tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/environmental-impacts-of-meat-36522/articlesenvironmental impacts of meat – The Conversation2021-10-08T08:11:47Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1686262021-10-08T08:11:47Z2021-10-08T08:11:47ZMeat eating drops by 17% over a decade in the UK – new research<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/425265/original/file-20211007-23-19wzn7l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C3788%2C2997&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/world-vegan-day-vegetarian-sheep-cauliflower-1542201788">DOERS/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>To rein in the greenhouse gas emissions and other environmental impacts from livestock farming and to reduce diet-related diseases, people in the UK must eat 30% less meat by the end of the decade, according to <a href="https://www.nationalfoodstrategy.org/">a recent report</a> commissioned by the government. Vegan and vegetarian diets might seem more popular than ever, but is the country on track to slash meat consumption by a third?</p>
<p>To find out, we analysed trends from the UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey. The data we looked at came from four-day food diaries completed by around 1,000 people in each survey year.</p>
<p>Between 2008 and 2019, the average amount of meat eaten each day per person in the UK fell from 103.7g to 86.3g – a total reduction of 17.4g a day, or <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(21)00228-X/fulltext">just under 17%</a>. This included a 13.7g drop in daily red meat consumption, a 7g reduction in processed meat, and a 3.2g increase in white meat.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Black trays containing different types of red meat." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/425274/original/file-20211007-18619-1qfkynm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/425274/original/file-20211007-18619-1qfkynm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425274/original/file-20211007-18619-1qfkynm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425274/original/file-20211007-18619-1qfkynm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425274/original/file-20211007-18619-1qfkynm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425274/original/file-20211007-18619-1qfkynm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425274/original/file-20211007-18619-1qfkynm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Red meat consumption fell by the most in the new survey.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/different-types-meat-plastic-boxes-packaging-348847544">Natalia Lisovskaya/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>So, to meet the 30% by 2030 target, our research suggests that the rate at which people in the UK are reducing their meat consumption has to nearly double in the next ten years. Here’s what else our analysis of UK diet trends revealed about the country’s evolving relationship with meat.</p>
<h2>Trends in meat eating</h2>
<p>The National Diet and Nutrition Survey is the only survey to capture nationally representative data on the food people are eating in the UK. This means that the mix of people surveyed resembles the general population with regards to demographics such as age, gender, ethnicity, income and region.</p>
<p>To accurately estimate how much meat the survey respondents were eating, we excluded all the other components of dishes containing meat. If a person wrote that they ate beef lasagne for dinner in their food diary, for instance, we only measured the quantity of beef and excluded all other ingredients. </p>
<p>And to understand how these changes in meat consumption might affect the environment, we compared them with information on the environmental impact of rearing a gram of meat (beef, pork, lamb and poultry) from a <a href="https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.aaq0216%22%22">global database</a>. We estimated the consequences for six different indicators of environmental impact, including greenhouse gas emissions and the amount of land used for livestock farming.</p>
<p>Each day, people in the UK now eat 5.7g less beef, 3.9g less lamb and 4.2g less sausage. But at the same time, people are eating more white meat, mostly chicken. This <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6689198/">flight to white</a>, as food scientists are calling it, reflects similar trends seen in other countries. It could be because health guidelines tend to emphasise the risks of eating too much red and processed meat, which is linked to colorectal cancer, while offering little evidence for health problems <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10408398.2021.1949575">from eating poultry</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A partially sliced grilled chicken breast." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/425277/original/file-20211007-22785-hijfke.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/425277/original/file-20211007-22785-hijfke.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425277/original/file-20211007-22785-hijfke.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425277/original/file-20211007-22785-hijfke.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425277/original/file-20211007-22785-hijfke.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425277/original/file-20211007-22785-hijfke.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425277/original/file-20211007-22785-hijfke.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">White meat consumption is on the rise.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/partially-sliced-grilled-chicken-breast-black-504699331">Moving Moment/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>As far back as 2010, a <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/339309/SACN_Iron_and_Health_Report.pdf">committee of scientists</a> which advises the government on nutrition recommended adults in the UK with high intakes of red and processed meat – over 90g a day – reduce their daily intake to a maximum of 70g. Our analysis suggests that in the most recent survey year (2018-19), 34% of respondents were exceeding this recommendation – 26% of women and 43% of men. But this is at least down from 53% in 2008-09.</p>
<p>The proportion of vegetarians and vegans in the UK is also increasing steadily, with 5% of respondents foregoing meat or all animal products in 2018-19, up from 2% in 2008-09. </p>
<p>White people and those born in the 1980s and 1990s ate the most meat, while the youngest (those born after 1999) and oldest (those born before 1960), and those with Asian heritage were eating the least. There was no difference in intake between genders or household income brackets.</p>
