An overview of approaches for assessing the environmental sustainability of diets – a scoping review for Nordic Nutrition Recommendations 2023

Tim G. Benton; Helen Harwatt; Anne  Høyer-Lund; Helle Margrete Meltzer; Ellen Trolle; Rune Blomhoff

doi:10.29219/fnr.v68.10453

Tim G. Benton Royal Institute of International Affairs, Chatham House, London, UK
Helen Harwatt Royal Institute of International Affairs, Chatham House, London, UK
Anne Høyer-Lund he Norwegian Directorate of Health, Oslo, Norway
Helle Margrete Meltzer Division of Climate and Environmental Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
Ellen Trolle National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark (DTU), Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark
Rune Blomhoff The Norwegian Directorate of Health, Oslo, Norway; Department of Nutrition, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; and Division of Cancer Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway

DOI: https://doi.org/10.29219/fnr.v68.10453

Keywords: Sustainable food systems, dietary guidelines, environmental impacts, food systems

Abstract

Assessing the environmental impacts of food, food systems and diets is highly complex due to the multitude of processes involved, the uncertainty in assessment models, the variability in production systems and the large range of products available. No single assessment method alone can provide a complete evidence base. The increasing number of Life Cycle Assessment and food system analyses, and more recently the integration of planetary boundaries offer insights from which we can draw some robust high-level conclusions, whilst recognising there is a need for more detailed analysis to capture the inherent nuances of more location and context-specific situations.

Despite the complexity of assessing the environmental sustainability of food, diets and food systems, there are a number of key considerations that could be used to guide this process, and in doing so, they help to increase utility of the outcomes and limit unintended adverse consequences. We identified five key considerations that can be applied (consider the thresholds, consider the system, consider the variables, consider the context and consider the spillover) to ensure assessments are comprehensive.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1.
FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP, WHO. The state of food security and nutrition in the world 2023. Urbanization, agrifood systems transformation and healthy diets across the rural–urban continuum. Rome: FAO; 2023.

2.
GBD Risk Factors Collaborators. Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet 2020; 396(10258): 1223–49. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30752-2

3.
GBD Diseases Injuries Collaborators. Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet 2020; 396(10258): 1204–22. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30925-9

4.
Bahadur KCK, Dias GM, Veeramani A, Swanton CJ, Fraser D, Steinke D, et al. When too much isn’t enough: does current food production meet global nutritional needs? PLoS One 2018; 13(10): e0205683. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205683

5.
Springmann M, Spajic L, Clark MA, Poore j, Herforth A, Webb P, et al. The healthiness and sustainability of national and global food based dietary guidelines: modelling study. BMJ 2020; 370: m2322. doi: 10.1136/bmj.m2322

6.
Global Panel on Agriculture and Food Systems for Nutrition. Future food systems: for people, our planet, and prosperity. London; 2020. Available from: https://www.glopan.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Foresight-2.0_Future-Food-Systems_For-people-our-planet-and-prosperity.pdf [cited 02 Dec 2023].

7.
Swinburn BA, Kraak VI, Allender S, Atkins VJ, Baker PI, Bogard JR, et al. The global syndemic of obesity, undernutrition, and climate change: the Lancet Commission report. Lancet 2019; 393(10173): 791–846. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32822-8

8.
Willett W, Rockstrom J, Loken B, Springmann M, Lang T, Vermeulen S, et al. Food in the anthropocene: the EAT-Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. Lancet 2019; 393(10170): 447–92. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31788-4

9.
FAO. State of food and agriculture 2013: food systems for better nutrition. Rome: FAO; 2013.

10.
Paulot F, Jacob DJ. Hidden cost of U.S. agricultural exports: particulate matter from ammonia emissions. Environ Sci Technol 2014; 48(2): 903–8. doi: 10.1021/es4034793

11.
The Food and Land Use Coalition. Growing better: ten critical transitions to transform food and land use. London: The Food and Land Use Coalition; 2019.

