Economic, social and environmental spillovers decrease the benefits of a global dietary shift

Nature Food (2023)Cite this article

36 Accesses

Metrics details

Dietary shifts are key for enhancing the sustainability of current food systems but need to account for potential economic, social and environmental indirect effects as well. By tracing physical quantities of biomass along supply chains in a global economic model, we investigate the benefits of adopting the EAT–Lancet diet and other social, economic and environmental spillovers in the wider economy. We find that decreased global food demand reduces global biomass production, food prices, trade, land use and food loss and waste but also reduces food affordability for low-income agricultural households. In sub-Saharan Africa, increased food demand and higher prices decrease food affordability also for non-agricultural households. Economic spillovers into non-food sectors limit agricultural land and greenhouse gas reductions as cheaper biomass is demanded more for non-food use. From an environmental perspective, economy-wide greenhouse gas emissions increase as lower global food demand at lower prices frees income subsequently spent on non-food items.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

$29.99 / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles

$119.00 per year

only $9.92 per issue

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it

$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

The FLW database and results data are available in the Supplementary Information.

The code used for the analysis is described in the Supplementary Information.

Sustainable Consumption and Production (United Nations, 2019); https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-consumption-production/

The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2020: Transforming Food Systems for Affordable Healthy Diets (FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP & WHO, 2020); https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9692en

Springmann, M., Godfray, H. C. J., Rayner, M. & Scarborough, P. Analysis and valuation of the health and climate change cobenefits of dietary change. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 4146–4151 (2016).

Article ADS CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Willett, W., Rockström, J. & Loken, B. et al. Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT-Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. Lancet. 393, 447–492 (2019).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Resolution A/RES/70/1 (United Nations, 2015).

Springmann, M. et al. Health and nutritional aspects of sustainable diet strategies and their association with environmental impacts: a global modelling analysis with country-level detail. Lancet Planet. Health 2, e451–e461 (2018).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Laine, J. E. et al. Co-benefits from sustainable dietary shifts for population and environmental health: an assessment from a large European cohort study. Lancet Planet. Health 5, e786–e796 (2021).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Tilman, D. & Clark, M. Global diets link environmental sustainability and human health. Nature 515, 7528 (2014).

Article Google Scholar

Robinson, S. et al. The International Model for Policy Analysis of Agricultural Commodities and Trade (IMPACT): Model Description for Version 3 (IFPRI, 2015); http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15738coll2/id/129825

Swinnen, J. The right price of food. Dev. Policy Rev. 29, 667–688 (2011).

Article Google Scholar

Hirvonen, K., Bai, Y., Headey, D. & Masters, W. A. Affordability of the EAT–Lancet reference diet: a global analysis. Lancet Glob. Health 8, e59–e66 (2020).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Springmann, M., Clark, M. A., Rayner, M., Scarborough, P. & Webb, P. The global and regional costs of healthy and sustainable dietary patterns: a modelling study. Lancet Planet. Health 5, e797–e807 (2021).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Springmann, M. et al. Options for keeping the food system within environmental limits. Nature 562, 519–525 (2018).

Article ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Frank, S. et al. Agricultural non-CO2 emission reduction potential in the context of the 1.5 °C target. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 66–72 (2019).

Article ADS CAS Google Scholar

Crippa, M. et al. Food systems are responsible for a third of global Anthropogenic GHG emissions. Nat. Food 2, 198–209 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

The State of Food and Agriculture 2019: Moving Forward on Food Loss and Waste Reduction (FAO, 2019).

van Meijl, H., van Rheenen, T., Tabeau, A. & Eickhout, B. The impact of different policy environments on land use in Europe. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 114, 21–38 (2006).

Article Google Scholar

Britz, W. & van der Mensbrugghe, D. CGEBox: a flexible, modular and extendable framework for CGE analysis in GAMS. J. Glob. Econ. Anal. 3, 106–177 (2018).

Article Google Scholar

Chepeliev, M. Incorporating nutritional accounts to the GTAP Data Base. J. Glob. Econ. Anal. 7, 1–43 (2022).

Article Google Scholar

Clements, K. W. & Si, J. Engel's law, diet diversity, and the quality of food consumption. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 100, 1–22 (2018).

Article Google Scholar

Pyka, A., Cardellini, G., van Meijl, H. & Verkerk, P. J. Modelling the bioeconomy: emerging approaches to address policy needs. J. Clean. Prod. 330, 129801 (2022).

Article Google Scholar

van der Mensbrugghe, D. & Peters, J. Volume Preserving CES and CET Formulations. GTAP Working Paper 87 (Purdue Univ., 2020); https://www.gtap.agecon.purdue.edu/resources/download/10019.pdf

Horridge, M. Using CRETH to Make Quantities Add Up Without Efficiency Bias (Centre of Policy Studies & Victoria Univ. Melbourne, 2019); https://www.gtap.agecon.purdue.edu/resources/download/9280.pdf

Britz, W. et al. Economy-Wide Analysis of Food Waste Reductions and Related Costs. Working Paper No. JRC113395 (Joint Research Centre Seville, 2019); https://econpapers.repec.org/paper/iptiptwpa/jrc113395.htm

Okawa, K. (2015). Market and trade impacts of food loss and waste reduction. OECD Food Agric. Fish. Pap. https://doi.org/10.1787/5js4w29h0wr2-en (2015).