<p>We were particularly surprised to find that respondents born after 1999 (so-called Generation Z) were the only subgroup to be eating more meat over time – even though they’re still eating among the least overall. Though it’s important to note that respondents in this group were aged 19 years and younger and so their eating habits as children are more likely to reflect their household’s.</p>
<p>We estimated that the overall changes in meat intake equate to a 35% reduction in the amount of land and a 23% reduction in the amount of freshwater needed to rear livestock, as well as a 28% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture overall.</p>
<p>Although this seems positive, this 17% reduction in meat intake still falls short of dietary targets for a healthy and sustainable food system. Understanding these trends within sub-groups of the UK population could help public health policymakers to tailor strategies, and help researchers and public health professionals to refine messaging to accelerate this reduction in meat consumption.</p>
<p>The environmental data used here are based on averages from global food production systems, so the estimates in relation to UK consumption are approximates. We were also unable to determine from the survey data whether respondents were buying British meat, which would have a lower environmental impact than meat that has been imported from elsewhere.</p>
<h2>How to eat less meat</h2>
<p>Though <a href="https://www.mintel.com/press-centre/food-and-drink/plant-based-push-uk-sales-of-meat-free-foods-shoot-up-40-between-2014-19">39% of people</a> in the UK are currently trying to reduce their meat intake, whether for health or environmental reasons, progress is slow. We recently developed a list of 26 daily strategies for reducing meat consumption, which we refined through focus groups with members of the public, for an <a href="https://optimisediet.org/">online programme</a>.</p>
<p>Here are six strategies which participants in the programme rated as the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/food/2021/jul/17/i-tried-an-app-to-reduce-my-familys-meat-consumption-and-it-worked">most effective</a> for helping them to cut meat from their diets:</p>
<ol>
<li>Make at least one of your main meals vegetarian.</li>
<li>Double the veg, halve the meat in your meals.</li>
<li>Set a maximum number of animal products to eat today and stick to it.</li>
<li>Try a new vegetarian recipe.</li>
<li>Make your lunch and dinner vegetarian.</li>
<li>Eat only plant-based snacks throughout the day.</li>
</ol><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/168626/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Cristina Stewart does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>But the national goal of cutting meat intake by 30% over the next ten years is likely to be missed.Cristina Stewart, Health Behaviours Researcher, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of OxfordLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1326922020-03-10T16:08:55Z2020-03-10T16:08:55ZEven concerned consumers don’t know which food choices have the lowest climate impact<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/318854/original/file-20200305-106616-gi19ve.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=1672%2C0%2C3421%2C3398&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/photos/wAO7PNThO-c">Марьян Блан | @marjanblan/Unsplash</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The energy used to grow, process, package and transport food accounts for about <a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/113/15/4146">a quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions</a>. But not all food is equally carbon-intensive. Researchers can measure the impact of different food choices at each stage of their journey – from farm to fork – to work out their <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652616303584">carbon footprint</a>. </p>
<p>Experts suggest that, to reduce your food-related carbon footprint, the best dietary changes to make include replacing <a href="https://science.sciencemag.org/content/361/6399/eaam5324">red meat</a> and <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378014000338">dairy products</a> with plant-based alternatives, and avoiding products that are <a href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es2030577">flown in, or grown in a commercial greenhouse</a>.</p>
<p>In <a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab465d">our research</a>, we found that many people aren’t aware of this advice. In a national UK sample, most people mentioned one or two dietary changes for reducing the climate impact of their food choices, but they rarely mentioned the strategies that experts suggest are <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652616303584">the most effective</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/318855/original/file-20200305-106573-ojh9f8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/318855/original/file-20200305-106573-ojh9f8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=309&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318855/original/file-20200305-106573-ojh9f8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=309&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318855/original/file-20200305-106573-ojh9f8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=309&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318855/original/file-20200305-106573-ojh9f8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=389&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318855/original/file-20200305-106573-ojh9f8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=389&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318855/original/file-20200305-106573-ojh9f8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=389&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Cut out red meat and dairy, say experts. But is it getting through to people?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/different-types-raw-meat-plastic-boxes-485926792">Sandro Pavlov/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Respondents in our study thought that buying local and organic were the best choices for the climate, with reducing packaging and avoiding processed food coming close behind. Although these strategies can have benefits for the environment and animal welfare, they are far from the most effective strategies for mitigating climate change.</p>
<p>Even the respondents who were most engaged with environmental issues were often ill informed – rarely mentioning the most effective strategies and frequently suggesting relatively ineffective ones. This suggests that advice about how people can make more sustainable food choices isn’t even reaching the ones who might want to do the most. </p>
