Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Framework for Sustainability Transition: The Case of Plant-Based Diets

  • Articles
  • Published:
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Societal and technological development during the last century has enabled Western economies to achieve a high standard of living. Yet this profusion of wealth has led to several outcomes that are undesirable and/or unsustainable. There is thus an imperative need for a fundamental and rapid transition towards more sustainable practices. While broad conceptual frameworks for managing sustainability transitions have been suggested in prior literature, these need to be further developed to suit contexts in which the overall vision is arguably clear, such as in the case of consuming animal-originated foodstuffs. In this article we introduce a novel transition management framework that is based upon the dimensions of sustainability. The suggested transition management process includes the identification of objectives and obstacles, the listing of options and their opportunities and threats as well as the evaluation of the outcomes (the Five O’s). We argue that sustainability transition management should be a process in which the identification of the relevant dimensions of sustainability and related objectives forms the foundation for strategic, tactical and operational governance activities. We illustrate the practical applicability of the framework in the case of transition towards plant-based diets.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The whole system involved in producing and consuming food, including administrative and commercial actors, as well as consumers.

  2. There are some suggestions in the scientific literature concerning the extent of such a transition. See McMichael et al. (2007) for exact amounts or Rifkin (1993) for a composition.

  3. For a corresponding conceptualization and explanation in terms of ecological economics, see e.g., Harris (2003).

  4. The inclusion of the animal dimension might emphasize the distinction between humans (i.e., social and cultural ethics) and other animals (i.e., animal ethics). The purpose here is not to present such a categorical ethical division but to put forward a conceptual tool for analysing sustainability.

  5. Similarly, to avoid excessive top-down control, the decision of how to define “meat” (e.g., whether or not to include white meat) is left to the transition arena.

  6. Such systems include the linguistic terms separating living animals from their meat (e.g., veal from calves, pork from pigs), as well as the relocation of butchering facilities from inner cities to industrial areas (see Vialles, 1994).

  7. It has been argued that the welfare of all beings is at the heart of Darwinism (Rachels, 1990, p. 222), not the domination of the strong over the weak.

  8. Although this is already the case in most European countries, the situation might be different globally as indicated, for instance, by the appeal of an international coalition of scientists (IAP, 2006).

  9. Food pyramids and food plates are graphical representations of the nutritional recommendations given by national authorities such as the US Department of Agriculture or UK National Health Service.

References

  • Adams, C. (1999). The sexual politics of meat: A feminist–vegetarian critical theory continuum. New York: International Publishing Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aiking, H. (2011). Future protein supply. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 22(2–3), 112–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Dietetic Association. (2003). Position of the American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada: Vegetarian diets. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 103, 748–765.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, E. (1997). Micro algae as a source of protein. Biotechnology Advances, 25(2), 207–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bekoff, M. (2007). Animals matter—a biologist explains why we should treat animals with compassion and respect. Boston: Shambhala Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berg, A. (2011). Not roadmaps but toolboxes: Analysing pioneering national programmes for sustainable consumption and production. Journal of Consumer Policy, 34(1), 9–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berg, A. (2012). The Multiple Faces of a Sustainability Strategy: Analysing Finland’s Programme to Promote Sustainable Consumption and Production. Dissertations of the National Consumer Research Centre 6, Tampere University Press, Tampere.

  • Björkroth, T., Frosterus, H., Kajova, M., & Palo, E. (2012). Kilpailuviraston päivittäistavarakauppaa koskeva selvitys. Kuinka kaupan ostajavoima vaikuttaa kaupan ja teollisuuden välisiin suhteisiin? (in Finnish: Finnish Competition Authorities report on grocery stores. How does retailers’ purchasing power affect the relations between trade and industry? Finnish Competition Authorities report 1/2012, Helsinki. ISBN 978-952-5289-12-1.

  • Bonney, R. (2008). Ethics in action: Farming, the environment and animal welfare. Presentation at “Reconnections”. Forum for the Future, Yewfield, Cumbria.

  • Boogaard, B., Boekhorst, L., Oosting, S., & Sørensen, J. (2011). Socio-cultural sustainability of pig production: Citizen perceptions in the Netherlands and Denmark. Livestock Science, 140, 189–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bord, R., O’Connor, R., & Fisher, R. (2000). In what sense does the public need to understand global climate change? Public Understanding of Science, 9, 205–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, K., & Jameton, A. (2000). Public health implications of urban agriculture. Journal of Public Health Policy, 21, 20–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burlingame, B., & Dernini, S. (eds.) (2012). Sustainable diets and biodiversity: Directions and solutions for policy, research and action. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Rome 2012.

  • Campbell, S. (1996). Green cities, growing cities, just cities?: Urban planning and the contradictions of sustainable development. Journal of the American Planning Association, 62, 296–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, T. C., & Campbell, T. M. (2006). The China Study: The most comprehensive study of nutrition ever conducted and the startling implications for diet, weight loss and long-term health. Dallas: Benbella Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson-Kanyama, A. (1998). Climate change and dietary choices—how can emissions of greenhouse gases from food consumption be reduced? Food Policy, 23, 277–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiu, R. (2004). Socio-cultural sustainability of housing: A conceptual exploration. Housing, Theory and Society, 21, 65–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawkins, R. (2006). The God delusion. Kent: Bantam press.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Bakker, E., & Dagevos, H. (2012). Reducing meat consumption in today’s consumer society: questioning the citizen-consumer gap. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 25, 877–894.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Vries, B., & Petersen, A. (2009). Conceptualizing sustainable development: An assessment methodology connecting values, knowledge, worldviews and scenarios. Ecological Economics, 68(4), 1006–1019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deckers, J. (2010). Should the consumption of farmed animal products be restricted, and if so, by how much? Food Policy, 35, 497–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeLeeuw, J., Galen, L., Aebersold, C., & Stanton, V. (2007). Support for animal rights as a function of belief in evolution, religious fundamentalism, and religious denomination. Society and Animals, 15, 353–363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamandis, P., & Kotler, S. (2012). Abundance—The future is better than you think. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Silva, J., & Webster, J. (2010). The meat crisis: Developing more sustainable production and consumption. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2005). Special Eurobarometer 229: Attitudes of consumers towards the welfare of farmed animals. European Commission, Brussels. Available in: http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/welfare/euro_barometer25_en.pdf Cited 20.2.2012.

  • EuroStat. (2010). Agricultural statistics, Main results 2008–09. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farla, J., Markard, J., Raven, R., & Coenen, L. (2012). Sustainability transitions in the making: A closer look at actors, strategies and resources. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79, 991–998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiddes, N. (1991). Meat: A natural symbol. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flyvbjerg, B. (2001). Making social science matter: Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, M. (1999). Deep vegetarianism. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francione, G., & Garner, R. (2010). The animal rights debate: Abolition or regulation?. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, J. (2008). Is there an “animal welfare Kuznets curve”? Ecological Economics, 66(2–3), 478–491.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, A. (1999). Animals and modern cultures—A sociology of human-animal relations in modernity. London: Sage publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friel, S., Dangour, A., Garnett, T., Lock, K., Chalabi, Z., Roberts, I., et al. (2009). Public health benefits of strategies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions: food and agriculture. Lancet, 374, 2016–2025.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garnett, T. (2009). Livestock-related greenhouse gas emissions: Impacts and options for policy makers. Environmental Science & Policy, 12, 491–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garnett, T. (2011). Where are the best opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the food system (including the food chain)? Food Policy, 36, S23–S32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geels, F. (2011). The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: Responses to seven criticisms. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 1, 24–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geuens, M., Brengman, M., & S’Jegers, R. (2003). Food retailing, now and in the future. A consumer perspective. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 10, 241–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • González, A., Frostell, B., & Carlsson-Kanyama, A. (2011). Protein efficiency per unit energy and per unit greenhouse gas emissions: Potential contribution of diet choices to climate change mitigation. Food Policy, 36, 562–570.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodland, R. (1997). Environmental sustainability in agriculture: Diet matters. Ecological Economics, 23, 189–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodland, R., & Daly, H. (1996). Environmental sustainability: Universal and non-negotiable. Ecological Applications, 6, 1002–1017.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hajer, M. (1995). The politics of environmental discourse—ecological modernisation and the policy process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardeman, E., & Jochemsen, E. (2012). Are there ideological aspects to the modernization of agriculture? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 25, 657–674.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardoy, J., Mitlin, D., & Satterthwaite, D. (1992). Environmental problems in third world cities. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, J. (2003). Sustainability and sustainable development. International Society for Ecological Economics Internet Encyclopedia of Ecological Economics. Available at: http://www.landecon.cam.ac.uk/up211/SD/reading/SD_ISEE.pdf. Accessed 13 Sept 2013.

