Scientific Targets for Healthy Diets* Food group Food subgroup Reference diet (g/day) Possible ranges (g/day) Whole Grains All grains 232 0 to 60% of energy Tubers/Starchy Vegetables Potatoes, cassava 50 0 to 100 Vegetables All vegetables 300 200 to 600 Fruits All Fruits 200 100 to 300 Dairy Foods Dairy Foods 250 0 to 500 Beef, lamb, pork 14 0 to 28 Protein Sources Chicken, other poultry 29 0 to 58 Eggs 13 0 to 25 Fish 28 0 to 100 Dry beans, lentils, peas 50 0 to 100 Soy 25 0 to 50 Nuts 50 0 to 75 Added fats Unsaturated oils 40 20-80 Added sugars All sweeteners 31 0 to 31 * See Table 1 for a complete list of scientific targets for a 2500 kcal/day healthy reference diet The Commission has integrated, with the quantification of universal healthy diets, global scientific targets for sustainable food systems. The objective is to provide scientific boundaries to reduce environmental degradation arising from food production at all scales. The quantification of scientific targets for the safe operating space of food systems in the world, was done for the key environmental systems and processes where food production plays a dominant role in determining the state of the planet. There is strong scientific evidence that food production is among the largest drivers of global environmental change due to its contributions to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, biodiversity loss, freshwater use, eutrophication, and land-system change (as well as chemical pollution, which is not assessed by this Commission). In turn, food production depends upon the continued functioning of these biophysical systems and processes in regulating and maintaining a stable Earth system. These systems and processes thereby provide a necessary set of globally systemic indicators of what constitutes sustainable food production. The Commission concludes that these quantitative scientific targets for sustainable food systems, constitute universal and scalable planetary boundaries for the food system, (Table 2). However, the uncertainty range for these food boundaries remain high, due to the inherent complexity in Earth system dynamics from local ecosystems to the functioning of the biosphere and the climate system. Scientific Targets for Sustainable Food Production Earth system process Control variable Boundary Uncertainty Range Climate change GHG (CH4 and N2O) emissions 5 Gt CO2-eq yr-1 (4.7-5.4 Gt CO2-eq yr-1) Nitrogen cycling N application 90 Tg N yr-1 (65-90 Tg N yr-1) (90-130 Tg N yr-1) Phosphorus cycling P application 8 Tg P yr-1 (6-12 Tg P yr-1) (8-16 Tg P yr-1) Freshwater use Consumptive water use 2,500 km 3 yr-1 (1000-4000 km 3 yr-1) Biodiversity loss Extinction rate 10 E/MSY (1-80 E/MSY) Land-system change Cropland use 13 M km 2 (11-15 M km 2)

The food system is a major driver of climate change, land-use change, depletion of freshwater resources, and pollution of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems by excessive nitrogen and phosphorus inputs. Here we show that as a result of expected changes in population and income levels, the environmental impacts of the food system could increase by 60-90% between 2010 and 2050 in absence of technological changes and dedicated mitigation measures, and reach levels that are beyond planetary boundaries that define a safe operating space for humanity. We analyse several options for reducing the environmental impacts of the food system, including dietary changes towards healthier, more plant-based diets, improvements in technologies and management, and reductions in food loss and waste. We find that no single measure is enough to simultaneously stay within all planetary boundaries, and combining each measure synergistically will be needed to sufficiently mitigate the projected increase in environmental pressures.

Fish and other aquatic foods (blue foods) present an opportunity for more sustainable diets 1,2 . Yet comprehensive comparison has been limited due to sparse inclusion of blue foods in environmental impact studies 3,4 relative to the vast diversity of production 5 . Here we provide standardized estimates of greenhouse gas, nitrogen, phosphorus, freshwater and land stressors for species groups covering nearly three quarters of global production. We find that across all blue foods, farmed bivalves and seaweeds generate the lowest stressors. Capture fisheries predominantly generate greenhouse gas emissions, with small pelagic fishes generating lower emissions than all fed aquaculture, but flatfish and crustaceans generating the highest. Among farmed finfish and crustaceans, silver and bighead carps have the lowest greenhouse gas, nitrogen and phosphorus emissions, but highest water use, while farmed salmon and trout use the least land and water. Finally, we model intervention scenarios and find improving feed conversion ratios reduces stressors across all fed groups, increasing fish yield reduces land and water use by up to half, and optimizing gears reduces capture fishery emissions by more than half for some groups. Collectively, our analysis identifies high-performing blue foods, highlights opportunities to improve environmental performance, advances data-poor environmental assessments, and informs sustainable diets.The food system is a major driver of environmental change, emitting a quarter of all greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, occupying half of all ice-free land, and responsible for three quarters of global consumptive water use and eutrophication 3,6 . Yet, it still fails to meet global nutrition needs 7 , with 820 million people lacking sufficient food 8 and with one in three people globally overweight or obese 9 . As a critical source of nutrition 8,10 generating relatively low average environmental pressures 1,2,11,12 , blue foods present an opportunity to improve nutrition with lower environmental burdens, in line with the Sustainable Development Goals to improve nutrition (Goal 2), ensure sustainable consumption and production (Goal 12), and sustainably use marine resources (Goal 14).Blue foods, however, are underrepresented in food system environmental assessments 13 and the stressors considered are limited 4 such that we have some understanding of GHG emissions 14,15 , but less of others such as land or freshwater use 16 . Where blue foods are included, they are typically represented by only one or a few broad categories (see, for example, refs. 3,17,18), masking the vast diversity within blue food production. Finally, estimates combining results of published life cycle assessments undertaken for different purposes, and consequently using incompatible methodologies 19,20 , cannot be compared reliably. It is therefore critical to examine the environmental performance across the diversity of blue foods in a robust, methodologically consistent manner to serve as a benchmark within the rapidly evolving se...