Sustainability considerations are not influencing meat consumption in the US.

The consumption of animal-source foods, and particularly red meat from ruminants, is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, freshwater use, and loss of biodiversity. Reducing red meat consumption has been identified as a key strategy to mitigate climate change; however, little is known about how to effectively intervene to promote its reduction in the United States (US). This study aimed to examine meat (red, unprocessed, and poultry) and seafood consumption patterns, the factors influencing their consumption (including a reduction in their consumption over time), and how these differed based on socioeconomic variables. The study was conducted through an online survey with a representative sample of the US population (n = 1224) in 2021 using KnowledgePanel®. Overall, we found that most participants reported consuming red meat (78%), processed meat (74%), or poultry (79%) 1-4 times per week, with several differences in consumption patterns based on socio-demographic characteristics. A substantial proportion of the population reported reducing their red (70%) and processed meat (64%) consumption over the previous year, which was much higher than those that reported reducing poultry (34%) or seafood (26%). Key factors influencing red meat reduction were health and price, while environmental sustainability and animal welfare were less important, particularly among certain socio-demographic groups. These findings can help provide insight into how best to frame messaging campaigns aimed at shifting red meat consumption in the US to support climate change mitigation. Focusing on the factors that resonate more with consumers is more likely to lead to shifts in consumption patterns.

Measuring Community Urbanicity and Its Influence on Household Food Security Across Nepal's Agroecological Zones.

Background: Urbanization influences food systems and food security, but research on these associations in low- and middle-income countries remain limited, partly because of the binary and unstandardized "urban compared with rural" classifications. Objectives: To develop a community urbanicity scale, to assess its associations with household food security, and to explore whether agricultural occupation modifies this relationship across the 3 agroecological zones (mountain, hill, Tarai) of Nepal. Methods: Data came from a nationally and agroecologically representative, multistaged 2013 agri-food system survey of 4285 households with children <5 y in 63 communities (wards) in Nepal. A novel community-level urbanicity scale was constructed using factor analysis that included 8 domains. Multilevel mixed effects logistic regression was used to assess associations between urbanicity and household food security (measured using the validated Household Food Insecurity Access Scale), and to investigate modifying effects of agricultural occupation. Results: Urbanicity scores ranged between 13 and 69, of a possible 80 points. Most agricultural households in the mountains (67%) and hills (54%) were categorized food insecure. Increases in urbanicity were negatively associated with food insecurity, controlling for other factors (odds ratio [OR] per 10-unit urbanicity difference OR: 0.82; confidence interval [CI]: 0.71, 0.94; P ≤ 0.05). Agricultural occupation may have positively influenced this association though was not a statistically significant effect measure modifier (P = 0.07). Conclusions: The novel scale shows more nuance within Nepal's agroecological zones, which had similar urbanicity-to-food security relationships as well as overlapping urbanicity score distributions. Research and policy efforts should consider using scales providing more precise urbanicity measurement, and thus informative assessments on its role in predicting food insecurity, especially in agriculturally reliant populations.

Centering context when characterizing food environments: the potential of participatory mapping to inform food environment research.

Food environments are a critical place within the food system to implement interventions aimed at enabling sustainable diets. In this perspective article, we argue for the need for food environment research to more comprehensively examine the different types of food environments that people access within their communities to ensure that interventions and programs are better aligned with people's lived experiences. We highlight the potential ways in which participatory mapping (PM) can be leveraged to better design food environment research by: (1) identifying the different food environment types that are accessed within a given community; (2) providing insight into the timing for data collection; (3) informing the prioritization of where to conduct food environment assessments; and (4) highlighting the dynamism of food environments over time (e.g., across a given day or across seasons). We provide a case study example of the application of PM and the lessons learned from it in Cambodia. By conceptualizing food environments in a more comprehensive way, from the perspective of the people living within a given community, we will be able to measure food environments in a way that more closely aligns with people's lived experiences.

A multifaceted approach to global health.