  • Heiskanen, E., Kivisaari, S., Lovio, R., & Mickwitz, P. (2009). Designed to travel? Transition Management encounters environmental and innovation policy histories in Finland. Policy Sciences, 42(4), 409–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herzog, H., & Galvin, S. (1997). Common sense and the mental lives of animals: An empirical approach. In R. Mitchell, N. Thompson, & L. Miles (Eds.), Anthropomorhism, anecdotes, and animals (pp. 237–253). Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • HM Government. (2010). Food 2030. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Available at: http://archive.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/food/pdf/food2030strategy.pdf. Accessed 13 Sept 2013.

  • Holm, L., & Mohl, M. (2000). The role of meat in everyday food culture: an analysis of an interview study in Copenhagen. Appetite, 34, 277–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins, P., & Dacey, A. (2008). Vegetarian meat: Could technology save animals and satisfy meat eaters? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 21, 579–596.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopwood, B., Mellor, M., & O’Brien, G. (2005). Sustainable development: Mapping different approaches. Sustainable Development, 13, 38–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huesemann, M. (2006). Can advances in science and technology prevent global warming? A critical review of limitations and challenges. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 11(3), 539–577.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyvönen, K. (2003). Food from the internet (in Finnish: Ruokaa netistä). National Consumer Research Centre, publications 10/2003. Helsinki.

  • IAP. (2006). IAP statement on the teaching of evolution. Available: http://www.interacademies.net/File.aspx?id=6150 cited 28.6.2013.

  • IPCC. (2007). Climate change, 2007. Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, M. (2006). Six arguments for a greener diet. Washington: Center for Science in the Public Interest.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jamieson, D. (2002). Morality’s progress: Essays on humans, other animals, and the rest of nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jokinen, P., Kupsala, S., & Vinnari, M. (2012). Consumer trust in animal farming practices—exploring the high trust of Finnish consumers. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 36(1), 106–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, J. (2009). Advancing sustainability science: Report on the international conference on sustainability science (ICSS) 2009. Sustainability Science, 4(2), 233–242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kearney, J., & McElhone, S. (1999). Perceived barriers in trying to eat healthier—results of a pan—EU consumer attitudinal survey. British Journal of Nutrition, 81, 133–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemp, R., Loorbach, D., & Rotmans, J. (2007). Transition management as a model for managing processes of co-evolution towards sustainable development. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 14, 78–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kern, F., & Howlett, M. (2009). Implementing transition management as policy reforms: A case study of the Dutch energy sector. Policy Sciences, 42, 391–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kern, F., & Smith, A. (2008). Restructuring energy systems for sustainability? Energy transition policy in the Netherlands. Energy Policy, 36, 4093–4103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirchhoff, S., Smyth, H., Sanderson, J., Sultanbawa, Y., & Gething, K. (2011). Increasing vegetable consumption: A means-end chain approach. British Food Journal, 113, 1031–1044.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kupsala, S., Jokinen, P., & Vinnari, M. (2013). Who cares about farmed fish? Citizen perceptions of the welfare and the mental abilities of fish. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 26(1), 119–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lafferty, W., & Hovden, E. (2003). Environmental policy integration: Towards an analytical framework. Environmental Politics, 12, 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lang, T., Barling, D., & Caraher, M. (2009). Food policy. Integrating health environment and society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lang, T., Wu, M., & Caraher, M. (2010). Meat and policy: Charting a course through the complexity. In J. D’Silva & J. Webster (Eds.), The meat crisis: Developing more sustainable production and consumption. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsson, C., & Johansson, G. (2002). Dietary intake and nutritional status of young vegans and omnivores in Sweden. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 76, 100–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lassen, J., Sandøe, P., & Forkman, B. (2006). Happy pigs are dirty!—Conflicting perspectives on animal welfare. Livestock Science, 103, 221–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • LAV, & Angelini, G. (2012). The real cost of meat: Mapping the impacts of meat production. Available: http://www.lav.it/uploads/84/42408_dossier_carne_inglese.pdf Cited: 20.8.2012.