12.
Crippa M, Solazzo E, Guizzardi D, Monforti-Ferrario F, Tubiello FN, Leip A. Food systems are responsible for a third of global anthropogenic GHG emissions. Nat Food 2021; 2(3): 198–209. doi: 10.1038/s43016-021-00225-9

13.
Benton TG, Bieg C, Harwatt H, Pudasaini R, Wellesley L. Food system impacts on biodiversity loss: three levers for food system transformation in support of nature. London: Chatham House; 2021.

14.
Springmann M, Clark M, Mason-D’Croz D, Wiebe K, Bodirsky BL, Lassaletta L, et al. Options for keeping the food system within environmental limits. Nature 2018; 562(7728): 519–25. doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0594-0

15.
Williams DR, Clark M, Buchanan GM, Ficetola GF, Rondinini C, Tilman D. Proactive conservation to prevent habitat losses to agricultural expansion. Nat Sustain 2020; 4(4): 314–22. doi: 10.1038/s41893-020-00656-5

16.
Steffen W, Rockstrom J, Richardson K, Lenton TM, Folke C, Liverman D, et al. Trajectories of the earth system in the anthropocene. P Natl Acad Sci U S A 2018; 115(33): 8252–9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1810141115

17.
Clark MA, Domingo NGG, Colgan K, Thakrar SK, Tilman D, Lynch J, et al. Global food system emissions could preclude achieving the 1.5 degrees and 2 degrees C climate change targets. Science 2020; 370(6517): 705–8. doi: 10.1126/science.aba7357

18.
Blomhoff R, Andersen R, Arnesen EK, Christensen JJ, Eneroth H, Erkkola M, et al. Nordic Nutrition Recommendations 2023. Copenhagen; 2023. Available from: https://pub.norden.org/nord2023-003/ [cited 02 Dec 2023].

19.
Holling CS. Theories for sustainable futures. Conserv Ecol 2000; 4(2): 7. doi: 10.5751/es-00203-040207

20.
Rockstrom J, Steffen W, Noone K, Persson Å, Chapin FS, Lambin EF, et al. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 2009; 461(7263): 472–5. doi: 10.1038/461472a

21.
Committee on World Food Security, High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition (HLPE). Nutrition and food systems. Rome: Committee on World Food Security; 2017.

22.
Committee on World Food Security. The CFS voluntary guidelines on food systems and nutrition. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization; 2021.

23.
Ritchie H, Roser M. Land use. Our world in data, September 2019. 2019. Available from: https://ourworldindata.org/land-use [cited 02 Dec 2023].

24.
IPCC. Summary for policymakers. In: Shukla J, Skea J, Buenida E, et al., eds. Climate change and land: an IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems. Geneva: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; pp. 1–34, 2019.

25.
Scheffer M, Carpenter S, Foley JA, Folke C, Walker B. Catastrophic shifts in ecosystems. Nature 2001; 413(6856): 591–6. doi: 10.1038/35098000

26.
Carpenter SR. Eutrophication of aquatic ecosystems: bistability and soil phosphorus. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005; 102(29): 10002–5. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0503959102

27.
IPCC. IPCC special report on the ocean and cryosphere in a changing climate. Cambridge; 2019. Available from: https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/ [cited 02 Dec 2023].

28.
Benton TG, Fairweather D, Graves A, Harris J, Jones A, Lenton T, et al. Environmental tipping points and food system dynamics: main report. London: Global Food Security; 2017.

29.
German RN, Thompson CE, Benton TG. Relationships among multiple aspects of agriculture’s environmental impact and productivity: a meta-analysis to guide sustainable agriculture. Biol Rev 2017; 92(2): 716–38. doi: 10.1111/brv.12251

30.
Tribaldos T, Kortetmäki T. Just transition principles and criteria for food systems and beyond. Environ Innov Soc Trans 2022; 43: 244–56. doi: 10.1016/j.eist.2022.04.005

31.
Science Advice for Policy by European Academies (SAPEA). A sustainable food system for the European Union. Berlin: European Comission’s Scientific Advice Mechanism; 2020.

