4.6 Review

Data Integration for Diet Sustainability Analyses

期刊

SUSTAINABILITY
卷 13, 期 14, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su13148082

关键词

sustainability; food system; integration; NHANES; environment; economic; climate change; diets; nutrition; natural resource use

资金

  1. Commonwealth Center for Energy and the Environment at William Mary
  2. U.S. Department of Agriculture under an INFEWS [2018-67003-27408]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article emphasizes the importance of integrating multiple domains, disciplines, scales, and time/space dimensions into a common modeling framework for diet sustainability analyses. While focusing on the United States, key data sources and methods for integrating them are summarized.
Diet sustainability analyses are stronger when they incorporate multiple food systems domains, disciplines, scales, and time/space dimensions into a common modeling framework. Few analyses do this well: there are large gaps in food systems data in many regions, accessing private and some public data can be difficult, and there are analytical challenges, such as creating linkages across datasets and using complex analytical methods. This article summarizes key data sources across multiple domains of food system sustainability (nutrition, economic, environment) and describes methods and tools for integrating them into a common analytic framework. Our focus is the United States because of the large number of publicly available and highly disaggregated datasets. Thematically, we focus on linkages that exist between environmental and economic datasets to nutrition, which can be used to estimate the cost and agricultural resource use of food waste, interrelationships between healthy eating and climate impacts, diets optimized for cost, nutrition, and environmental impacts, and others. The limitations of these approaches and data sources are described next. By enhancing data integration across these fields, researchers can be better equipped to promote policy for sustainable diets.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据