Campoy-Muñoz, P., Cardenete, M. A., Delgado, M., del, C. & Sancho, F. Food losses and waste: a needed assessment for future policies. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18, 11586 (2021).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Springmann, M., Godfray, H. C. J., Rayner, M. & Scarborough, P. Analysis and valuation of the health and climate change cobenefits of dietary change. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 4146–4151 (2016).

Article ADS CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Leclere D. et al. Bending the curve of terrestrial biodiversity needs an integrated strategy. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2705-y (2020).

Parfitt, J., Croker, T. & Brockhaus, A. Global food loss and waste in primary production: a reassessment of its scale and significance. Sustainability 13, 12087 (2021).

Article Google Scholar

UNEP Food Waste Index Report 2021 (UNEP, 2021); https://www.unep.org/resources/report/unep-food-waste-index-report-2021

van Hal, O. et al. Upcycling food leftovers and grass resources through livestock: impact of livestock system and productivity. J. Clean. Prod. 219, 485–496 (2019).

Article Google Scholar

De Boer, I. J. M. & Van Ittersum, M. K. Circularity in Agricultural Production (Wageningen Univ. & Research, 2018); https://www.wur.nl/upload_mm/7/5/5/14119893-7258-45e6-b4d0e514a8b6316a_Circularity-in-agricultural-production-20122018.pdf

Poore, J. & Nemecek, T. Reducing food's environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science 360, 987–992 (2018).

Article ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Gollin, D., Lagakos, D. & Waugh, M. E. The agricultural productivity gap. Q. J. Econ. 129, 939–993 (2014).

Article Google Scholar

Kaza, S., Yao, L. C., Bhada-Tata, P. & Van Woerden, F. What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050 (World Bank, 2018); https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/30317

Delgado, L., Schuster, M. & Torero, M. Quantity and quality food losses across the value chain: a comparative analysis. Food Policy https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2020.101958 (2021).

Latka, C. et al. Paying the price for environmentally sustainable and healthy EU diets. Glob. Food Secur. 28, 100437 (2021).

Woltjer, G. B. et al. The MAGNET Model: Module Description. Manual/LEI No. 14-57 (LEI Wageningen UR, 2014); https://edepot.wur.nl/310764

van Meijl, H., Tabeau, A., Stehfest, E., Doelman, J. & Lucas, P. How food secure are the green, rocky and middle roads: food security effects in different world development paths. Environ. Res. Commun. https://doi.org/10.1088/2515-7620/ab7aba (2020).

Pérez-Domínguez, I. et al. Short- and long-term warming effects of methane may affect the cost-effectiveness of mitigation policies and benefits of low-meat diets. Nat. Food 2, 970–980 (2021).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Corong, E., Hertel, T., McDougall, R., Tsigas, M. & van der Mensbrugghe, D. The standard GTAP model, version 7. J. Glob. Econ. Anal. 2, 1–119 (2017).

Google Scholar

van Vuuren, D. P. et al. Energy, land-use and greenhouse gas emissions trajectories under a green growth paradigm. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 237–250 (2017).

Article Google Scholar

Doelman, J. C. et al. Afforestation for climate change mitigation: potentials, risks and trade-offs. Glob.Change Biol. 26, 1576–1591 (2019).

Article ADS Google Scholar

Lele U. et al. Measuring Food and Nutrition Security: An Independent Technical Assessment and User's Guide for Existing Indicators. Technical Working Group on Measuring Food and Nutrition Security (FAO, 2016).

Rutten, M., Tabeau, A. & Godeschalk, F. New Methodology for Incorporating Nutrition Indicators in Economy-Wide Scenario Analyses. FOODSECURE technical paper 1, (LEI Wageningen UR, 2013).

Britz, W. Maintaining Plausible Calorie Intakes, Crop Yields and Crop Land Expansion in Long-Run Simulations with Computable General Equilibrium Models (Institute for Food and Resource Economics & Univ. of Bonn, 2020); https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.302922

Aguiar, A., Chepeliev, M., Corong, E. L., McDougall, R., & van der Mensbrugghe, D. The GTAP Data Base: Version 10. J. Glob. Econ. Anal. https://doi.org/10.21642/JGEA.040101AF (2019).

Leontief, W. W. in Contributions to Input–Output Analysis (eds Carter, A. P. & Brody, A.) 17–46 (Elsevier, 1970).

World Economic Outlook October 2022 (IMF, 2022); https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/datasets/WEO

Download references

This study was supported by the Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality via the knowledge and innovation Connected Circularity programme (grant number KB-40-001-001), Circular and Climate Neutral Society (grant number KB-34-002-006) and Healthy and Safe food systems (grant number KB-37-001-007) and by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement number 86193). This publication reflects only the authors’ view; the funding agencies are not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Policy, Wageningen University and Wageningen Economic Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands

Alessandro Gatto & Hans van Meijl

Department of International Policy, Wageningen University and Wageningen Economic Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands

Marijke Kuiper

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

A.G., M.K. and H.v.M. conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analysed the data, contributed materials/analysis tools and wrote the paper.

Correspondence to Alessandro Gatto.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Nature Food thanks Hanna Helander and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Publisher's note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Figs. 1–18 and Tables 1–21.

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and Permissions

Gatto, A., Kuiper, M. & van Meijl, H. Economic, social and environmental spillovers decrease the benefits of a global dietary shift. Nat Food (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-023-00769-y

Download citation

Received: 20 May 2022

Accepted: 09 May 2023

Published: 05 June 2023

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-023-00769-y

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative