The future of meat and dairy consumption in the UK: exploring different policy scenarios to meet net zero targets and improve population health

英国肉类和乳制品消费的未来:探索不同的政策方案以实现净零排放目标并改善民众健康

阅读:1

Abstract

NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY: 1To meet the UK's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions targets, the Climate Change Committee (CCC) recommended to reduce current meat and dairy intake by 20% by 2030. In this study, we modelled the impact of potential dietary changes on GHG emissions and water use with the selected scenarios based on the trend of food purchase and meat and dairy reduction policy. We show that implementing fiscal measures and facilitating innovations in production of meat alternatives would accelerate existing positive trends, help the UK reach the CCC 2030 target of 20% meat and dairy reduction and increase fruit and vegetable intake. TECHNICAL SUMMARY: 2We used 2001-2019 data from the Family Food module of the Living Costs and Food Survey (LCF), an annual UK survey of about 5,000 representative households recording quantities of all food and drink purchases, to model four 2030 dietary scenarios: Business as usual (BAU); two fiscal policy scenarios ('fiscal 10%' and 'fiscal 20%'), combining either a 10% meat and dairy tax and a 10% fruit and vegetable subsidy, or a 20% tax and 20% subsidy on the same foods; and an 'innovation scenario' substituting traditionally-produced meat and dairy with plant-based analogues and animal proteins produced in laboratories. Compared to 2019 levels, we forecasted reductions in the range of 5-30% for meat and 8-32% for dairy across scenarios. Meat reductions could be up to 21.5% (fiscal20%) and 30.4% (innovation). For all scenarios we forecasted an increase in fruit and vegetables intake in the range of 3-13.5%; with the fiscal 20% scenario showing highest increases (13.5%). GHG emissions and water use reductions were highest for the innovation scenario (-19.8%, -16.2%) followed by fiscal 20% (-15.8%, - 9.2%) fiscal 10% (-12.1%, 5.9%) and BAU (-8.3%, -2.6%) scenarios. Compared to average households, low-income households had similar patterns of change, but both past and predicted purchase of meat, fruit and vegetables and environmental footprints were lower.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。