<p>So why are people in the dark about the right dietary choices for the climate?</p>
<h2>Well-intentioned but misinformed</h2>
<p>For one, <a href="https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/more-recycling-wont-solve-plastic-pollution/">corporate sustainability campaigns</a> tend to shift responsibility onto consumers by focusing on reusing and recycling packaging. This has the obvious appeal of presenting no risk to a company’s bottom line. Although reducing the amount of plastic packaging that ends up in landfill is important, it’s unlikely to make much difference to climate change.</p>
<p>It also doesn’t help that there is so much information to process, and so many complex choices to make. What should we do when the organic vegetables are wrapped in plastic and non-organic ones aren’t? Or when the milk-based yoghurt pot is decorated with a landscape of happy cows wandering free in lush fields, while the plainly packaged soy yoghurt conjures images of the Amazon burning to ashes? What about when the fresh bananas arrive from Ecuador but the local Scottish strawberries are kept in the freezer? Whether it’s plastic packaging versus organic produce, animal welfare versus deforestation, or travel miles versus energy consumption, there is a lot to consider.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/318857/original/file-20200305-106557-fr290d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/318857/original/file-20200305-106557-fr290d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318857/original/file-20200305-106557-fr290d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318857/original/file-20200305-106557-fr290d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318857/original/file-20200305-106557-fr290d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318857/original/file-20200305-106557-fr290d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318857/original/file-20200305-106557-fr290d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Grown in commercial greenhouses or shipped from overseas – which is better for the planet?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/growing-cucumbers-greenhouse-1022292085">ANDREY-SHA74/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Another cause for confusion might be the nature of advice given by climate experts. Often, the climate impact of food choices is presented in terms of grams of greenhouse gas emissions. </p>
<p>We found that people were confused when they were asked “how many <em>grams</em> of greenhouse gas emissions could be saved by growing 1 kg of produce organically instead of conventionally?”, or “packing 1 kg of produce into a paper bag instead of plastic”? They were less confused and could answer more accurately when asked the same questions about the <em>percentage</em> of the greenhouse gas emissions that could be saved. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/four-ways-to-reduce-the-carbon-in-your-food-basket-128811">Four ways to reduce the carbon in your food basket</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Making decisions</h2>
<p>For most of us, decisions about what to eat involve many <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23994507">factors</a>, including how healthy or tasty food is likely to be. We simply don’t have the time, the motivation, or the ability to always figure out exactly which food option has the lowest carbon footprint. </p>
<p>Making choices becomes a lot easier when we have <a href="https://pure.mpg.de/rest/items/item_2102905/component/file_2102904/content">heuristics, or simple rules of thumb</a>. One example is the <a href="https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/eat-well/why-5-a-day/%22%22">five-a-day rule</a>, which encourages people to eat five portions of fruit and vegetables each day. It’s much easier to follow than weighing and adding up your daily intake of different fruits and vegetables to see if you’ve consumed the necessary amount in grams.</p>
<p>Popularising simple rules of thumb – like replace red meat and dairy with plant-based products – helps people skip the stupefying step of computing the complex carbon footprint of every single meal they eat. They allow people to make fast and effective decisions about what to eat.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/319314/original/file-20200309-64601-1y391h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/319314/original/file-20200309-64601-1y391h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/319314/original/file-20200309-64601-1y391h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/319314/original/file-20200309-64601-1y391h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/319314/original/file-20200309-64601-1y391h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/319314/original/file-20200309-64601-1y391h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/319314/original/file-20200309-64601-1y391h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Heuristics offer a mental shortcut through dizzying choice and information overload.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/nutrition-health-eating-five-fruit-vegetables-310705694">Faithie/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Heuristics <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3629675/">are remarkably effective compared to more complex strategies</a> for making decisions. According to <a href="https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-psych-120709-145346">research in psychology</a>, this is probably due to them being easier to remember, implement in different situations, and stick to over time.</p>
<p>If you want to reduce the climate impact of our food choices, try to replace red meat and dairy with plant-based products more often, and avoid products that are flown in or grown in a greenhouse. These choices would be good for the climate, with the added bonus of being <a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/113/15/4146">good for your health.</a></p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/imagine-newsletter-researchers-think-of-a-world-with-climate-action-113443?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKengagement&utm_content=Imagineheader1132692">Click here to subscribe to our climate action newsletter. Climate change is inevitable. Our response to it isn’t.</a></em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/132692/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Joel Millward-Hopkins receives funding from the Leverhulme Trust.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Astrid Kause receives funding from the Met Office UK. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Wändi Bruine de Bruin receives funding from the Riksbankens Jubileumsfond (The Swedish foundation for Humanities and Social Sciences) </span></em></p>The recommendations of experts aren’t reaching people in the supermarket aisles. So what can be done about it?Joel Millward-Hopkins, Postdoctoral Researcher in Sustainability, University of LeedsAstrid Kause, Research Fellow, Management, University of LeedsWändi Bruine de Bruin, Provost Professor of Public Policy, Psychology, and Behavioral Science, University of Southern CaliforniaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1155292019-06-14T09:08:22Z2019-06-14T09:08:22ZA vegan meat revolution is coming to global fast food chains – and it could help save the planet<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/279533/original/file-20190614-158949-1dabv2v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/young-woman-drinks-green-smoothies-eats-1148760260?src=fiAgYRmnic4RX88_5_k76w-1-13&studio=1">frantic00/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>A few years ago, convincing meat-free “meat” was nothing more than a distant dream for most consumers. Meat substitutes in supermarkets lacked variety and quality. Plant-based burgers were few and far between in major fast food outlets – and meaty they were not.</p>
<p>But realistic alternatives to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/may/31/avoiding-meat-and-dairy-is-single-biggest-way-to-reduce-your-impact-on-earth">environmentally damaging</a> meat are now <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/03/business/plant-based-protein-revolution/index.html">big business</a> – and global fast food chains are finally starting to take notice.</p>
<p>Burger King has announced that after a hugely <a href="https://www.livekindly.com/burger-kings-earnings-skyrocket-nearly-30-since-vegan-whopper-launch/">successful trial</a>, it will roll out its partnership with plant-based meat company Impossible Foods <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/food-and-drink/burger-king-impossible-whopper-vegetarian-stores-a8892026.html">across the US</a>. McDonalds recently introduced the similarly meaty <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/07/business/mcdonalds-meatless-burger-germany/index.html">Big Vegan TS</a> in its outlets in Germany, one of its five largest international markets.</p>
<p>Now finally able to produce <a href="https://www.bbcgoodfood.com/howto/guide/what-does-impossible-burger-taste">meat-free imitations</a> that are for many <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/apr/08/burger-king-impossible-whopper-plant-based-review-meat-lobbyist">indistinguishable</a> from their beefy counterparts, the rapidly growing industry appears set to make serious waves in the once impregnable bastions of cheap meat. In so doing, it could kickstart a rapid decline in meat’s contribution to the climate crisis – driven not just by a global minority of vegans and vegetarians, but by millions of meat-eaters too.</p>
<h2>Joining the meatless burger bandwagon</h2>
<p>Thanks to rising <a href="https://www.economist.com/technology-quarterly/2015/03/05/silicon-valley-gets-a-taste-for-food">interest in food technology</a> from Silicon Valley’s start-up scene, such indistinguishable vegan meat came on the menu <a href="https://www.foodstuffsa.co.za/meat-the-disruptors-15-startups-shaking-up-the-global-meat-industry/">a little over five years ago</a>.
Helped by <a href="https://www.cbinsights.com/research/future-of-meat-industrial-farming/">huge investments</a>, <a href="https://www.livekindly.com/beyond-meat-having-global-influence-how-brands-merchandise-vegan-protein/">sophisticated marketing</a>, and a friendly regulatory environment, US companies leaped to the forefront of vegan meat innovation. Products such as the Impossible Burger and the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/food/2018/nov/12/bleeding-vegan-burger-arrives-on-uk-supermarket-shelves">Beyond Burger</a> soon entered into many smaller US restaurants and fast food outlets, before Burger King made it widely available across the country.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ng4C2HMH664?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>In contrast, for a long time, tighter food regulations in Europe stifled meatless meat innovation. Thanks to the European Union’s <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/food/safety/general_food_law/principles_en">precautionary principle</a>, companies face much more stringent checks to show that new ingredients and foods aren’t harmful before they can go on sale. Quorn, a low-cost meat substitute that is now a household name, took almost <a href="https://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/eb059180">ten years</a> to be approved as a legitimate foodstuff, because its use of fungi was unprecedented.</p>
<p>These tight regulations also stipulate that genetically modified ingredients have to be labelled, which may <a href="https://euobserver.com/environment/144195">explain</a> why the widely heralded Impossible Burger – which uses genetically modified yeast to produce the <a href="https://www.cbinsights.com/research/future-of-meat-industrial-farming/">blood-like plant protein</a> that tastes so much like beef – has not yet landed in European countries.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-makes-the-impossible-burger-look-and-taste-like-real-beef-115027">What makes the Impossible Burger look and taste like real beef?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Combined with differences in language, food culture and investment climate across European states, innovative start-ups looking to bring high-quality meat analogues <a href="https://agfundernews.com/why-is-europe-behind-in-food-tech-investment.html">took longer</a> to thrive in Europe.</p>
<p>But while the US may have had a head-start in high-quality vegan meat innovation, it may surprise you to know that plant-based alternatives are much more popular in parts of Europe. While some European states such as France, Portugal and Switzerland are yet to warm to fake meat, the average Briton (750g) or Swede (725g) consumed nearly twice as many meat alternatives in 2018 as in the US (350g), where vegan meats are have typically been more realistic and thus higher-priced than in much of Europe. </p>
<p>With the market growing at times by <a href="https://www.plantbasednews.org/post/2017-ridiculous-987-increase-demand-meat-free-options">orders of magnitude</a> as traditional meat-eaters <a href="https://www.livekindly.com/86-of-people-buying-plant-based-products-are-meat-eaters-says-new-data/">switched on</a> to plant-based products, it was only a matter of time before major European companies started cottoning on to the potential of high-quality meat imitations.</p>
