Diet Quality and Water Scarcity: Evidence from a Large Australian Population Health Survey

Ridoutt, Bradley G.; Baird, Danielle; Anastasiou, Kim; Hendrie, Gilly A.

doi:10.3390/nu11081846

Cited by 38 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a recent study about core and discretionary foods consumed daily by a large (>9000) population of self-selected adults, a potential association between a healthier diet and lower environmental impacts was emphasized [42]. Indeed, this study concluded that "excessive consumption of discretionary foods-i.e., energy-dense and nutrient-poor foods high in saturated fat, added sugars and salt, and alcohol-contributes up to 36% of the water-scarcity impacts and is the primary factor differentiating healthier diets with lower water-scarcity footprint from poorer quality diets with higher water-scarcity footprint" [42]. The authors added that very large reductions in the dietary water-scarcity footprint are therefore possible, notably through technological change, product reformulation, and procurement strategies in the agricultural and food industries.…”

Section: Discretionary Foodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On that basis and extended to an ethical and sustainable diet, three golden rules for designing a protective diet food system sustainability have been elaborated in our laboratory, and taking into consideration the neglected dimension of the degree of processing (second rule). In French, this new concept is called the 3Vs Rule for Végétal (animal calories not exceeding 15% per day), Vrai (real: ultra-processed calories not exceeding 15% per day), and Varié (varied real foods), using, if possible, local, seasonal, and organic products [42,133]. In line with previous collective experience searching for a generic complex diet protecting both human health and the planet as a whole with a time horizon of 2050 [7,31,32,[134][135][136][137][138][139][140], the 3Vs concept is based on a holistic view in that, through its application, it protects humans, animals, and the environment as a whole.…”

Section: The 3v's Rule Proposal To Counteract Excess Upf Consumptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ultra-Processed Foods and Food System Sustainability: What Are the Links?

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global food systems are no longer sustainable for health, the environment, animal biodiversity and wellbeing, culinary traditions, socioeconomics, or small farmers. The increasing massive consumption of animal foods has been identified as a major determinant of unsustainability. However, today, the consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPFs) is also questioned. The main objective of this review is therefore to check the validity of this new hypothesis. We first identified the main ingredients/additives present in UPFs and the agricultural practices involved in their provision to agro-industrials. Overall, UPF production is analysed regarding its impacts on the environment, biodiversity, animal wellbeing, and cultural and socio-economic dimensions. Our main conclusion is that UPFs are associated with intensive agriculture/livestock and threaten all dimensions of food system sustainability due to the combination of low-cost ingredients at purchase and increased consumption worldwide. However, low-animal-calorie UPFs do not produce the highest greenhouse gas emissions (GHGEs) compared to conventional meat and dairy products. In addition, only reducing energy dense UPF intake, without substitution, might substantially reduce GHGEs. Therefore, significant improvement in food system sustainability requires urgently encouraging limiting UPF consumption to the benefit of mildly processed foods, preferably seasonal, organic, and local products.

show abstract

Section: Discretionary Foodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The 3v's Rule Proposal To Counteract Excess Upf Consumptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ultra-Processed Foods and Food System Sustainability: What Are the Links?

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To enable integration of the dietary intake data and cropland footprint data, processed foods and mixed dishes were disaggregated into basic components as described previously [49], applying archetypal recipe files published by the ABS [36]. Conversion factors, obtained predominantly from a reference database managed by Food Standards Australia and New Zealand [50], were used to translate cooked food portions into raw quantities.…”

Section: Dietary Intake Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For each of the 9341 adult daily diets, a diet quality score was determined by application of the food-based Dietary Guideline Index (DGI) [57], as described previously [49]. The DGI provides a score out of 100 that reflects overall compliance with the Australian Dietary Guidelines [53].…”

Section: Dietary Quality Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Detail is available in the associated reference [31]. The cropland footprints of individual foods were quantified using conversion factors that translate agricultural commodities into retail products and edible portions, as described previously [49]. Former cropland areas occupied by food-processing factories, transportation systems and other infrastructure were deemed not materially important and were excluded from the assessment.…”

Section: Cropland Footprint Modellingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cropland Footprints of Australian Dietary Choices

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Food systems vitally depend on croplands, which are a scarce natural resource. Croplands are also heterogeneous, differing in productive capability and in environmental context. Some are in regions of high biodiversity conservation importance, others in regions vulnerable to food insecurity. In this study, life cycle assessment was used to quantify cropland scarcity footprints, cropland biodiversity footprints and cropland malnutrition footprints for 9341 individual Australian adult daily diets. Dietary cropland scarcity footprints averaged 7.1 m2yr-e person−1 day−1, exceeding a target of 6.1 m2yr-e person−1 day−1, consistent with the proposed global cropland planetary boundary of 15% of the ice-free land area. Discretionary foods, which are energy-dense and nutrient-poor foods high in saturated fat, added sugars and salt, and alcohol and are not essential to a healthy diet, made the largest contribution, followed by fresh meats and alternatives, breads and cereals, fruit, dairy and alternatives and vegetables. Around 45% of the variation in cropland footprint between individuals was explained by differences in total dietary energy intake. Diets characterised by higher diet quality and lower cropland scarcity footprint required only 4.2 m2yr-e person−1 day−1 and recommended diets based on the food choices of this subgroup required 5.9 m2yr-e person−1 day−1. Eating within the global cropland planetary boundary appears realistic if Australians greatly reduce their intake of discretionary foods and moderate their food choices within the “meat and alternatives” food group.

show abstract

Water footprint: applying the water footprint assessment method to Australian agriculture

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND Water footprint assessment is essential for the evaluation of water scarcity that considers both direct and indirect water consumption along the supply chain. This paper presents the estimation of water footprint for locally grown fruits and vegetables in Australia. Water footprint was calculated based on the framework developed in the Water Footprint Assessment Manual for the crops which are the most practicable to grow in Australia. Nine different crops (apples, grapes, tomatoes, oranges, peaches/nectarines, cherries, potatoes, carrots/turnips and almonds) in the agricultural industry were selected and identified as the most water‐consumptive crop and least water‐consumptive crop. For each type of crop, the three main water footprint components (blue, green, and grey water) were calculated. RESULTS It was found that almond had the highest water footprint (6671.96 m3 ton−1) and tomato had the lowest water footprint (212.24 m3 ton−1) in Australia. From the global comparison, it is revealed that total water footprint for Australian crops is much higher than the corresponding international average values, except for tomatoes, potatoes and almonds. Also, almonds had the highest water footprint among the nine crops investigated. CONCLUSION The study provides an insight into future sustainable cropping patterns in Australia, which suggest that tomatoes, carrots/turnips, potatoes and apples should continue to be grown in Australia, whereas stone fruit (e.g., almonds) should no longer be grown because of its high water footprint. © 2020 Society of Chemical Industry

show abstract

Diet Quality and Water Scarcity: Evidence from a Large Australian Population Health Survey

Cited by 38 publications

References 48 publications

Ultra-Processed Foods and Food System Sustainability: What Are the Links?

Ultra-Processed Foods and Food System Sustainability: What Are the Links?

Cropland Footprints of Australian Dietary Choices

Water footprint: applying the water footprint assessment method to Australian agriculture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About