32.
FAO, WHO. Sustainable healthy diets – guiding principles. Rome: FAO; 2019.

33.
IPCC. Climate change 2022: mitigation of climate change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: United Nations; 2022.

34.
Kroll C, Warchold A, Pradhan P. Sustainable development goals (SDGs): are we successful in turning trade-offs into synergies? Palgrave Commun 2019; 5: 140. doi: 10.1057/s41599-019-0335-5

35.
Zira S, Rydhmer L, Ivarsson E, Hoffmann R, Roos E. A life cycle sustainability assessment of organic and conventional pork supply chains in Sweden. Sustain Prod Consump 2021; 28: 21–38. doi: 10.1016/j.spc.2021.03.028

36.
Clark M, Tilman D. Comparative analysis of environmental impacts of agricultural production systems, agricultural input efficiency, and food choice. Environ Res Lett 2017; 12(6): 064016. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/aa6cd5

37.
van der Werf HMG, Knudsen MT, Cederberg C. Towards better representation of organic agriculture in life cycle assessment. Nat Sustain 2020; 3: 419–25. doi: 10.1038/s41893-020-0489-6

38.
Mouysset L, Doyen L, Leger F, Jiguet F, Benton TG. Operationalizing sustainability as a safe policy space. Sustainability 2018; 10(10): 3682. doi: 10.3390/su10103682

39.
Benton TG, Bailey R, Froggatt A, King R, Lee B, Wellesley L. Designing sustainable landuse in a 1.5 degrees C world: the complexities of projecting multiple ecosystem services from land. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2018; 31: 88–95. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2018.01.011

40.
Gabriel D, Carver SJ, Durham H, Kunin WE, Palmer RC, Sait SM, et al. The spatial aggregation of organic farming in England and its underlying environmental correlates. J Appl Ecol 2009; 46(2): 323–33. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01624.x

41.
Dougill AJ, Howlett DJB, Fraser EDG, Benton TG. The scale for managing production vs the scale required for ecosystem service production. World Agric 2012. Available from: http://www.world-agriculture.net/article/the-scale-for-managing-production-vs-the-scale-required-for-ecosystem-service-production [cited 02 Dec 2023].

42.
Arnesen EK, Christensen JJ, Andersen R, Eneroth H, Erkkola M, Høyer A, et al. The Nordic Nutrition Recommendations 2022 – handbook for qualified systematic reviews. Food Nutr Res 2020; 64: 4404. doi: 10.29219/fnr.v64.4404

43.
Arnesen EK, Christensen JJ, Andersen R, Eneroth H, Erkkola M, Høyer A, et al. The Nordic Nutrition Recommendations 2022 – structure and rationale of qualified systematic reviews. Food Nutr Res 2020; 64: 4403. doi: 10.29219/fnr.v64.4403

44.
Christensen JJ, Arnesen EK, Andersen R, Eneroth H, Erkkola M, Høyer A, et al. The Nordic Nutrition Recommendations 2022 – principles and methodologies. Food Nutr Res 2020; 64: 4402. doi: 10.29219/fnr.v64.4402

45.
Röös E, Nylinder J. Uncertainties and variations in the carbon footprint of livestock products. Uppsala: Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences; 2013. Available from: https://res.slu.se/id/publ/51856 [cited 02 Dec 2023].

46.
von Brömssen C, Röös E. Why statistical testing and confidence intervals should not be used in comparative life cycle assessments based on Monte Carlo simulations. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2020; 25(11): 2101–5. doi: 10.1007/s11367-020-01827-4

47.
Hallström E, Carlsson-Kanyama A, Börjesson P. Environmental impact of dietary change: a systematic review. J Clean Prod 2015; 91: 1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.12.008

48.
Aleksandrowicz L, Green R, Joy EJM, Smith P, Haines A. The impacts of dietary change on greenhouse gas emissions, land use, water use, and health: a systematic review. PLoS One 2016; 11(11): e0165797. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165797

49.
Poore J, Nemecek T. Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science 2018; 360(6392): 987–92. doi: 10.1126/science.aaq0216