<p>In 2017, McDonald’s was quick to <a href="https://www.plantbasednews.org/post/mcdonalds-mcvegan-burger-update">roll out</a> a vegan burger, the McVegan, at its restaurants in Finland and Sweden. But it was not designed to closely resemble meat, and was marketed primarily at vegans.</p>
<p>In the UK, where <a href="https://www.foodspark.com/Trends-People/16-figures-on-the-UK-s-meat-free-market">more than half of British people</a> have either already reduced or are considering reducing their meat consumption, Greggs decided to blaze the trail. Having only last year considered vegan sausage rolls “<a href="https://www.scotsman.com/read-this/greggs-looking-to-add-vegan-options-to-its-menu/">too difficult</a>” a proposition, they are now returning record profits thanks to an offering <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/may/14/greggs-vegan-sausage-rolls-fuel-profit-boom">so popular</a> that the bakery has struggled to keep up with demand.</p>
<p>In <a href="https://archive.is/20080307163116/http://www.foodfromgermany.org/consumer/facts/guidetosausages.cfm">traditionally</a> <a href="https://www.ndr.de/ratgeber/verbraucher/Fleischkonsum-in-Deutschland,fleisch348.html">meaty Germany</a>, meat alternatives were practically non-existent ten years ago. But Germans now aren’t far off the USA in fake meat consumption, thanks in part to prominent processed meat brands <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-meat-industry-could-win-big-from-the-switch-to-veggie-lifestyles-112714">entering the market</a>. It’s no coincidence that McDonald’s in Germany has since decided to partner with Nestlé, a new <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/07/business/mcdonalds-meatless-burger-germany/index.html">major player</a> in the meatless meat game, to offer a vegan burger there.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/279342/original/file-20190613-32356-bsi2hu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/279342/original/file-20190613-32356-bsi2hu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=461&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279342/original/file-20190613-32356-bsi2hu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=461&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279342/original/file-20190613-32356-bsi2hu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=461&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279342/original/file-20190613-32356-bsi2hu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=580&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279342/original/file-20190613-32356-bsi2hu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=580&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279342/original/file-20190613-32356-bsi2hu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=580&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The market for plant-based meat is rapidly growing across Europe and the USA.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Malte Roedl/Euromonitor International</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>If news of out-of-reach vegan burgers is giving you food envy, there is no need to worry. Different cultures, tastes, prices and administrative hurdles mean that developments will not happen everywhere at the same time. But in the next couple of years, expect to see a lot more plant-based meat coming to fast food chains near you.</p>
<p>Realistic chicken imitations have thus far proved difficult to master, but KFC plans to trial a <a href="https://inews.co.uk/news/consumer/kfc-imposter-burger-vegan-quorn-original-recipe-uk-launch/">vegan version</a> of its chicken fillet burger from June 17. Meanwhile Burger King is <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/food-and-drink/features/replica-chicken-plant-based-patties-fast-food-chains-looking/">already</a> exploring how best to bring its vegan burger to Europe.</p>
<p>And, given the whopping <a href="https://www.livekindly.com/burger-kings-earnings-skyrocket-nearly-30-since-vegan-whopper-launch/">30% increase</a> in sales brought by the Impossible Whopper, McDonald’s and Nestlé are already considering <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/11/nestle-may-extend-plant-based-burger-partnership-with-mcdonalds.html">expanding their partnership</a> beyond Germany.</p>
<p>Crucially, these fast-food vegan meats are not just aimed at vegans and vegetarians, but meat-lovers too, who still make up the vast majority of the country populations across the world. The Impossible Whopper, for example, is marketed not as a planet-saving treat, but a healthier way to enjoy the same meaty taste their customers are used to.</p>
<p>Some vegans <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/food-and-drink/features/replica-chicken-plant-based-patties-fast-food-chains-looking/">baulk</a> at the idea of replicating the taste of animal flesh – but the bigger picture is that such products will play a major role in realising projections that the majority of “meat” will <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jun/12/most-meat-in-2040-will-not-come-from-slaughtered-animals-report">not come from dead animals</a> by 2040. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.mintel.com/press-centre/food-and-drink/taste-is-the-top-reason-us-consumers-eat-plant-based-proteins">Taste and health</a> still far outweigh concern for the environment and animal welfare as factors that determine whether people are willing to purchase plant-based meat. By tapping into these, vegan meat can massively reduce the hefty <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/may/31/avoiding-meat-and-dairy-is-single-biggest-way-to-reduce-your-impact-on-earth">emissions burden</a> and animal suffering caused by animal agriculture.</p>
<p>Bring on the vegan meat revolution, I say.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/115529/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Malte Rödl does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Realistic plant-based meat is now big business - and global fast food chains are finally starting to take notice. In doing so, they could significantly reduce meat’s role in the climate crisis.Malte Rödl, Doctoral Researcher in Sustainable Consumption, University of ManchesterLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1084242018-12-17T19:06:03Z2018-12-17T19:06:03ZWhat’s your beef? How ‘carbon labels’ can steer us towards environmentally friendly food choices<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/250880/original/file-20181217-185255-cd0ise.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C8%2C5607%2C3724&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Delicious, nutritious... and emissions-intensive.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>What did you have for dinner last night? Might you have made a different choice if you had a simple way to compare the environmental impacts of different foods?</p>
