Advertisement

Just eating healthier is not enough: studying the environmental impact of different diet scenarios for Dutch women (31–50 years old) by linear programming

  • Marcelo Tyszler
  • Gerard Kramer
  • Hans Blonk
LCA OF NUTRITION AND FOOD CONSUMPTION

Abstract

Purpose

Eating healthier or vegetarian and vegan diets are suggested options to reduce the environmental impact of the current diet. In this paper, we demonstrate a method that is able to identify diets with reduced environmental impact and are more similar to the current diet than predetermined scenarios. All diets were adequate and consisted of commonly available foods.

Methods

We used linear programming to find solutions that are as close as possible to the current diet of an average woman with age 31–50, first without any food groups’ constraints and later by imposing constraints on meat, fish, dairy, and eggs. Finally, we use a similar technique to search for the closest diet that achieves the same environmental reduction as the most restricted option (no meat, fish, dairy, or eggs), without restrictions on products. In the optimization algorithm, we incorporate popularity of food products in order to design menus which are feasible for the Dutch population.

Results and discussion

The results show that simply eating according to guidelines does not guarantee a diet with an improved environmental profile. Removing meat and fish from the diet reduces the environmental impact by about 21 %. A healthy vegan diet reaches 30 % environmental impact reduction, but leads to a diet with many changes in comparison to a typical Dutch diet and without meeting one of the health constraints (EPA + DHA—Eicosapentaenoic acid + Docosahexaenoic acid). We show that it is possible to find less restrictive solutions than vegetarian or vegan diets that still satisfy all nutritional requirements and have less environmental impact than the current one.

Conclusions

Just eating healthier is not enough in order to reduce environmental impact. However, designing a diet that meets dietary requirements must be a prerequisite for sustainable diets. Simply removing products from a diet can have as consequence that other products have to be added to compensate for the nutritional imbalances. We show, by using linear programming, that it is possible to reach 30 % reduction in the environmental impact with a diet which is relatively similar to the current one and could be more likely to be accepted.

Keywords

Eating patterns Environmental impact Environmental impact of food Food policy and nutrition Greenhouse gas emissions Healthy food Linear programming 

Supplementary material

11367_2015_981_MOESM1_ESM.docx (77 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 76 kb)