50.
Jones AD, Hoey L, Blesh J, Miller L, Green A, Shapiro LF. A systematic review of the measurement of sustainable diets. Adv Nutr 2016; 7(4): 641–64. doi: 10.3945/an.115.011015

51.
Schader C, Muller A, Scialabba NE, Hecht J, Isensee A, Erb KH, et al. Impacts of feeding less food-competing feedstuffs to livestock on global food system sustainability. J Roy Soc Interface 2015; 12(113): 20150891. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2015.0891

52.
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 14040:2006 environmental management – life cycle assessment – principles and framework. Geneva: International Organisation for Standardization; 2006.

53.
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 14044:2006 environmental management – life cycle assessment – requirements and guidelines. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization; 2006.

54.
IPCC. Annex VII: glossary. In: Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Pirani SL, et al., eds. Climate change 2021: the physical science basis Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. pp. 1–42, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2021.

55.
Life Cycle Initiative. Global guidance for life cycle impact assessment indicators, volume 1. Paris: UN environmental program; 2017.

56.
Life Cycle Initiative. Global guidance for life cycle impact assessment indicators, volume 2. Paris: UN environmental program; 2019.

57.
Hallström E, Davis A, Woodhouse A, Sonesson U. Using dietary quality scores to assess sustainability of food products and human diets: a systematic review. Ecol Indic 2018; 93: 219–30. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.04.071

58.
McLaren S, Berardy A, Henderson A, Holden N, Huppertz T, Jolliet O, et al. Integration of environment and nutrition in life cycle assessment of food items: opportunities and challenges. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2021.

59.
Ziegler F, Tyedmers PH, Parker RWR. Methods matter: improved practices for environmental evaluation of dietary patterns. Glob Environ Change 2022; 73: 102482. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2022.102482

60.
Röös E, Karlsson H, Witthöft C, Sundberg C. Evaluating the sustainability of diets–combining environmental and nutritional aspects. Environ Sci Policy 2015; 47: 157–66. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2014.12.001

61.
Bälter K, Sjörs C, Sjölander A, Gardner C, Hedenus F, Tillander A. Is a diet low in greenhouse gas emissions a nutritious diet? – analyses of self-selected diets in the LifeGene study. Arch Public Health 2017; 75(1): 17. doi: 10.1186/s13690-017-0185-9

62.
Scarborough P, Appleby PN, Mizdrak A, Briggs ADM, Travis RC, Bradbury KE, et al. Dietary greenhouse gas emissions of meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans in the UK. Clim Change 2014; 125(2): 179–92. doi: 10.1007/s10584-014-1169-1

63.
Saxe H, Larsen TM, Mogensen L. The global warming potential of two healthy Nordic diets compared with the average Danish diet. Clim Change 2012; 116(2): 249–62. doi: 10.1007/s10584-012-0495-4

64.
Bryngelsson D, Wirsenius S, Hedenus F, Sonesson U. How can the EU climate targets be met? A combined analysis of technological and demand-side changes in food and agriculture. Food Policy 2016; 59: 152–64. doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2015.12.012

65.
Jarmul S, Dangour AD, Green R, Liew Z, Haines A, Scheelbeek PFD. Climate change mitigation through dietary change: a systematic review of empirical and modelling studies on the environmental footprints and health effects of ‘sustainable diets’. Environ Res Lett 2020; 15(12): 123014. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/abc2f7

66.
Röös E, Garnett T, Watz V, Sjörs C. The role of dairy and plant based dairy alternatives in sustainable diets. Uppsala: Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences; 2018.