<p>Most people do not recognise the environmental impact of their food choices. Our research, <a href="https://rdcu.be/bdHbo">published in Nature Climate Change</a>, shows that even when consumers do stop to think about the greenhouse gas emissions associated with their food, they tend to underestimate it.</p>
<p>Fortunately, our study also points to a potential solution. We found that a simple “carbon label” can nudge consumers in the right direction, just as nutrition information helps to highlight healthier options.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-to-reduce-your-kitchens-impact-on-global-warming-68484">How to reduce your kitchen's impact on global warming</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Most food production is highly industrialised, and has <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652616307570">environmental impacts</a> that most people do not consider. In many parts of the world, conversion of land for beef and agricultural production is a major cause of <a href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es103240z">deforestation</a>. Natural gas is a key input in the manufacture of fertiliser. Refrigeration and <a href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/es702969f">transportation</a> also depend heavily on fossil fuels.</p>
<p>Overall, food production contributes <a href="https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-020411-130608">19-29% of global greenhouse emissions</a>. The biggest contributor is meat, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.12.054">particularly red meat</a>. Cattle raised for beef and dairy products are major sources of methane, a <a href="https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warming-potentials">potent greenhouse gas</a>. </p>
<p>Meat production is inherently inefficient: fertiliser is used to grow feedstock, but only a small portion of this feed becomes animal protein. It takes about <a href="http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/10/105002/meta">38 kilograms of plant-based protein to produce 1kg of beef</a> – an efficiency of just 3%. For comparison, pork has 9% efficiency and poultry has 13%.</p>
<p>We could therefore cut greenhouse emissions from food significantly by opting for <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-014-1169-1">more vegetarian or vegan meals</a>.</p>
<h2>Food for thought</h2>
<p>To find out whether consumers appreciate the environmental impact of their food choices, we asked 512 US volunteers to estimate the greenhouse emissions of 19 common foods and 18 typical household appliances. </p>
<p>We told the respondents that a 100-watt incandescent light bulb turned on for 1 hour produces 100 “greenhouse gas emission units”, and asked them to make estimates about the other items using this reference unit. In these terms, a serving of beef produces 2,481 emission units.</p>
<p>As shown below, participants underestimated the true greenhouse gas emissions of foods and appliances in almost every case. For example, the average estimate for a serving of beef was around 130 emission units – more than an order of magnitude less than the true amount. Crucially, foods were much more underestimated than appliances. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/250881/original/file-20181217-185268-1vjxxeb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/250881/original/file-20181217-185268-1vjxxeb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/250881/original/file-20181217-185268-1vjxxeb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=390&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250881/original/file-20181217-185268-1vjxxeb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=390&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250881/original/file-20181217-185268-1vjxxeb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=390&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250881/original/file-20181217-185268-1vjxxeb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250881/original/file-20181217-185268-1vjxxeb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250881/original/file-20181217-185268-1vjxxeb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Consumers consistently underestimate the greenhouse emissions of food.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Camilleri et al. Nature Climate Change 2018</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Improving consumers’ knowledge</h2>
<p>People often <a href="https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2605_1">overestimate their understanding</a> of common everyday objects and processes. You might think you have a pretty solid idea of how a toilet works, until you are asked to describe it in exact detail.</p>
<p>Food is a similarly familiar but complex phenomenon. We eat it every day, but its production and distribution processes are largely hidden. Unlike appliances, which have energy labels, are plugged into an electrical outlet, emit heat, and generally have clear indications of when they are using electricity, the release of greenhouse gases in the production and transportation of food is invisible.</p>
<p>One way to influence food choice is through <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2012.08.032">labelling</a>. We designed a new carbon label to communicate information about the total amount of greenhouse emissions involved in the production and transport of food.</p>
<p>Drawing on knowledge from the design of existing labels for nutrition, fuel economy and energy efficiency, we came up with the label shown below. It has two key features. </p>
<p>First, it <a href="https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2703">translates</a> greenhouse emissions into a concrete, familiar unit: equivalent number of light bulb minutes. A serving of beef and vegetable soup, for example, is roughly equivalent to a light bulb turned on for 2,127 minutes – or almost 36 hours.</p>