  • Lea, E., Crawford, D., & Worsley, A. (2006). Public views of the benefits and barriers to the consumption of a plant-based diet. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 60, 828–837.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lea, E., & Worsley, A. (2004). What proportion of South Australian non-vegetarians hold similar beliefs to vegetarians? Nutrition & Dietetics: the Journal of the Dietitians Association of Australia, 61, 11–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loorbach, D. (2007). Transition management: New mode of governance for sustainable development. Utrecht: International Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loorbach, D. (2010). Transition management for sustainable development: A prescriptive, complexity-based governance model. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 23, 161–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loorbach, D., & Rotmans, J. (2010). The practice of transition management: examples and lessons from four distinct cases. Futures, 42, 237–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorek, S., & Fuchs, D. (2013). Strong sustainable consumption governance e precondition for a degrowth path. Journal of Cleaner Production, 38, 36–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loughnan, S., Haslam, N., & Bastian, B. (2010). The role of meat consumption in the denial of moral status and mind to meat animals. Appetite, 55, 156–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markard, J., Raven, R., & Truffer, B. (2012). Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects. Research Policy, 41, 955–967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, K., Zeuschner, C., & Saunders, A. (2012). Health implications of a vegetarian diet: A review. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 6, 250–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, S., & Slater, R. (2003). Food policy old and new. Development Policy Review, 21, 531–553.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr, E. (2001). What evolution is. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • McEachern, M., & Schröder, M. (2002). The role of livestock production ethics in consumer values towards meat. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 15, 221–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • McEvoy, C. T., Temple, N., & Woodside, J. V. (2012). Vegetarian diets, low-meat diets and health: A review. Public Health Nutrition, 15, 2287–2294.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMichael, J., Powles, C., & Butler, R. (2007). Food, livestock production, energy, climate change, and health. Lancet, 370, 1253–1263.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMillan, T., & Durrant, R. (2009). Livestock consumption and climate change: A framework for dialogue. Food Ethics Council and WWF-UK. Available online: http://www.foodethicscouncil.org/livestockconsumption Cited 30.4.2012.

  • Meadowcroft, J. (2009). What about the politics? Sustainable development, transition management, and long term energy transitions. Policy Sciences, 42(4), 323–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meadowcroft, J. (2012). Engaging with the politics of sustainability transitions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 1, 70–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miele, M., & Evans, A. (2006). Negotiating signs of pleasure and pain: Towards a democratic-deliberative model of animal welfare monitoring. In M. Kaiser & M. Lien (Eds.), Ethics and the politics of food. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, P., Knight, S., & Lesley, S. (2012). Belief in animal mind: Does familiarity with animals influence beliefs about animal emotions? Society & Animals, 20, 211–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munasinghe, M. (1992). Environmental Economics and Sustainable Development, (originally presented at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil),. Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nestle, M. (2002). Food politics. How the food industry influences nutrition and health. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ngapo, T., Dransfielda, E., Martina, J., Magnussonb, M., Bredahlc, L., & Nute, G. (2004). Consumer perceptions: Pork and pig production. Insights from France, England, Sweden and Denmark. Meat Science, 66, 125–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novacek, M. (2008). Engaging the public in biodiversity issues. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105, 11571–11578.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orlich, M. J., Singh, P. N., Sabate′, J., Jaceldo-Siegl, K., Fan, J., Knutsen, S., et al. (2013). Vegetarian dietary patterns and mortality in adventist health study 2. JAMA Internal Medicine,. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.6473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pape, J., Rau, H., Fahy, F., & Davies, A. (2011). Developing policies and instruments for sustainable household consumption: Irish experiences and futures. Journal of Consumer Policy, 34, 25–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pluhar, E. B. (2010). Meat and morality: Alternatives to factory farming. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 23, 455–468.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prime Minister’s Office. (2006). Towards sustainable choices. A nationally and globally sustainable Finland. The national strategy for sustainable development. Helsinki: Edita.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rachels, J. (1990). Created from animals—The moral implications of Darwinism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawles, K. (2010). Developing ethical, sustainable and compassionate food policies. In J. D’Silva & J. Webster (Eds.), The meat crisis: Developing more sustainable production and consumption. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Regan, T. (1985). The case for animal rights. Berkley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rifkin, J. (1993). Beyond beef—The rise and fall of the cattle culture. New York: Plume.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, J. (2004). Squaring the circle? Some thoughts on the idea of sustainable development. Ecological Economics, 48, 369–384.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin, F., Lambin, E., et al. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, 461, 472–475.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabaté, J. (Ed.). (2001). Vegetarian nutrition. Florida: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salonen, A., & Helne, T. (2012). Vegetarian diets: A way towards a sustainable society. Journal of Sustainable Development, 5, 10–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schösler, H., de Boer, J., & Boersema, J. (2012). Can we cut out the meat of the dish? Constructing consumer-oriented pathways towards meat substitution. Appetite, 58, 39–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shove, E. (2007). CAUTION! Transitions ahead: Politics, practice, and sustainable transition management. Environment and Planning A, 39, 763–770.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. (1975). Animal liberation: A new ethics for our treatment of animals. New York: New York Review/Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A., Stirling, A., & Berkhout, F. (2005). The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions. Research Policy, 34, 1491–1510.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spaargaren, G., Oosterveer, P., & Loeber, A. (2012). Food practices in transition. Changing food consumption, retail and production in the age of reflexive modernity. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spash, C. (2012). New foundations for ecological economics. Ecological Economics, 77, 36–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, C. (1995). The Heretic′s feast—A history of vegetarianism. London: University Press of New England.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanford, C., & Bunn, H. (2001). Meat-eating and human evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stehfest, E., van Bouwman, L., Vuuren, D. P., den Elzen, M. G. J., Eickhout, B., & Kabat, P. (2009). Climate benefits of changing diet. Climatic Change, 95, 83–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinfeld, H., Gerber, P., Wassenaar, T., Castel, V., Rosales, M., & de Haan, C. (2006). Livestock’s long shadow—Environmental issues and options. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, N. (2007). The economics of climate change—The Stern review. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • STRN Steering Group (2010). A mission statement and research agenda for the sustainability transitions research network. Available at: http://www.transitionsnetwork.org/ Cited 1.8.2012.

