4.7 Article

Trimming the excess: environmental impacts of discretionary food consumption in Australia

期刊

ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS
卷 131, 期 -, 页码 119-128

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.08.006

关键词

Sustainable diet; Food system; Environmentally extended input-output analysis; Environmental sustainability; Planetary health; Life cycle assessment

资金

  1. Australian Academy of Science through W H Gladstones Population and Environment Fund Grant

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tackling the overconsumption of discretionary foods (foods and drinks not necessary to provide the nutrients the body needs) is central to aligning human and planetary health. Whilst the adverse health impacts of discretionary foods are well documented, the environmental and broader sustainability impacts of these products deserve more attention, especially since their consumption has been increasing in recent decades, particularly amongst low income groups. This paper presents a quantitative case study analysis of discretionary food consumption and the associated environmental impacts for households from different income groups in Australia. Environmentally extended input-output analysis is used to estimate the full life cycle environmental impacts of discretionary food consumption on the basis of household expenditures. On average, discretionary foods account for a significant 35%, 39%, 33% and 35% of the overall diet-related life cycle water use, energy use, carbon dioxide equivalent and land use respectively. These significant percentages provide further support for the need to incentivise diets that are both healthier and more sustainable, including 'divestment' from discretionary food products. The study highlights the challenges ahead, including the need for further research on food substitutions to minimise environmental and social impacts whilst maximising nutritional quality-especially amongst poorer socioeconomic groups. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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