References

  1. Carlsson-kanyama A, González AD (2009) Potential contributions of food consumption patterns to climate change 1–4. Am J Clin Nutr 89:1704–1709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Catherine A. Forestell, Andrea M. Spaeth, Stephanie A. Kane, (2012) To eat or not to eat red meat. A closer look at the relationship between restrained eating and vegetarianism in college females, Appetite, 58;(1);319-325, ISSN 0195-6663,  10.1016/j.appet.2011.10.015.
  3. Duchin F (2008) Sustainable consumption of food: a framework for analyzing scenarios about changes in diets. J Ind Ecol 9:99–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. FAO (2010) Sustainable diets and biodiversity. Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
  5. FAO (2011) The state of the world’s land and water resources for food and agriculture - managing systems at risk. Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
  6. Gerbens-Leenes P, Nonhebel S (2002) Consumption patterns and their effects on land required for food. Ecol Econ 42:185–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gerber PJ, Steinfeld H, Henderson B et al (2013) Tackling climate change through livestock – A global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities. Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
  8. Gezondheidsraad (2001) Health Council of the Netherlands. Dietary reference intakes: energy, proteins, fats, and digestible carbohydrates; publication no. 2001/19R; The Hague, The Netherlands. pp 1–174Google Scholar
  9. Gezondheidsraad (2006) Health Council of the Netherlands. Guidelines for a healthy diet 2006/Richtlijnen Goede Voeding 2006; publication no. 2006/21. The Hague, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  10. Goedkoop M, Heijungs R, Huijbregts M et al (2013) ReCiPe 2008, A LCA method which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level; Report 1 CharacterisationGoogle Scholar
  11. Hagemann M, Ndambi A, Hemme T, Latacz-Lohmann U (2012) Contribution of milk production to global greenhouse gas emissions. An estimation based on typical farms. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 19:390–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hallström E, Carlsson-Kanyama A, Börjesson P (2015) Environmental impact of dietary change: a systematic review. J Clean Prod 91:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kramer GFH, Broekema R, Tyszler M et al (2013) Comparative LCA of Dutch dairy products and plant- based alternatives. Gouda, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  14. 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 96:632–639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Maillot M, Vieux F, Amiot MJ, Darmon N (2010) Individual diet modeling translates nutrient recommendations into realistic and individual-specific food choices. Am J Clin Nutr 91:421–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mensink GBM, Fletcher R, Gurinovic M et al (2013) Mapping low intake of micronutrients across Europe. Br J Nutr 110:755–773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Risku-Norja H, Kurppa S, Helenius J (2009) Dietary choices and greenhouse gas emissions—assessment of impact of vegetarian and organic options at national scale. Prog Ind Ecol Int J 6:340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. RIVM (2011) NEVO-online version 2011/3.0. http://nevo-online.rivm.nl/. Accessed 31 Jan 2013
  19. RIVM (2012) consumption_food_nut.dat Version 20111125, part of the Dutch National Food Consumption Survey 2007-2010Google Scholar
  20. Searchinger T et al (2013) Creating a Sustainable Food Future - World Resources Report 2013–14: Interim Findings. 1–144Google Scholar
  21. Sevenster M, Blonk H, Van der Flier S (2010) Environmental analyses of food and food waste/Milieuanalyses voedsel en voedselverliezen. pp 1–76Google Scholar
  22. Stehfest E, Bouwman L, Vuuren DP et al (2009) Climate benefits of changing diet. Clim Chang 95:83–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Temme EH, van der Voet H, Thissen JT et al. (2013) Replacement of meat and dairy by plant-derived foods: estimated effects on land use, iron and SFA intakes in young Dutch adult females. Public Health Nutr 1–8.Google Scholar
  24. Tubiello FN, Salvatore M, Cóndor Golec RD et al. (2014) Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use Emissions by Sources and Removals by Sinks - 1990-2011 Analysis. 1–76Google Scholar
  25. Tukker A, Bausch-Goldbohm S, Verheijden M et al. (2009) Environmental impacts of diet changes in the EU. 1–96. doi:  10.2791/88996
  26. Tyszler M, Kramer G, Blonk H (2014) Comparing apples with oranges: on the functional equivalence of food products for comparative LCAs. Int J Life Cycle Ass 19(8):1482–1487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. USDA (2012) Release 25 of the USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference. http://www.ars.usda.gov/Services/docs.htm?docid=22771
  28. Van Dooren C, Marinussen M, Blonk H et al (2014) Exploring dietary guidelines based on ecological and nutritional values: a comparison of six dietary patterns. Food Policy 44:36–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Van Rossum CTM, Fransen HP, Verkaik-Kloosterman J et al (2011) Dutch National Food Consumption Survey 2007-2010, pp 1–148Google Scholar
  30. Van Westerhoven S, Steenhuizen F (2010) Bepaling voedselverliezen bij huishoudens en bedrijfscatering in Nederland. pp 1–65Google Scholar
  31. Vieux F, Darmon N, Touazi D, Soler LG (2011) Food Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Changing Food Consumption Patterns or Consuming less? Annals of Nutrition and Metabolism, 58 (Suppl. 3) Presented at 11. European Nutrition Conference (FENS), Madrid, ESP (2011-10-26 - 2011-10-29). Basel,CHE: Karger. http://prodinra.inra.fr/record/209894
  32. Vieux F, Darmon N, Touazi D, Soler LG (2012) Greenhouse gas emissions of self-selected individual diets in France: changing the diet structure or consuming less? Ecol Econ 75:91–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Vieux F, Soler LG, Touazi D, Darmon N (2013) High nutritional quality is not associated with low greenhouse gas emissions in self-selected diets of French adults. Am J Clin Nutr. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.112.035105 Google Scholar
  34. Voedingscentrum (2011) Richtlijnen voedselkeuze 2011.Google Scholar
  35. Voedingscentrum (2013) Eettabel. 1–207Google Scholar
  36. Voedingscentrum (2014) Aanbevelingen voor vitamines , mineralen en spoorelementen/Recommendations for vitamins, minerals and trace elementsGoogle Scholar
  37. Westenbrink S, Jansen-van der Vliet M (2013) NEVO-online 2013: background information (in Dutch). pp 1–24Google Scholar
  38. Westhoek H, Rood T, Berg M van den et al (2011) The protein puzzle. pp 1–221Google Scholar
  39. WHO, FAO, UNU (2007) Protein and amino acid requirements in human nutrition - Report of a join FAO/WHO/UNU expert consultation (WHO Technical Report Series 935). 284 ppGoogle Scholar
  40. Wilson N, Nghiem N, Ni Mhurchu C et al (2013) Foods and dietary patterns that are healthy, low-cost, and environmentally sustainable: a case study of optimization modeling for New Zealand. PLoS One 8:e59648CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Blonk ConsultantsGoudaNetherlands

Personalised recommendations