World Health Day underscores the scientific community's commitment to achieving health equity for all. It is paramount to eliminate bias in research that has traditionally focused on men, neglecting the specific needs of diverse populations. Innovative clinical trial designs are being developed with more inclusive enrollment. Ensuring equitable access to essential antibiotics, coupled with robust infection prevention and control measures, is vital to safeguarding public health. The pursuit of health equity extends beyond the realm of medicine. Investments in local food production and robust social safety nets are critical for mitigating the effects of climate change on access to healthy diets. Additionally, in times of polycrisis, prioritizing the unique needs of children and empowering community-led healthcare initiatives in conflict zones are essential steps. By taking these actions, we can move closer to realizing everyone's fundamental right to health.

The state of food systems worldwide in the countdown to 2030.

This Analysis presents a recently developed food system indicator framework and holistic monitoring architecture to track food system transformation towards global development, health and sustainability goals. Five themes are considered: (1) diets, nutrition and health; (2) environment, natural resources and production; (3) livelihoods, poverty and equity; (4) governance; and (5) resilience. Each theme is divided into three to five indicator domains, and indicators were selected to reflect each domain through a consultative process. In total, 50 indicators were selected, with at least one indicator available for every domain. Harmonized data of these 50 indicators provide a baseline assessment of the world's food systems. We show that every country can claim positive outcomes in some parts of food systems, but none are among the highest ranked across all domains. Furthermore, some indicators are independent of national income, and each highlights a specific aspiration for healthy, sustainable and just food systems. The Food Systems Countdown Initiative will track food systems annually to 2030, amending the framework as new indicators or better data emerge.

Mitigation of the U.S. agrifood sector's contribution to human and planetary health: a case study.

The relationship of the United States (U.S.) agrifood sector to climate change is bidirectional; cattle production for beef consumption generates methane and nitrous oxide, both of which are potent greenhouse gases (GHGs). These gases contribute to global warming which in turn increase the frequency and strength of adverse catastrophic events, which compromise the food supply. Increased GHGs also affect crop yields and the micronutrient content of crops, which adversely affect the prevalence of food and nutrition insecurity, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Because the U.S. is a major contributor to global warming, we have a special responsibility to reduce our contribution to the generation of GHGs. The dilemma is that beef is a highly nutritious and desirable food, with excess consumption in the U.S. and under consumption in other parts of the world, but a desirable source of nutrients in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Reductions in fossil fuels have been a major focus of concern, and the agrifood system has been largely ignored. Policy changes to reduce beef consumption have been resisted at the highest levels of government. Furthermore, shifts to more plant-based diets have been contentious. Successful reductions in beef consumption will require individual, institutional, municipal, and state initiatives. Building the political will for change will require a compelling communication campaign that emphasizes the unsustainable contribution of beef consumption to climate change and land and water use.

Toward healthy and sustainable diets for the 21st century: Importance of sociocultural and economic considerations.

Four years after the EAT-Lancet landmark report, worldwide movements call for action to reorient food systems to healthy diets that respect planetary boundaries. Since dietary habits are inherently local and personal, any shift toward healthy and sustainable diets going against this identity will have an uphill road. Therefore, research should address the tension between the local and global nature of the biophysical (health, environment) and social dimensions (culture, economy). Advancing the food system transformation to healthy, sustainable diets transcends the personal control of engaging consumers. The challenge for science is to scale-up, to become more interdisciplinary, and to engage with policymakers and food system actors. This will provide the evidential basis to shift from the current narrative of price, convenience, and taste to one of health, sustainability, and equity. The breaches of planetary boundaries and the environmental and health costs of the food system can no longer be considered externalities. However, conflicting interests and traditions frustrate effective changes in the human-made food system. Public and private stakeholders must embrace social inclusiveness and include the role and accountability of all food system actors from the microlevel to the macrolevel. To achieve this food transformation, a new "social contract," led by governments, is needed to redefine the economic and regulatory power balance between consumers and (inter)national food system actors.

Exploring scenarios for the food system-zoonotic risk interface.

The unprecedented economic and health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic have shown the global necessity of mitigating the underlying drivers of zoonotic spillover events, which occur at the human-wildlife and domesticated animal interface. Spillover events are associated to varying degrees with high habitat fragmentation, biodiversity loss through land use change, high livestock densities, agricultural inputs, and wildlife hunting-all facets of food systems. As such, the structure and characteristics of food systems can be considered key determinants of modern pandemic risks. This means that emerging infectious diseases should be more explicitly addressed in the discourse of food systems to mitigate the likelihood and impacts of spillover events. Here, we adopt a scenario framework to highlight the many connections among food systems, zoonotic diseases, and sustainability. We identify two overarching dimensions: the extent of land use for food production and the agricultural practices employed that shape four archetypal food systems, each with a distinct risk profile with respect to zoonotic spillovers and differing dimensions of sustainability. Prophylactic measures to curb the emergence of zoonotic diseases are therefore closely linked to diets and food policies. Future research directions should explore more closely how they impact the risk of spillover events.