<p>Second, it displays the food’s relative environmental impact compared with other food, on an 11-point scale from green (low impact) to red (high impact). Our serving of beef and vegetable soup rates at 10 on the scale – deep into the red zone – because beef production is so emissions-intensive.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/249396/original/file-20181207-128193-1ftrxrs.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/249396/original/file-20181207-128193-1ftrxrs.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/249396/original/file-20181207-128193-1ftrxrs.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=557&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249396/original/file-20181207-128193-1ftrxrs.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=557&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249396/original/file-20181207-128193-1ftrxrs.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=557&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249396/original/file-20181207-128193-1ftrxrs.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=700&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249396/original/file-20181207-128193-1ftrxrs.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=700&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249396/original/file-20181207-128193-1ftrxrs.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=700&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In the can - a carbon label for beef and vegetable soup reveals its high environmental impact.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>To test the label, we asked 120 US volunteers to buy cans of soup from a selection of six. Half of the soups contained beef and the other half were vegetarian. Everyone was presented with price and standard nutritional information. Half of the group was also presented with our new carbon labels.</p>
<p>Volunteers who were shown the carbon labels chose significantly fewer beef soup options. Importantly, they also had more accurate perceptions of the relative carbon footprints of the different soups on offer.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/youve-heard-of-a-carbon-footprint-now-its-time-to-take-steps-to-cut-your-nitrogen-footprint-98762">You've heard of a carbon footprint – now it's time to take steps to cut your nitrogen footprint</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Figuring out the carbon footprint of every food item is difficult, expensive, and fraught with uncertainty. But we believe a simplified carbon label – perhaps using a traffic light system or showing <a href="http://www.eatlowcarbon.org/food-scores/">relative scores for different foods</a> – can help inform and empower consumers to reduce the environmental impact of their food choices.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/108424/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Adrian R. Camilleri received support from the American Australian Association.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dalia Patino-Echeverri received financial support from the Center for Climate and Energy Decision Making funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation (SES-0949710). </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rick Larrick has been a faculty affiliate at the Center for Research on Environmental Decisions (CRED), which was supported by the National Science Foundation.</span></em></p>Most consumers underestimate the greenhouse emissions associated with different foods. But environmental labels, similar to existing nutrition information, can help us make lower-impact choices.Adrian R. Camilleri, Senior Lecturer in Marketing, University of Technology SydneyDalia Patino-Echeverri, Associate professor, Duke UniversityRick Larrick, Professor of Management and Organizations, Duke UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/737412017-03-06T03:38:20Z2017-03-06T03:38:20ZLove meat too much to be vegetarian? Go ‘flexitarian’<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/159486/original/image-20170306-933-1nay8fl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Can't go full-vege? You can be a bit more flexible about it by just eating LESS meat, instead of none. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">from www.shutterstock.com.au</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>A flexitarian is <a href="https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flexitarian?utm_campaign=sd&utm_medium=serp&utm_source=jsonld">defined as</a> “one whose normally meatless diet occasionally includes meat or fish”. The term, first coined in 1998, describes people who mostly, but don’t always eat vegetarian foods. </p>
<h2>Who’s a flexitarian?</h2>
<p>Flexitarians focus on having vegetarian meals, rather than just <em>not eating</em> the meat served as part of a meat-based meal. Consciously reducing meat intake on <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03670244.2014.896797?journalCode=gefn20">three or more days a week</a> is the suggested cut-off for being called a <strong>flexitarian</strong>. </p>
<p><strong>Semi-vegetarians</strong> are therefore people who reduce their meat, or eat vegetarian meals, less than three days a week. <strong>Pesco-vegetarians</strong> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pescetarianism">are vegetarians who</a> also eat fish and other seafood. <strong>Ovo-lacto vegetarians</strong> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ovo-lacto_vegetarianism">include eggs and milk products</a> but exclude meat, poultry and fish. <strong>Vegans</strong> only <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veganism">eat foods not of animal</a> origin. <strong>Fruitarians</strong> eat mostly fruit but may also eat nuts and seeds. A <a href="http://www.natcen.ac.uk/media/1116002/vegetarian-society-bsa-2014.pdf">UK report</a> found women were more likely to have stopped eating meat or reduced meat intake or be considering reducing meat (50%) compared to men (38%).</p>
<h2>Health benefits of being flexitarian</h2>
<p>A <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28111625">systematic review of 25 studies</a> found health benefits associated with being flexitarian, including better weight management, lower blood pressure, better metabolic health and lower risk of type 2 diabetes. </p>
<p>One randomised controlled trial looked at the impact of five different plant-based weight-loss diets over six months. Researchers assigned overweight adults to either a vegan, vegetarian, flexitarian or semi-vegetarian, pesco-vegetarian or <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnivore">omnivore</a> diet. Those assigned to the vegan diet <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25592014">lost the most weight</a> (losing 7.5% of their starting weight), followed by the vegetarian diet (lost 6.3%), with those in the other groups losing about 3% of starting weight. </p>
<p>A cohort study <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23836264">of more than 73,000 Seventh-Day Adventists</a> who are commonly vegetarian, followed them over five years and found that being any type of vegetarian was associated with a lower risk of death (from all causes combined), compared to being a non-vegetarian. Cohort studies cannot prove causation and there may be other reasons why vegetarians have better health. For example Seventh-Day Adventists do not smoke or drink alcohol and usually have a healthy lifestyle. </p>