67.
Moberg E, Karlsson Potter H, Wood A, Hansson P-A, Röös E. Benchmarking the Swedish diet relative to global and national environmental targets – identification of indicator limitations and data gaps. Sustainability 2020; 12(4): 1407. doi: 10.3390/su12041407

68.
Bjørn A, Chandrakumar C, Boulay A-M, Doka G, Fang K, Gondran N, et al. Review of life-cycle based methods for absolute environmental sustainability assessment and their applications. Environ Res Lett 2020; 15(8): 083001. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/ab89d7

69.
Springmann M, Wiebe K, Mason-D’Croz D, Sulser TB, Rayner M, Scarborough P. Health and nutritional aspects of sustainable diet strategies and their association with environmental impacts: a global modelling analysis with country-level detail. Lancet Planet Health 2018; 2(10): e451–61. doi: 10.1016/S2542-5196(18)30206-7

70.
Campbell BM, Beare DJ, Bennett EM, Hall-Spencer JM, Ingram JSI, Jaramillo F, et al. Agriculture production as a major driver of the Earth system exceeding planetary boundaries. Ecol Soc 2017; 22(4): 1–11. doi: 10.5751/Es-09595-220408

71.
Steward PR, Shackelford G, Carvalheiro LG, Benton TG, Garibaldi LA, Sait SM. Pollination and biological control research: are we neglecting two billion smallholders. Agric Food Sec 2014; 3(1): 5. doi: 10.1186/2048-7010-3-5

72.
Seufert V, Ramankutty N, Foley JA. .Comparing the yields of organic and conventional agriculture. Nature 2012; 485(7397): 229–32. doi: 10.1038/nature11069

73.
Muller A, Schader C, El-Hage Scialabba N, Brüggemann J, Isensee A, Erb KH, et al. Strategies for feeding the world more sustainably with organic agriculture. Nat Commun 2017; 8(1): 1290. doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-01410-w

74.
Weber CL, Matthews HS. Food-miles and the relative climate impacts of food choices in the United States. Environ Sci Technol 2008; 42(10): 3508–13. doi: 10.1021/es702969f

75.
Nelson ME, Hamm MW, Hu FB, Abrams SA, Griffin TS. Alignment of healthy dietary patterns and environmental sustainability: a systematic review. Adv Nutr 2016; 7(6): 1005–25. doi: 10.3945/an.116.012567

76.
Reynolds CJ, Buckley JD, Weinstein P, Boland J. Are the dietary guidelines for meat, fat, fruit and vegetable consumption appropriate for environmental sustainability? A review of the literature. Nutrients 2014; 6(6): 2251–65. doi: 10.3390/nu6062251

77.
Joyce A, Hallett J, Hannelly T, Carey G. The impact of nutritional choices on global warming and policy implications: examining the link between dietary choices and greenhouse gas emissions. Energy Emiss Control Technol 2014; 2014(2): 33–43. doi: 10.2147/eect.S58518

78.
Payne CL, Scarborough P, Cobiac L. Do low-carbon-emission diets lead to higher nutritional quality and positive health outcomes? A systematic review of the literature. Public Health Nutr 2016; 19(14): 2654–61. doi: 10.1017/S1368980016000495

79.
Shepon A, Eshel G, Noor E, Milo R. The opportunity cost of animal based diets exceeds all food losses. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2018; 115(15): 3804–9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1713820115

80.
Harwatt H. Including animal to plant protein shifts in climate change mitigation policy: a proposed three-step strategy. Clim Policy 2018; 19(5): 533–41. doi: 10.1080/14693062.2018.1528965

81.
Cassidy ES, West PC, Gerber JS, Foley JA. Redefining agricultural yields: from tonnes to people nourished per hectare. Environ Res Lett 2013; 8(3): 034015. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/034015

82.
Leclere D, Obersteiner M, Barrett M, Butchart SHM, Chaudhary A, De Palma A, et al. Bending the curve of terrestrial biodiversity needs an integrated strategy. Nature 2020; 585(7826): 551–6. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2705-y

83.
Hayek MN, Harwatt H, Ripple WJ, Mueller ND. The carbon opportunity cost of animal-sourced food production on land. Nat Sustain 2021; 4(1): 21–4. doi: 10.1038/s41893-020-00603-4

84.
Sundin N, Rosell M, Eriksson M, Jensen C, Bianchi M. The climate impact of excess food intake – an avoidable environmental burden. Resour Conserv and Recycl 2021; 174: 105777. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105777

