scholarly journals Taxing food consumption to reduce environmental impacts – Identification of synergies and goal conflicts

Food Policy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 101 ◽  
pp. 102090
Author(s):  
Emma Moberg ◽  
Sarah Säll ◽  
Per-Anders Hansson ◽  
Elin Röös
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Food Consumption ◽  
Goal Conflicts

scholarly journals Life Cycle Assessment of Households in Santiago, Chile: Environmental Hotspots and Policy Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 2525
Author(s):  
Camila López-Eccher ◽  
Elizabeth Garrido-Ramírez ◽  
Iván Franchi-Arzola ◽  
Edmundo Muñoz
Keyword(s):  
Global Warming ◽  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Food Consumption ◽  
Household Income ◽  
Resource Scarcity ◽  
Life Cycles ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Freshwater Eutrophication

The aim of this study is to assess the environmental impacts of household life cycles in Santiago, Chile, by household income level. The assessment considered scenarios associated with environmental policies. The life cycle assessment was cradle-to-grave, and the functional unit considered all the materials and energy required to meet an inhabitant’s needs for one year (1 inh/year). Using SimaPro 9.1 software, the Recipe Midpoint (H) methodology was used. The impact categories selected were global warming, fine particulate matter formation, terrestrial acidification, freshwater eutrophication, freshwater ecotoxicity, mineral resource scarcity, and fossil resource scarcity. The inventory was carried out through the application of 300 household surveys and secondary information. The main environmental sources of households were determined to be food consumption, transport, and electricity. Food consumption is the main source, responsible for 33% of the environmental impacts on global warming, 69% on terrestrial acidification, and 29% on freshwater eutrophication. The second most crucial environmental hotspot is private transport, whose contribution to environmental impact increases as household income rises, while public transport impact increases in the opposite direction. In this sense, both positive and negative environmental effects can be generated by policies. Therefore, life-cycle environmental impacts, the synergy between policies, and households’ socio-economic characteristics must be considered in public policy planning and consumer decisions.

scholarly journals Consumer Readiness to Reduce Meat Consumption for the Purpose of Environmental Sustainability: Insights from Norway

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. 3058 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marthe Austgulen ◽  
Silje Skuland ◽  
Alexander Schjøll ◽  
Frode Alfnes
Keyword(s):  
Greenhouse Gas Emissions ◽  
Greenhouse Gas ◽  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Food Consumption ◽  
Environmental Sustainability ◽  
Food Choices ◽  
Gas Emissions ◽  
Environmentally Sustainable ◽  
Consumption Practices ◽  
Group Interviews

Food production is associated with various environmental impacts and the production of meat is highlighted as a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions. A transition toward plant-based and low-meat diets has thus been emphasised as an important contribution to reducing climate change. By combining results from a consumer survey, focus group interviews and an in-store field experiment, this article investigates whether Norwegian consumers are ready to make food choices based on what is environmentally sustainable. We ask how consumers perceive the environmental impacts of food consumption, whether they are willing and able to change their food consumption in a more climate-friendly direction, and what influences their perceptions and positions. The results show that there is uncertainty among consumers regarding what constitutes climate- or environmentally friendly food choices and that few consumers are motivated to change their food consumption patterns for climate- or environmental reasons. Consumers’ support to initiatives, such as eating less meat and increasing the prices of meat, are partly determined by the consumers’ existing value orientation and their existing consumption practices. Finally, we find that although providing information about the climate benefits of eating less meat has an effect on vegetable purchases, this does not seem to mobilise consumer action any more than the provision of information about the health benefits of eating less meat does. The article concludes that environmental policies aiming to transfer part of the responsibility for reducing greenhouse gas emissions to food consumers is being challenged by the fact that most consumers are still not ready to make food choices based on what is best for the climate or environment.

scholarly journals Corrigendum: Environmental Impacts of Plant-Based Diets: How Does Organic Food Consumption Contribute to Environmental Sustainability?

