Health-motivated taxes on red and processed meat: A modelling study on optimal tax levels and associated health impacts
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: The consumption of red and processed meat has been associated with increased mortality from chronic diseases, and as a result, it has been classified by the World Health Organization as carcinogenic (processed meat) and probably carcinogenic (red meat) to humans. One policy response is to regulate red and processed meat consumption similar to other carcinogens and foods of public health concerns. Here we describe a market-based approach of taxing red and processed meat according to its health impacts. METHODS: We calculated economically optimal tax levels for 149 world regions that would account for (internalize) the health costs associated with ill-health from red and processed meat consumption, and we used a coupled modelling framework to estimate the impacts of optimal taxation on consumption, health costs, and non-communicable disease mortality. Health impacts were estimated using a global comparative risk assessment framework, and economic responses were estimated using international data on health costs, prices, and price elasticities. FINDINGS: The health-related costs to society attributable to red and processed meat consumption in 2020 amounted to USD 285 billion (sensitivity intervals based on epidemiological uncertainty (SI), 93-431), three quarters of which were due to processed meat consumption. Under optimal taxation, prices for processed meat increased by 25% on average, ranging from 1% in low-income countries to over 100% in high-income countries, and prices for red meat increased by 4%, ranging from 0.2% to over 20%. Consumption of processed meat decreased by 16% on average, ranging from 1% to 25%, whilst red meat consumption remained stable as substitution for processed meat compensated price-related reductions. The number of deaths attributable to red and processed meat consumption decreased by 9% (222,000; SI, 38,000-357,000), and attributable health costs decreased by 14% (USD 41 billion; SI, 10-57) globally, in each case with greatest reductions in high and middle-income countries. INTERPRETATION: Including the social health cost of red and processed meat consumption in the price of red and processed meat could lead to significant health and environmental benefits, in particular in high and middle-income countries. The optimal tax levels estimated in this study are context-specific and can complement the simple rules of thumb currently used for setting health-motivated tax levels.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Modelling captures the premise that, with food and transport choices, the low-carbon option makes people healthier because it incentives them to eat a healthier diet and exercise more.
“modelling captures the premise that, with food and transport choices, the low-carbon option makes people healthier because it incentives them to eat a healthier diet and exercise more 77,78”
From Demand-side solutions to climate change mitigation consistent with high levels of well-being (2022) · cites this paper as [77]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 56 · Cited by 164
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- [18]Chen G-C, Lv D-B, Pang Z, Liu Q-F. Red and processed meat consumption and risk of stroke: a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2013; 67: 91– 95. 10.1038/ejcn.2012.180 23169473 · DOI · Paper page
- [39]IEA. CO2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion—Highlights 2015 Edition International Energy Agency, Paris; 2015.
- [44]Garnett T, Mathewson S, Angelidis P, Borthwick F. Policies and actions to shift eating patterns: What works? A review of the evidence of the effectiveness of interventions aimed at shifting diets in more sustainable and healthy directions Oxford: Food Climate Research Network; 2015.
- Authors
- Springmann, M., Mason-D’Croz, D., Robinson, S., Wiebe, K., Godfray, H. C. J., Rayner, M., & Scarborough, P.
- Affiliations
- University of Oxford (GB)
- Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU)
- International Food Policy Research Institute (US)
- Corresponding author
- Springmann, Marco
- ORCID
- Venue
- PLOS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2018-11-06
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- e0204139
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6219766
- OpenAlex
- W2900168944
- Cited by
- 164
- References
- 56
- Citations by year
- 2026: 18 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 1 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 23.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- IFPRI E-brary (International Food Policy Research Institute) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- CGSPace A Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- International Food Policy Research Institute (International Food Policy Research Institute) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Wellcome Trust (205212/Z/16/Z)
- CGIAR Research Programme on Policies, Institutions, and Markets
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economics of Agriculture and Food Markets
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
- Keywords
- red meat, processed meat, optimal taxation, health care costs, non-communicable disease mortality, price elasticity, meat consumption, global health impact
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Meat Products, Taxes, Health Care Costs, Models, Economic
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