Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Environmental consequences related to nutritional status of Thai populations

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Public Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aim

To quantify the cumulative environmental impact related to dietary preference of Thai adults classified by nutritional status.

Subject and methods

The study used the data from the Thailand National Food Consumption Survey in 2006. A sample of 4056 participants aged between 19 and 60 years were categorized (normal, overweight, and obesity) by body mass index (BMI) classification for Asians. Food consumption patterns were analyzed and amounts of popular food consumed were calculated. Each commodity’s input was converted into output during the life-cycle to CO2 equivalent (CO2-eq) using a Thai database. The most popular plant- and animal-based foods were selected to quantify their emission of GHGs (greenhouse gases) during transportation.

Results

Among the ten popular commodities, seven were plant-based foods. Annual GHG emissions by overweight and obesity were higher than that of the normal groups (367, 319, and 301 kgCO2-eq respectively). The highest GHG contributor was rice. Beef emitted more than other animal-based foods.

Conclusions

Food choices ultimately result in impacts on the environment. They also have consequences on public health related to health outcomes. It is therefore recommended that environmentally friendly consumption practices should be encouraged for climate change and food security.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aekplakorn W, Inthawong R, Kessomboon P, et al (2014) Prevalence and trends of obesity and association with socioeconomic status in Thai adults: National Health Examination Surveys, 1991–2009. J Obes 2014:410259

  • Berners-Lee M, Hoolohan C, Cammack H, Hewitt CN (2012) The relative greenhouse gas impacts of realistic dietary choices. Energy Policy 43:184–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canadell JG, Le Quéré C, Raupach MR et al (2007) Contributions to accelerating atmospheric CO(2) growth from economic activity, carbon intensity, and efficiency of natural sinks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104(47):18866–18870

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson-Kanyama A, González AD (2009) Potential contributions of food consumption patterns to climate change. Am J Clin Nutr 89(5):1704S–1709S

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Davis J, Sonesson U, Baumgartner DU, Nemecek T (2010) Environmental impact of four meals with different protein sources: case studies in Spain and Sweden. Food Res Int 43(7):1874–1884

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eshel G, Martin PA (2006) Diet, energy, and global warming. Earth Interact 10(9):1–17

    Article  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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garnett T (2013) Food sustainability: problems, perspectives and solutions. Proc Nutr Soc 72(1):29–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gemming L, Jiang Y, Swinburn B, Utter J, Mhurchu CN (2013) Under-reporting remains a key limitation of self-reported dietary intake: an analysis of the 2008/09 New Zealand Adult Nutrition Survey. Eur J Clin Nutr 68:259–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goris AHC, Westerterp-Plantenga MS, Westerterp KR (2000) Undereating and underrecording of habitual food intake in obese men: selective underreporting of fat intake. Am J Clin Nutr 71(1):130–134

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Haslam DW, James WPT (2005) Obesity. Lancet 366(9492):1197–1209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heller Martin C, Keoleian Gregory A (2014) Greenhouse gas emission estimates of U.S. dietary choices and food loss. J Ind Ecol 19(3):391–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huesemann M, Huesemann JA (2011) The inherent unpredictability and unavoidability of unintended consequences. In: Techno-Fix: why technology won't save us or the environment. New Society Publishers, Vancouver, pp. 3–15

  • International Energy Agency (2013) Key World Energy Statistics 2012. IEA, Paris

  • Macdiarmid JI, Kyle J, Horgan GW et al (2012) Sustainable diets for the future: can we contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by eating a healthy diet? Am J Clin Nutr 96(3):632–639

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Metz B, Davidson O, Bosch P, Dave R, Meyer L (2007) Climate change 2007: Working Group III: mitigation. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norat T, Riboli E (2009) Meat consumption and colorectal cancer: a review of epidemiologic evidence. Nutr Rev 59(2):37–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norat T, Lukanova A, Ferrari P, Riboli E (2001) Meat consumption and colorectal cancer risk: dose–response meta-analysis of epidemiological studies. Int J Cancer 98(2):241–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pachauri RK, Allen MR, Barros VR, et al (2014) Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, Pachauri RK, Meyer LA(eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, 155 pp

  • Poslusna K, Ruprich J, de Vries JHM, Jakubikova M, van't Veer P (2009) Misreporting of energy and micronutrient intake estimated by food records and 24 hour recalls, control and adjustment methods in practice. Br J Nutr 101(S2):S73–S85

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sheikholeslam R, Mohamad A, Mohammad K, Vaseghi S. (2004) Non-communicable disease risk factors in Iran. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr 13 (Suppl 2):S 100

  • Shulman S, Deyette J, Ekwurzel B, Friiedman D, Mellon M, Rogers J (2012) A low-carbon diet. In: Shulman S (ed) Cooler smarter: practical steps for low-carbon living. Island Press, Washington DC, pp 137–157

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M (2007) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Sranacharoenpong K, Soret S, Harwatt H, Wien M, Sabaté J (2015) The environmental cost of protein food choices. Public Health Nutr 8(11):2067–2073

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Stocker T, Qin D, Plattner G-K et al (2013) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Subar AF, Thompson FE, Kipnis V et al (2001) Comparative validation of the block, Willett, and National Cancer Institute food frequency questionnaires the eating at America's table study. Am J Epidemiol 154(12):1089–1099

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • The National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards (2006) Food consumption data of Thailand. Bangkok, Thailand

    Google Scholar 

  • Vidal R, Moliner E, Pikula A, Mena-Nieto A, Ortega A (2015) Comparison of the carbon footprint of different patient diets in a Spanish hospital. J Health Serv Res Policy 20(1):39–44

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful for the environmental database used in this study from the Thai National Life Cycle Inventory Database for Basic Materials and Energy, the Ministry of Industry and National Science and Technology Development Agency (NSTDA), Thailand.

The author would like to thank Dr. Mehraj Ahmad, an native English speaker, for professional editing of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Graduate Studies of Mahidol University Alumni Association, Thailand.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nutrition, Institute of Nutrition, Mahidol University, 999 Phuttamonthon 4 Rd., Salaya, Phuttamonthon, Nakhon Pathom, 73170, Thailand

    Piyanit Churak & Kitti Sranacharoenpong

  2. Faculty of Engineering, Kasetsart University, Bangkok, Thailand

    Thumrongrut Mungcharoen

Authors
  1. Piyanit Churak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kitti Sranacharoenpong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thumrongrut Mungcharoen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kitti Sranacharoenpong.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author has no conflict of interests.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was not required.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Churak, P., Sranacharoenpong, K. & Mungcharoen, T. Environmental consequences related to nutritional status of Thai populations. J Public Health (Berl.) 29, 879–884 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-019-01189-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-019-01189-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation