Over 80% of the European Union's Common Agricultural Policy supports emissions-intensive animal products.

The European Union's Common Agricultural Policy strongly influences the European Union's food system via agricultural subsidies. Linking global physical input-output datasets with public subsidy data reveals that current allocation favours animal-based foods, which uses 82% of the European Union's agricultural subsidies (38% directly and 44% for animal feed). Subsidy intensity (€ kg-1) for animal-based foods approximately doubles after feed inclusion. The same animal-based foods are associated with 84% of embodied greenhouse gas emissions of EU food production while supplying 35% of EU calories and 65% of proteins.

Stakeholder-driven transformative adaptation is needed for climate-smart nutrition security in sub-Saharan Africa.

Improving nutrition security in sub-Saharan Africa under increasing climate risks and population growth requires a strong and contextualized evidence base. Yet, to date, few studies have assessed climate-smart agriculture and nutrition security simultaneously. Here we use an integrated assessment framework (iFEED) to explore stakeholder-driven scenarios of food system transformation towards climate-smart nutrition security in Malawi, South Africa, Tanzania and Zambia. iFEED translates climate-food-emissions modelling into policy-relevant information using model output implication statements. Results show that diversifying agricultural production towards more micronutrient-rich foods is necessary to achieve an adequate population-level nutrient supply by mid-century. Agricultural areas must expand unless unprecedented rapid yield improvements are achieved. While these transformations are challenging to accomplish and often associated with increased greenhouse gas emissions, the alternative for a nutrition-secure future is to rely increasingly on imports, which would outsource emissions and be economically and politically challenging given the large import increases required.

Environmental Nutrition: A New Frontier for Public Health.

Food systems must operate within environmental constraints to avoid disastrous consequences for the biosphere. Such constraints must also take into account nutritional quality and health outcomes. Given the intrinsic relationships between the environmental sciences and nutritional sciences, it is imperative that public health embraces environmental nutrition as the new frontier of research and practice and begins a concerted focus on the new discipline of environmental nutrition, which seeks to comprehensively address the sustainability of food systems. We provide an overview to justify our proposition, outline a research and practice agenda for environmental nutrition, and explore how the complex relationships within food systems that affect public health could be better understood through the environmental nutrition model.

The environmental cost of protein food choices.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the resource efficiency and environmental impacts of producing one kilogram of edible protein from two plant- and three animal-protein sources. DESIGN: Primary source data were collected and applied to commodity production statistics to calculate the indices required to compare the environmental impact of producing 1 kg of edible protein from kidney beans, almonds, eggs, chicken and beef. Inputs included land and water for raising animals and growing animal feed, total fuel, and total fertilizer and pesticide for growing the plant commodities and animal feed. Animal waste generated was computed for the animal commodities. SETTING: Desk-based study at the Department of Nutrition and Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, Loma Linda University. SUBJECTS: None. RESULTS: To produce 1 kg of protein from kidney beans required approximately eighteen times less land, ten times less water, nine times less fuel, twelve times less fertilizer and ten times less pesticide in comparison to producing 1 kg of protein from beef. Compared with producing 1 kg of protein from chicken and eggs, beef generated five to six times more waste (manure) to produce 1 kg of protein. CONCLUSIONS: The substitution of beef with beans in meal patterns will significantly reduce the environmental footprint worldwide and should also be encouraged to reduce the prevalence of non-communicable chronic diseases. Societies must work together to change the perception that red meat (e.g. beef) is the mainstay of an affluent and healthy diet.

Comparing the water, energy, pesticide and fertilizer usage for the production of foods consumed by different dietary types in California.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the use of water, energy, pesticides and fertilizer to produce commodities for two dietary patterns that vary in the content of plant and animal products. DESIGN: A unique analysis using 'real-world' data was performed, in contrast to previous analyses which applied simulated data. Consumption data from the Adventist Health Study were used to identify two dietary patterns with a markedly different consumption of several plant and animal products. State agricultural data were collected and applied to commodity production statistics. Indices were created to allow a comparison of the resource requirements for each dietary pattern. SETTING: California, USA. SUBJECTS: None. RESULTS: The diet containing more animal products required an additional 10 252 litres of water, 9910 kJ of energy, 186 g of fertilizer and 6 g of pesticides per week in comparison to the diet containing less animal products. The greatest contribution to the difference came from the consumption of animal products, particularly beef. CONCLUSIONS: Consuming a more plant-based diet could to an extent alleviate the negative environmental impacts related to food production. As a method to feed ourselves more sustainably, behavioural adjustments appear to be a very important tool.

Climate change mitigation and health effects of varied dietary patterns in real-life settings throughout North America.

BACKGROUND: Greenhouse gas emissions (GHGEs) are a major consequence of our dietary choices. Assessments of plant-based compared with meat-based diets are emerging at the intersection of public health, environment, and nutrition. OBJECTIVES: The objective was to compare the GHGEs associated with dietary patterns consumed in a large population across North America and to independently assess mortality according to dietary patterns in the same population. DESIGN: Data from the Adventist Health Study 2 (AHS-2) were used to characterize the differential environmental and health impacts of the following 3 dietary patterns, which varied in the quantity of animal and plant foods: vegetarian, semivegetarian, and nonvegetarian. The GHGE intensities of 210 foods were calculated through life-cycle assessments and by using published data. The all-cause mortality rates and all-cause mortality HRs for the AHS-2 subjects were adjusted for a range of lifestyle and sociodemographic factors and estimated according to dietary pattern. RESULTS: With the use of the nonvegetarian diet as a reference, the mean reductions in GHGEs for semivegetarian and vegetarian diets were 22% and 29%, respectively. The mortality rates for nonvegetarians, semivegetarians, and vegetarians were 6.66, 5.53, and 5.56 deaths per 1000 person-years, respectively. The differences were significant. Compared with nonvegetarians, mortality HRs were lower for semivegetarians (0.86) and vegetarians (0.91). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate differences in the caloric intake of meat products provided nontrivial reductions in GHGEs and improved health outcomes, as shown through the mortality analyses. However, this does not mean that diets lower in GHGEs are healthy.