Estimated micronutrient shortfalls of the EAT-Lancet planetary health diet.

Unhealthy diets are a major contributor to the global burden of disease, and food systems cause substantial environmental destruction. To lay out how to achieve healthy diets for all, within planetary boundaries, the landmark EAT-Lancet Commission proposed the planetary health diet, which includes a range of possible intakes by food group and substantially restricts the intake of highly processed foods and animal source foods globally. However, concerns have been raised about the extent to which the diet provides adequate essential micronutrients, particularly those generally found in higher quantities and in more bioavailable forms in animal source foods. To address these concerns, we matched each food group point estimate within the respective range with globally representative food composition data. We then compared the resulting dietary nutrient intakes with globally harmonised recommended nutrient intakes for adults and women of reproductive age for six micronutrients that are globally scarce. To fill the dietary gaps that were estimated for vitamin B12, calcium, iron, and zinc, we suggest modifications to the original planetary health diet to achieve micronutrient adequacy (without fortification or supplementation) for adults, which included increasing the proportion of animal source foods and reducing foods high in phytate.

Riverine food environments and food security: a case study of the Mekong River, Cambodia.

Rivers are critical, but often overlooked, parts of food systems. They have multiple functions that support the food security, nutrition, health and livelihoods of the communities surrounding them. However, given current unsustainable food system practices, damming and climate change, the majority of the world's largest rivers are increasingly susceptible to environmental degradation, with negative implications for the communities that rely on them. Here we describe the dynamism and multifaceted nature of rivers as food environments (i.e. the place within food systems where people obtain their food) and their role in securing food security including improved diets and overall health. We also provide a conceptual framework that explain rivers as food environments within the broader food system and describe approaches to characterizing these food environments to better inform our understanding of how they influence food security and nutrition outcomes. Applying this framework to the Mekong River in Cambodia, we describe rivers as multifaceted wild food environments embedded within ecosystems, sociocultural and political environments and sectors of influence. We also explain the ways in which individual factors might influence how communities interact with this food environment. Developing and articulating food-related, ecosystem-specific frameworks and their constructs can guide implementation of policies aimed to improve specific public health or environmental sustainability outcomes. Our conceptual framework incorporates the multiple dimensions of rivers, which will aid future work and public health policy framing to better describe, understand and intervene to ensure protection of rivers' biodiversity and ecosystems as well as food security, health and livelihoods.

Souvent négligés, les cours d'eau jouent pourtant un rôle vital dans les systèmes alimentaires. Ils remplissent de nombreuses fonctions qui contribuent à la sécurité alimentaire, à la nutrition, à la santé et aux moyens de subsistance des communautés avoisinantes. Toutefois, en raison d'un système alimentaire actuel aux pratiques non durables, de la construction de barrages et du changement climatique, la plupart des grands fleuves et rivières du monde sont de plus en plus exposés aux dégradations environnementales, avec des conséquences néfastes pour les communautés qui en dépendent. Dans le présent document, nous évoquons le dynamisme et les multiples facettes des cours d'eau en tant qu'environnements alimentaires (c'est-à-dire l'endroit où les gens se procurent de la nourriture au sein d'un système alimentaire), ainsi que la manière dont ils favorisent la sécurité alimentaire, notamment par le biais d'un régime plus équilibré et d'une meilleure santé en général. Nous fournissons également un cadre conceptuel qui définit les cours d'eau comme environnements alimentaires au sein d'un système plus vaste et décrit les approches caractérisant ces environnements, afin que nous puissions mieux comprendre l'influence qu'ils exercent sur la sécurité alimentaire et la nutrition. En appliquant ce cadre au fleuve Mékong, au Cambodge, nous dévoilons les multiples facettes de ces environnements alimentaires naturels variés qui font partie intégrante des écosystèmes, des milieux politiques et socioculturels, mais aussi des sphères d'influence. Nous expliquons en outre la façon dont certains facteurs individuels sont susceptibles d'interférer dans les interactions que les communautés entretiennent avec cet environnement alimentaire. Développer et formuler des cadres et structures liés à l'alimentation, propres à chaque écosystème, peut orienter la mise en œuvre de mesures visant à améliorer des résultats spécifiques dans le domaine de la santé publique ou de la préservation de l'environnement. Notre cadre conceptuel inclut les différents aspects des cours d'eau, ce qui aidera à mener de futurs travaux et à élaborer des politiques de santé publique pour mieux les qualifier, les appréhender et intervenir en vue d'assurer la protection de la biodiversité et des écosystèmes fluviaux ainsi que la sécurité alimentaire, la santé et les moyens de subsistance.

