zhu and Jin investigate whether food produced by farmers is perceived as healthier and more natural, and its influence on consumer choices. These findings suggest that labeling can play a crucial role in guiding consumer preferences toward sustainable options. Similarly, the research on the ambivalence and willingness to pay for suboptimal fruits and vegetables among organic consumers in Germany by Puteri et al. address the potential for reducing food waste through informed consumer decisions.”
“Innovative approaches to promoting sustainable diets are explored in several contributions. The study on adherence to the Mediterranean Diet through a bio-psycho-social and sociotype approach by Donini and Berry present an integrative model that incorporates psychological and social factors, offering a holistic perspective on dietary adherence. The investigation into vegetarian and vegan private label products in Slovakia by Košiˇciarová et al. identify emerging trends and challenges in sustainable food consumption, reflecting shifting consumer preferences. ” (Miguel, 2024)
“Emerging technologies and novel food sources also feature prominently in this Research Topic. The study on cultured proteins in Nordic countries by Klöckner et al. examine consumer attitudes toward lab-grown meat, milk, and fish, highlighting the attributes that could make these products attractive to different demographic groups. This research underscores the potential of alternative proteins to contribute to sustainable food systems.
The influence of retail environments on consumer behavior is explored in the study on supermarket consumers’ intentions toward climate-friendly food consumption by Emberger-Klein et al.. This research emphasizes the role of supermarkets in shaping consumer choices through product availability, marketing, and normative influences. The findings suggest that supermarkets can act as critical nodes.” (Miguel, 2024)
“Collectively, the articles in this Research Topic provide a nuanced understanding of the various factors influencing the adoption of climate-friendly diets. They highlight the interplay between individual choices, economic conditions, cultural narratives, and structural enablers. The insights gained from these studies are invaluable for policymakers, marketers, and advocates aiming to promote sustainable dietary practices.
In a broader context, these findings align with global sustainability goals, such as those outlined in the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) and SDG 13 (Climate Action). By fostering a deeper understanding of the drivers and barriers to sustainable food consumption, this research contributes to the development of effective strategies for achieving these goals.
The transition to climate-friendly diets is a complex but necessary endeavor for addressing the global climate crisis. The diverse perspectives and insights presented in this Research Topic underscore the importance of a multi-faceted approach that considers economic, cultural, social, and psychological dimensions. As we continue to explore and understand the factors influencing consumer behavior, we can better design interventions and policies that support sustainable dietary transitions and ultimately contribute to a more sustainable and resilient food system.” (Miguel, 2024)
Reference:
Miguel IS. Editorial: Exploring consumers’ willingness to adopt climate-friendly diets. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2024;8:1448455. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2024.1448455
Sustainable RDN 