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camille Lacour ◽  
Louise Seconda ◽  
Benjamin Allès ◽  
Serge Hercberg ◽  
Brigitte Langevin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Food Consumption ◽  
Environmental Sustainability ◽  
Organic Food ◽  
Organic Food Consumption

scholarly journals Life Cycle Assessment of Dietary Patterns in the United States: A Full Food Supply Chain Perspective

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 1586 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daesoo Kim ◽  
Ranjan Parajuli ◽  
Gregory J. Thoma
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Supply Chain ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Food Consumption ◽  
The United States ◽  
Vegetarian Diet ◽  
Dietary Guidelines ◽  
Consumption Patterns ◽  
Consumption Pattern

A tiered hybrid input–output-based life cycle assessment (LCA) was conducted to analyze potential environmental impacts associated with current US food consumption patterns and the recommended USDA food consumption patterns. The greenhouse gas emissions (GHGEs) in the current consumption pattern (CFP 2547 kcal) and the USDA recommended food consumption pattern (RFP 2000 kcal) were 8.80 and 9.61 tons CO2-eq per household per year, respectively. Unlike adopting a vegetarian diet (i.e., RFP 2000 kcal veg or RFP 2600 kcal veg), adoption of a RFP 2000 kcal diet has a probability of increasing GHGEs and other environmental impacts under iso-caloric analysis. The bigger environmental impacts of non-vegetarian RFP scenarios were largely attributable to supply chain activities and food losses at retail and consumer levels. However, the RFP 2000 vegetarian diet showed a significant reduction in the environmental impacts (e.g., GHGEs were 22% lower than CFP 2547). Uncertainty analysis confirmed that the RFP 2600 scenario (mean of 11.2; range 10.3–12.4 tons CO2-eq per household per year) is higher than CFP 2547 (mean of 8.81; range 7.89–9.95 tons CO2-eq per household per year) with 95% confidence. The outcomes highlight the importance of incorporating environmental sustainability into dietary guidelines through the entire life cycle of the food system with a full accounting of the effects of food loss/waste.

Concurrent economic and environmental impacts of food consumption: are low emissions diets affordable?

2019 ◽  
Vol 236 ◽  
pp. 117645 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luca Benvenuti ◽  
Alberto De Santis ◽  
Andrea Di Sero ◽  
Nicola Franco
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Food Consumption

scholarly journals Environmental Impacts of Plant-Based Diets: How Does Organic Food Consumption Contribute to Environmental Sustainability?

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camille Lacour ◽  
Louise Seconda ◽  
Benjamin Allès ◽  
Serge Hercberg ◽  
Brigitte Langevin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Food Consumption ◽  
Environmental Sustainability ◽  
Organic Food ◽  
Organic Food Consumption

scholarly journals Environmental Sustainability of Food Consumption in Asia

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (20) ◽  
pp. 5749 ◽  
Author(s):  
Biraj Adhikari ◽  
Trakarn Prapaspongsa
Keyword(s):  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Food Consumption ◽  
Environmental Sustainability ◽  
Resource Scarcity ◽  
Alcoholic Beverages ◽  
Calorie Intake ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
Animal Products ◽  
The Impact

This study assesses the environmental sustainability of food consumption in Thailand, India, China, Japan, and Saudi Arabia by using a life cycle assessment. These five Asian countries were selected according to the differences in surface area, population density, GDP, and food consumption patterns. The data were obtained from Food and Agriculture Organization food balance sheets, Ecoinvent 3.4 and Agri-footprint 4.0 databases, and scientific publications. The environmental impact categories chosen were global warming, terrestrial acidification, eutrophication, eco-toxicity, human toxicity, and fossil resource scarcity. The impact assessment was carried out by using the ReCiPe2006 v1.1 method. Based on the analysis, the highest environmental impacts for all categories (except eutrophication) were from the food consumption in China, followed by the consumption in Japan, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, and India. The major contributors to these impacts were meat, cereals, animal products, and alcoholic beverages. Meat was the highest contributor in all countries except India, because of low meat consumption in India. A calorie intake analysis was also conducted, which showed reductions in environmental impacts by shifting towards calorie-adequate and non-environmentally intensive diets in Thailand, China, Japan, and Saudi Arabia. Therefore, a reduction in the consumption of meat, cereals, animal products, and alcoholic beverages could therefore enhance the environmental sustainability of food consumption.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document