Los ríos son partes fundamentales de los sistemas alimentarios, pero con frecuencia se ignoran. Tienen múltiples funciones que favorecen la seguridad alimentaria, la nutrición, la salud y los medios de vida de las comunidades que los rodean. Sin embargo, dadas las actuales prácticas insostenibles del sistema alimentario, la construcción de embalses y el cambio climático, la mayoría de los ríos más grandes del mundo son cada vez más susceptibles a la degradación medioambiental, con implicaciones negativas para las comunidades que dependen de ellos. En este documento, se describe el dinamismo y la naturaleza polifacética de los ríos como entornos alimentarios (es decir, el lugar dentro de los sistemas alimentarios donde las personas obtienen sus alimentos) y su función para garantizar la seguridad alimentaria, incluida la mejora de los hábitos alimentarios y la salud en general. Asimismo, se proporciona un marco conceptual que explica los ríos como entornos alimentarios dentro del sistema alimentario en su conjunto y se describen enfoques para caracterizar estos entornos alimentarios con el fin de comprender mejor cómo influyen en los resultados de la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición. Mediante la aplicación de este marco al río Mekong en Camboya, se describen los ríos como entornos alimentarios silvestres multifacéticos integrados en ecosistemas, entornos socioculturales y políticos y sectores de influencia. Además, se explican cómo los factores individuales pueden influir en la interacción de las comunidades con este entorno alimentario. El desarrollo y la articulación de marcos específicos de los ecosistemas relacionados con la alimentación y sus constructos pueden orientar la aplicación de políticas destinadas a mejorar determinados resultados en materia de salud pública o sostenibilidad medioambiental. El marco conceptual que se presenta incorpora las múltiples dimensiones de los ríos, lo que ayudará en futuros trabajos y en la formulación de políticas de salud pública a describir, comprender e intervenir mejor para asegurar la protección de la biodiversidad y los ecosistemas fluviales, así como la seguridad alimentaria, la salud y los medios de subsistencia.

Understanding human water turnover in times of water scarcity.

Tightly controlled water homeostasis in the human body is essential for optimal health. A recent study by Yamada and colleagues in Science shows that biological and environmental factors impact human water turnover, providing insight into potential water insecurity among specific populations in the context of global challenges, including climate change.

Four ways blue foods can help achieve food system ambitions across nations.

Blue foods, sourced in aquatic environments, are important for the economies, livelihoods, nutritional security and cultures of people in many nations. They are often nutrient rich1, generate lower emissions and impacts on land and water than many terrestrial meats2, and contribute to the health3, wellbeing and livelihoods of many rural communities4. The Blue Food Assessment recently evaluated nutritional, environmental, economic and justice dimensions of blue foods globally. Here we integrate these findings and translate them into four policy objectives to help realize the contributions that blue foods can make to national food systems around the world: ensuring supplies of critical nutrients, providing healthy alternatives to terrestrial meat, reducing dietary environmental footprints and safeguarding blue food contributions to nutrition, just economies and livelihoods under a changing climate. To account for how context-specific environmental, socio-economic and cultural aspects affect this contribution, we assess the relevance of each policy objective for individual countries, and examine associated co-benefits and trade-offs at national and international scales. We find that in many African and South American nations, facilitating consumption of culturally relevant blue food, especially among nutritionally vulnerable population segments, could address vitamin B12 and omega-3 deficiencies. Meanwhile, in many global North nations, cardiovascular disease rates and large greenhouse gas footprints from ruminant meat intake could be lowered through moderate consumption of seafood with low environmental impact. The analytical framework we provide also identifies countries with high future risk, for whom climate adaptation of blue food systems will be particularly important. Overall the framework helps decision makers to assess the blue food policy objectives most relevant to their geographies, and to compare and contrast the benefits and trade-offs associated with pursuing these objectives.

