Search

Tackling the overconsumption of discretionary foods (foods and drinks not necessary to provide the nutrients the body needs) is central to aligning human and planetary health. Whilst the adverse health impacts of discretionary foods are well documented, the environmental and broader sustainability impacts of these products deserve more attention, especially since their consumption has been increasing in recent decades, particularly amongst low income groups. This paper presents a quantitative case study analysis of discretionary food consumption and the associated environmental impacts for households from different income groups in Australia. Environmentally extended input-output analysis is used to estimate the full life cycle environmental impacts of discretionary food consumption on the basis of household expenditures. On average, discretionary foods account for a significant 35%, 39%, 33% and 35% of the overall diet-related life cycle water use, energy use, carbon dioxide equivalent and land use respectively. These significant percentages provide further support for the need to incentivise diets that are both healthier and more sustainable, including ‘divestment’ from discretionary food products. The study highlights the challenges ahead, including the need for further research on food substitutions to minimise environmental and social impacts whilst maximising nutritional quality – especially amongst poorer socioeconomic groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper uses input–output analysis to model the environmental impacts of the weekly food consumption of Australia's households sorted by income quintile in 2003. We found that weekly food consumption of the relatively better off households caused greater environmental burden than that of the less well-off household. Meat and bakery products/flour/cereals were the categories that contributed the largest share of environmental impacts in an average household's food consumption footprint: 58% water, 26% energy, 29% CO 2 , and 31% wasted materials. Per dollar spent, fruit and vegetables generated 0.0874 m 3 of water, 0.0055 GJ of energy, 0.37 kg of CO 2 , and 0.0114 kg of wasted materials. This was lower than the per dollar impacts of bakery products (0.8482, 0.0067, 0.63, 0.0204), meat (0.3471, 0.0070, 0.65, 0.0203), dairy (0.0995, 0.0114, 0.98, 0.0192), and edible fats (0.2373, 0.0080, 0.70, 0.0165). Eating out and fast food consumption also had a low per dollar impact (0.1317, 0.0046, 0.38, 0.0141). We surmise that substituting fruit and vegetables at the expense of animal products, processed foods, and fats would decrease environmental impacts. Change at low income levels should be focused upon meat, bakery and dairy consumption, while higher incomes should be focused upon the consequences of eating food outside the home. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]