85.
Stehfest E, Bouwman L, van Vuuren DP, den Elzen MGJ, Eickhout B, Kabat P. Climate benefits of changing diet. Clim Change 2009; 95(1–2): 83–102. doi: 10.1007/s10584-008-9534-6

86.
Springmann M, Godfray HCJ, Rayner M, Scarborough P. Analysis and valuation of the health and climate change cobenefits of dietary change. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2016; 113(15): 4146–51. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1523119113

87.
Patterson E, Eustachio Colombo P, Milner J, Green R, Elinder LS. Potential health impact of increasing adoption of sustainable dietary practices in Sweden. BMC Public Health 2021; 21(1): 1332. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-11256-z

88.
Clark MA, Springmann M, Hill J, Tilman D. Multiple health and environmental impacts of foods. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2019; 116(46): 23357–62. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1906908116

89.
Gazan R, Brouzes CMC, Vieux F, Maillot M, Lluch A, Darmon N. Mathematical optimization to explore tomorrow’s sustainable diets: a narrative review. Adv Nutr 2018; 9(5): 602–16. doi: 10.1093/advances/nmy049

90.
Macdiarmid J, Kyle J, Horgan G, Loe JE, Fyfe C, Johnstone A, et al. Livewell: a balance of healthy and sustainable food choices. London: WWF-UK; 2011.

91.
Perignon M, Darmon N. Advantages and limitations of the methodological approaches used to study dietary shifts towards improved nutrition and sustainability. Nutr Rev 2022; 80(3): 579–97. doi: 10.1093/nutrit/nuab091

92.
Donati M, Menozzi D, Zighetti C, Rosi A, Zinetti A, Scazzina F. Towards a sustainable diet combining economic, environmental and nutritional objectives. Appetite 2016; 106: 48–57. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2016.02.151

93.
Seconda L, Baudry J, Pointereau P, Lacour C, Langevin B, Hercnerg S, et al. Development and validation of an individual sustainable diet index in the NutriNet-Sante study cohort. Br J Nutr 2019; 121(10): 1166–77. doi: 10.1017/S0007114519000369

94.
Vieux F, Perignon M, Gazan R, Darmon N. Dietary changes needed to improve diet sustainability: are they similar across Europe? Eur J Clin Nutr 2018; 72(7): 951–60. doi: 10.1038/s41430-017-0080-z

95.
Grigoriadis V, Nugent A, Brereton P. Working towards a combined measure for describing environmental impact and nutritive value of foods: a review. Trends Food Sci Technol 2021; 112: 298–311. doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2021.03.047

96.
McAuliffe GA, Takahashi T, Lee MRF. Applications of nutritional functional units in commodity-level life cycle assessment (LCA) of agri-food systems. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2020; 25(2): 208–21. doi: 10.1007/s11367-019-01679-7

97.
Guo A, Bryngelsson S, Strid A, Bianchi M, Winkvist A, Hallström E. Choice of health metrics for combined health and environmental assessment of foods and diets: a systematic review of methods. J Clean Prod 2022; 365: 132622. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132622

98.
Green A, Nemecek T, Chaudhary A, Mathys A. Assessing nutritional, health, and environmental sustainability dimensions of agri-food production. Glob Food Secur 2020; 26: 100406. doi: 10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100406

99.
Eme PE, Douwes J, Kim N, Foliaki S, Burlingame B. Review of methodologies for assessing sustainable diets and potential for development of harmonised indicators. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019; 16(7): 1184. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16071184

100.
Mertens E, Van’t Veer P, Hiddink GJ, Steijns JM, Kuijsten A. Operationalising the health aspects of sustainable diets: a review. Public Health Nutr 2017; 20(4): 739–57. doi: 10.1017/S1368980016002664

An overview of approaches for assessing the environmental sustainability of diets – a scoping review for Nordic Nutrition Recommendations 2023

Abstract

Downloads

References

Most read articles by the same author(s)