Leveraging Nutrient-Rich Traditional Foods to Improve Diets among Indigenous Populations in India: Value Chain Analysis of Finger Millet and Kionaar Leaves.

Many indigenous foods are nutrient-rich but are often underutilized even among populations at high risk of malnutrition. The aims of this study were to conduct value chain analysis of one cultivated crop (finger millet among the Munda tribe) and one wild green leafy vegetable (Koinaar leaves among the Sauria Paharia tribe) of two Indigenous communities in Jharkhand state, India and to identify entry points for interventions aimed at supporting production and consumption. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with stakeholders among each tribal group and transcripts were open coded and organized based on key themes across the steps of the value chain for each food independently. Improved storage techniques and infrastructure, machinery for processing and improved cooking fuel would help reduce barriers across the finger millet supply chain related to postharvest losses, processing labor and safety concerns related to cooking. For Koinaar leaves, improving drying techniques to increase consumption across seasons and providing training and support to increase opportunities for selling leaves in local markets, where participants mentioned potential language barriers, could strengthen the supply chain. Improving extension services and focusing beyond production has potential to improve the production and consumption of both nutrient-rich crops among Indigenous communities in India.

Indigenous Foods to Address Malnutrition: An Inquiry into the Diets and Nutritional Status of Women in the Indigenous Community of Munda Tribes of Jharkhand, India.

Background: Indigenous people globally experience poor nutrition outcomes, with women facing the greater burden. Munda, a predominant tribe in Jharkhand, India, live in a biodiverse food environment but yet have high levels of malnutrition. Objectives: To assess diets and the nutritional status of Munda tribal women and explore associations with their Indigenous food consumption, dietary diversity, and socioeconomic and demographic profiles. Methods: A cross-sectional study with a longitudinal component to capture seasonal dietary intake was conducted in 11 villages of the Khunti district, Jharkhand. Household surveys and FFQs, supplemented with 2-d 24-h dietary recall and anthropometric assessments on 1 randomly selected woman per household were conducted. Results: Limited access to diverse foods from a natural food environment (Food Accessed Diversity Index score of 0.3 ± 0.3) was observed. More than 90% women in both seasons had usual nutrient intakes below the estimated average requirements for all nutrients except protein and vitamin C; 35.5% of women were underweight. The mean Minimum Dietary Diversity Score among women (MDDS) was low [2.6 ± 0.6 in wet monsoon; 3 ± 0.7 in winters (acceptable ≥5)]. Higher MDDS contributed to higher usual nutrient intakes (P <0.001). Indigenous food intakes in both seasons (wet monsoon and winter) were low, e.g. Indigenous green leafy vegetables [10.5 and 27.8% of the recommended dietary intake (RDI), respectively], other vegetables (5.2% and 7.8% of RDI, respectively), and fruits (5.8 and 22.8% of RDI, respectively). Despite low intakes, the Indigenous food consumption score was positively associated with usual intake of vitamin A, riboflavin, vitamin C, pyridoxine, and calcium (P < 0.05) in the wet monsoon and thiamine, riboflavin, and zinc (P < 0.001) in winters. After adjusting for covariates, Indigenous food consumption was associated with a higher usual intake of vitamin A (P  < 0.001) in the wet monsoon season. Conclusion: Contextual food-based interventions promoting Indigenous foods and increasing dietary diversity have the potential to address malnutrition in Munda women.

Estimating the environmental impacts of 57,000 food products.

