Cited by 96Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental ImpactEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilitySustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis

Benchmarking the Swedish Diet Relative to Global and National Environmental Targets—Identification of Indicator Limitations and Data Gaps

Open access
Moberg, Emma, Karlsson Potter, Hanna, Wood, Amanda, Hansson, Per-Anders, Röös, Elin·2020·Sustainability

Abstract

To reduce environmental burdens from the food system, a shift towards environmentally sustainable diets is needed. In this study, the environmental impacts of the Swedish diet were benchmarked relative to global environmental boundaries suggested by the EAT-Lancet Commission. To identify local environmental concerns not captured by the global boundaries, relationships between the global EAT-Lancet variables and the national Swedish Environmental Objectives (SEOs) were analysed and additional indicators for missing aspects were identified. The results showed that the environmental impacts caused by the average Swedish diet exceeded the global boundaries for greenhouse gas emissions, cropland use and application of nutrients by two- to more than four-fold when the boundaries were scaled to per capita level. With regard to biodiversity, the impacts caused by the Swedish diet transgressed the boundary by six-fold. For freshwater use, the diet performed well within the boundary. Comparison of global and local indicators revealed that the EAT-Lancet variables covered many aspects included in the SEOs, but that these global indicators are not always of sufficiently fine resolution to capture local aspects of environmental sustainability, such as eutrophication impacts. To consider aspects and impact categories included in the SEO but not currently covered by the EAT-Lancet variables, such as chemical pollution and acidification, additional indicators and boundaries are needed. This requires better inventory data on e.g., pesticide use and improved traceability for imported foods.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/su12041407

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The agroecological transition increased the emission intensity per kg meat from 24 to 32 kg CO2e/kg SW (Swedish average 23 kg CO2e/kg SW).

    “The agroecological transition increased the emission intensity per kg meat from 24 to 32 kg CO2e/kg SW (with a Swedish average of 23 kg CO2e/kg SW (Moberg et al. 2020)).”

    From Delivering “less but better” meat in practice—a case study of a farm in agroecological transition (2022) · cites this paper as Moberg et al. 2020

    The citation is attached to the Swedish-average comparison, not the reported increase from 24 to 32. Section 2.2.1 describes emissions data for food sold on the Swedish market, and the Figure 3 caption describes impacts per kg of bone-free meat, but neither passage gives a 23 kg CO2e/kg SW average. Searches for that value and unit found no confirming passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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 51 · Cited by 96

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Dickinson, E.C.; Remsen, J.V.J. The Howard and Moore Complete Checklist of the Birds of the World, 4th ed.; Non-Passerines, Aves Press: Eastbourne, UK, 2013; Volume 1.
  2. Dickinson, E.C.; Christidis, L. The Howard and Moore Complete Checklist of the Birds of the World, 4th ed.; Non-Passerines, Aves Press: Eastbourne, UK, 2014; Volume 2.
  3. European Union. European Parliament and Cote, Regulation (EU) No 517/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on fluorinated greenhouse gases and repealing regulation (EC) No 842/2006 Text with EEA relevance. Off. J. Eur. Union 2014, 57, 195-230.

Authors
Moberg, E., Karlsson Potter, H., Wood, A., Hansson, P.-A., & Röös, E.
Affiliations
  • Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SE)
  • Department of Energy and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
  • Stockholm Resilience Centre (SE)
Corresponding author
Moberg, Emma
Venue
Sustainability
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2020-02-14
Volume
12
Issue
4
Pages
1407
ISSN
2071-1050 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3005719547
Cited by
96
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 2
FWCI
5.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sustainability (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Epsilon Open Archive (Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet biblioteket (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences)) (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Naturvårdsverket (NV03211-15)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Sustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis
Keywords
environmental impact of diets, environmental boundaries, greenhouse gas emissions, cropland use, nutrient utilization, biodiversity loss, freshwater use, eutrophication, chemical pollution, acidification, pesticide use, food traceability, food system sustainability

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