<p>Interestingly, risk reduction was stronger in men compared to women. When researchers drilled down to look at specific types of vegetarian eating patterns, overall risk of dying was lowest for pesco-vegetarians, followed by vegans, then ovo-lacto vegetarians. It was not significantly different between flexitarian or semi-vegetarians compared to non-vegetarians. </p>
<p>Other <a href="http://publichealth.llu.edu/adventist-health-studies">analyses in Seventh-Day Adventist population</a> groups have looked at cancer risk and found <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23169929">a lower overall cancer risk in any type of vegetarians</a> compared with non-vegetarians. </p>
<p>When the type of vegetarian was considered, ovo-lacto vegetarians had a lower risk of cancers of gut, while vegans had a lower overall cancer risk and for female-specific cancers. However another analysis found being any type of vegetarian was not associated with a <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26987270">lower risk of breast cancer</a>, although it did approach significance for vegans in the analysis. </p>
<p>For prostate cancer vegan Caucasian males had a lower risk compared to other vegetarians and non-vegetarians. For bowel cancer <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25751512">pesco-vegetarians had the lowest risk</a>, followed by ovo-lacto vegetarians and vegans, with no risk reduction for semi-vegetarians compared to non-vegetarians. Keep in mind that results from these studies in Seventh-Day Adventists may not necessarily apply directly to other populations. </p>
<p>A large study examined <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27299701">plant-based diets in relation to risk of type 2 diabetes</a> in over 200,000 adults from the Health Professionals Follow-up and Nurses Health Studies. The healthiest plant-based diets had the largest amounts of wholegrains, fruit, vegetables, nuts, legumes, vegetable oils, tea and coffee as well as the lowest intakes of fruit juice, sweetened beverages, refined grains, potatoes, sweets, desserts and animal foods. </p>
<p>Those eating the healthiest plant-based food pattern had a 66% lower risk of developing type 2 diabetes compared to those with the worst diets. Interestingly, this was independent of body weight, meaning that the risk reduction was the same no matter how much people weighed. </p>
<p>Another important insight was that those who had “unhealthy” plant-based diets, with high intakes of refined grains, potatoes, sweets, desserts and low intakes of the healthy plant foods had a 16% higher risk of developing type 2 diabetes, irrespective of body weight. This is a really important finding and shows that it is worth the effort to learn how to make healthy (and yummy) vegetarian food, rather than just leaving the meat off your plate.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/159345/original/image-20170304-29027-3lgmxo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/159345/original/image-20170304-29027-3lgmxo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=605&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/159345/original/image-20170304-29027-3lgmxo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=605&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/159345/original/image-20170304-29027-3lgmxo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=605&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/159345/original/image-20170304-29027-3lgmxo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=761&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/159345/original/image-20170304-29027-3lgmxo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=761&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/159345/original/image-20170304-29027-3lgmxo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=761&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">‘Meat Free Monday’ and the Meat Free Monday logo are registered trademarks and their use here is not deemed to indicate any affiliation or endorsement of any third party or their products, services or opinions by the Meat Free Monday campaign.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Meat Free Monday</h2>
<p>Let <a href="http://www.meatfreemondays.com/about/">Meat Free Monday</a> inspire you. There are lots of <a href="http://www.meatfreemondays.com/recipes/">great recipes on the website</a>. It’s a not-for-profit campaign launched in 2009 by Paul, Mary and Stella McCartney.</p>
<p>Apart from health, there are many reasons why people choose to cut down their meat intake, or to not eat meat at all. These range from concerns about animal welfare, the environment, cost or world hunger. </p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/159346/original/image-20170304-29032-9ryxre.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/159346/original/image-20170304-29032-9ryxre.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/159346/original/image-20170304-29032-9ryxre.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/159346/original/image-20170304-29032-9ryxre.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/159346/original/image-20170304-29032-9ryxre.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/159346/original/image-20170304-29032-9ryxre.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/159346/original/image-20170304-29032-9ryxre.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Paul McCartney Meat Free Monday 2014 MPL Communications Ltd/Photographer: MJ Kim.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Meat Free Monday raises awareness of these issues and encourages people to have at least one meat free day a week to help improve their health. You can sign up for their newsletter on the website.</p>
<p>So whether you want to boost your health, ease pressure on the planet, conserve resources to feed the world, or just enjoy making and eating really interesting food, consider becoming a flexitarian.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/73741/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<h4 class="border">Disclosure</h4><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Clare Collins is affiliated with the Priority Research Centre for Physical Activity and Nutrition, the University of Newcastle, NSW. She is an NHMRC Senior Research fellow. She has received a range of research grants including NHMRC, ARC, Hunter Medical Research Institute, Meat and Livestock Australia, Diabetes Australia, the Heart Foundation. She has consulted to SHINE Australia, Novo Nordisk, Quality Bakers and the Sax Institute. She is a spokesperson for the Dietitians Association of Australia on some specific nutrition issues, including Australia's Healthy Weight Week.</span></em></p>A flexitarian is a vegetarian who eats small amounts of meat.Clare Collins, Professor in Nutrition and Dietetics, University of NewcastleLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.