Understanding and communicating the environmental impacts of food products is key to enabling transitions to environmentally sustainable food systems [El Bilali and Allahyari, Inf. Process. Agric. 5, 456-464 (2018)]. While previous analyses compared the impacts of food commodities such as fruits, wheat, and beef [Poore and Nemecek, Science 360, 987-992 (2018)], most food products contain numerous ingredients. However, because the amount of each ingredient in a product is often known only by the manufacturer, it has been difficult to assess their environmental impacts. Here, we develop an approach to overcome this limitation. It uses prior knowledge from ingredient lists to infer the composition of each ingredient, and then pairs this with environmental databases [Poore and Nemecek Science 360, 987-992 (2018); Gephart et al., Nature 597, 360-365 (2021)] to derive estimates of a food product's environmental impact across four indicators: greenhouse gas emissions, land use, water stress, and eutrophication potential. Using the approach on 57,000 products in the United Kingdom and Ireland shows food types have low (e.g., sugary beverages, fruits, breads), to intermediate (e.g., many desserts, pastries), to high environmental impacts (e.g., meat, fish, cheese). Incorporating NutriScore reveals more nutritious products are often more environmentally sustainable but there are exceptions to this trend, and foods consumers may view as substitutable can have markedly different impacts. Sensitivity analyses indicate the approach is robust to uncertainty in ingredient composition and in most cases sourcing. This approach provides a step toward enabling consumers, retailers, and policy makers to make informed decisions on the environmental impacts of food products.

Ethical and economic implications of the adoption of novel plant-based beef substitutes in the USA: a general equilibrium modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Slowing climate change is crucial to the future wellbeing of human societies and the greater environment. Current beef production systems in the USA are a major source of negative environmental impacts and raise various animal welfare concerns. Nevertheless, beef production provides a food source high in protein and many nutrients as well as providing employment and income to millions of people. Cattle farming also contributes to individual and community identities and regional food cultures. Novel plant-based meat alternatives have been promoted as technologies that could transform the food system by reducing negative environmental, animal welfare, and health effects of meat production and consumption. Recent studies have conducted static analyses of shifts in diets globally and in the USA, but have not considered how the whole food system would respond to these changes, nor the ethical implications of these responses. We aimed to better explore these dynamics within the US food system and contribute a multiple perspective ethical assessment of plant-based alternatives to beef. METHODS: In this national modelling analysis, we explored multiple ethical perspectives and the implications of the adoption of plant-based alternatives to beef in the USA. We developed USAGE-Food, a modified version of USAGE (a detailed computable general equilibrium model of the US economy), by improving the representation of sector interactions and dependencies, and consumer behaviour to better reflect resource use across the food system and the substitutability of foods within households. We further extended USAGE, by linking estimates of the environmental footprint of US agriculture, to estimate how changes across the agriculture sector could alter the environmental impact of primary food production across the whole sector, not only the beef sector. Using USAGE-Food, we simulated four beef replacement scenarios against a baseline of current beef demand in the USA: BEEF10, in which beef expenditure is replaced by other foods and three scenarios wherein 10%, 30%, or 60% of beef expenditure is replaced by plant-based alternatives. FINDINGS: The adoption of plant-based beef alternatives is likely to reduce the carbon footprint of US food production by 2·5-13·5%, by reducing the number of animals needed for beef production by 2-12 million. Impacts on other dimensions are more ambiguous, as the agricultural workforce and natural resources, such as water and cropland, are reallocated across the food system. The shifting allocation of resources should lead to a more efficient food system, but could facilitate the expansion of other animal value chains (eg, pork and poultry) and increased exports of agricultural products. In aggregate, these changes across the food system would have a small, potentially positive, impact on national gross domestic product. However, they would lead to substantial disruptions within the agricultural economy, with the cattle and beef processing sectors decreasing by 7-45%, challenging the livelihoods of the more than 1·5 million people currently employed in beef value chains (primary production and animal processing) in the USA. INTERPRETATION: Economic modelling suggests that the adoption of plant-based beef alternatives can contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the food system. Relocation of resources across the food system, simulated by our dynamic modelling approach, might mitigate gains across other environmental dimensions (ie, water or chemical use) and might facilitate the growth of other animal value chains. Although economic consequences at the country level are small, there would be concentrated losses within the beef value chain. Reduced carbon footprint and increased resource use efficiency of the food system are reasons for policy makers to encourage the continued development of these technologies. Despite this positive outcome, policy makers should recognise the ethical assessment of these transitions will be complex, and should remain vigilant to negative outcomes and be prepared to target policies to minimise the worst effects. FUNDING: The Stavros Niarchos Foundation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Johns Hopkins University, the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Cornell University, and Victoria University.