Cited by 1,262Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental ImpactNutritional Studies and DietClimate Change and Health Impacts

Analysis and valuation of the health and climate change cobenefits of dietary change

Open access
Springmann, Marco, Godfray, H. Charles J., Rayner, Mike, Scarborough, Peter·2016·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

What we eat greatly influences our personal health and the environment we all share. Recent analyses have highlighted the likely dual health and environmental benefits of reducing the fraction of animal-sourced foods in our diets. Here, we couple for the first time, to our knowledge, a region-specific global health model based on dietary and weight-related risk factors with emissions accounting and economic valuation modules to quantify the linked health and environmental consequences of dietary changes. We find that the impacts of dietary changes toward less meat and more plant-based diets vary greatly among regions. The largest absolute environmental and health benefits result from diet shifts in developing countries whereas Western high-income and middle-income countries gain most in per capita terms. Transitioning toward more plant-based diets that are in line with standard dietary guidelines could reduce global mortality by 6-10% and food-related greenhouse gas emissions by 29-70% compared with a reference scenario in 2050. We find that the monetized value of the improvements in health would be comparable with, or exceed, the value of the environmental benefits although the exact valuation method used considerably affects the estimated amounts. Overall, we estimate the economic benefits of improving diets to be 1-31 trillion US dollars, which is equivalent to 0.4-13% of global gross domestic product (GDP) in 2050. However, significant changes in the global food system would be necessary for regional diets to match the dietary patterns studied here.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.1523119113

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Springmann, M., Godfray, H. C. J., Rayner, M., & Scarborough, P.
Affiliations
  • British Heart Foundation (GB)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Springmann, Marco
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2016-03-21
Volume
113
Issue
15
Pages
4146-4151
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2306028256
Cited by
1,262
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 86 · 2025: 113 · 2024: 134 · 2023: 159 · 2022: 126 · 2021: 146 · 2020: 172 · 2019: 116 · 2018: 110 · 2017: 63 · 2016: 35 · 2013: 1
FWCI
94.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • British Heart Foundation (FS/15/34/31656)
  • University of Oxford
  • Natural Environment Research Council (NE/M021386/1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Climate Change and Health Impacts
Keywords
dietary change, plant-based diet, meat consumption, health co-benefits, economic valuation of health, global mortality, regional variation, food system transformation, developing countries
MeSH terms
Developing Countries, Diet, Health Status, Humans, Models, Economic, Developed Countries, Climate Change

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review