  • Stuart, T. (2006). The bloodless revolution—A cultural history of vegetarianism from 1600 to modern times. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C., & Thaler, R. (2009). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. London: Penguin books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, K. (1984). Man and the natural world: Changing attitudes in England, 1500–1800. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilman, D., Cassman, K., Matson, P., Naylor, R., & Polasky, S. (2002). Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature, 418, 671–677.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilman, D., Fargione, J., Wolff, B., D’Antonio, C., Dobson, A., Howarth, R., et al. (2001). Forecasting agriculturally driven global environmental change. Science, 292, 281–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuomisto, H., & de Mattos, J. (2011). Environmental impacts of cultured meat production. Environmental Science and Technology, 45, 6117–6123.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Bergh, J. (2011). Environment versus growth—A criticism of “degrowth” and a plea for “a-growth”. Ecological Economics, 70, 881–890.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Huis, A., van Itterbeeck, J., Klunder, H., Mertens, E., Halloran, A., Muir, G., et al. (2013). Edible insects: Future prospects for food and feed security. Rome: FAO and Wageningen UR.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Otterloo, A. (2012). Healthy, safe and sustainable. In G. Spaargaren, P. Oosterveer, & A. Loeber (Eds.), Food practices in transition. Changing food consumption, retail and production in the age of reflexive modernity. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vialles, N. (1994). Animal to edible. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vinnari, M., Montonen, J., Härkänen, T., & Männistö, S. (2008). Identifying vegetarians and their food consumption according to self-identification and operationalized definition in Finland. Public Health Nutrition, 12, 481–488.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vinnari, M., Räsänen, P., & Jokinen, P. (2013). Attitudes towards farm animals as a part of belief systems. Anthrozoos., 26(1), 110–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vinnari, M., & Tapio, P. (2012). Sustainability of diets: From concepts to governance. Ecological Economics, 74, 46–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitousek, P., Mooney, H., Lubchenco, J., & Melillo, J. (1997). Human domination of Earth’s ecosystems. Science, 277, 494–499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voß, J.-P., Smith, A., & Grin, J. (2009). Designing long-term policy: Rethinking transition management. Policy Sciences, 42, 275–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wahlen, S., Heiskanen, E., & Aalto, K. (2012). Endorsing sustainable food consumption: Prospects from public catering. Journal of Consumer Policy, 35, 7–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wansink, B., Sonka, S., Goldsmith, P., Chiriboga, J., & Eren, N. (2005). Increasing the acceptance of soy-based foods. Journal of International Food and Agribusiness Marketing, 17, 35–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wirsenius, S., Hedenus, F., & Mohlin, K. (2011). Greenhouse gas taxes on animal food products: Rationale, tax scheme and climate mitigation effects. Climatic Change, 108, 159–184.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geographical and Historical Studies, University of Eastern Finland, PO Box 111, 80101, Joensuu, Finland

    Markus Vinnari

  2. Department of Accounting and Finance, Turku School of Economics, Rehtorinpellonkatu 3, 20500, Turku, Finland

    Eija Vinnari

Authors
  1. Markus Vinnari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eija Vinnari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eija Vinnari.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vinnari, M., Vinnari, E. A Framework for Sustainability Transition: The Case of Plant-Based Diets. J Agric Environ Ethics 27, 369–396 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-013-9468-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-013-9468-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation