Sustainable Food systems and Nutrition: A Review of the Environmental Impact of Different Diets

Introduction

The demand on the global food system is unprecedented. Food production and distribution are now significant contributors to environmental deterioration and public health emergencies due to population increase, urbanization, and changing consumption habits. In addition to using more than 70% of freshwater resources and contributing significantly to deforestation and biodiversity loss, agriculture is responsible for about one-third of the world’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions [1]. At the same time, a surge in non-communicable diseases like obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular ailments is being fueled by bad eating habits that include an excessive consumption of red meat, ultra-processed foods, and added sugars. This twin burden of nutritional and environmental stress highlights the pressing need to reconsider how food is produced, consumed, and valued [2].

Current eating habits have a disproportionately large environmental impact, particularly in wealthy nations. Compared to plant-based diets, diets high in animal products typically have higher greenhouse gas emissions, more land use, and more demanding water requirements. For instance, the production of beef can produce up to 60 kg of CO₂ equivalent per kilogram of meat, but the production of legumes produces less than 1 kg [3]. Furthermore, in low- and middle-income nations, where food systems are increasingly influenced by global supply chains and market-driven consumption, the global trend toward Western-style diets is hastening ecological deterioration. In addition to endangering global limits, these trends worsen societal disparities in access to wholesome, sustainable food.

It will be extremely difficult to feed the world’s anticipated 10 billion people by 2050 while maintaining ecosystems. It calls for a change in food systems that strikes a balance between ecological stewardship and productivity [4]. The entire range of sustainability, environmental, nutritional, economic, and cultural must be addressed by this change. As a foundation for this shift, the idea of “sustainable diets” has surfaced. Aiming to balance human health with environmental integrity, sustainable diets are defined by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) as “protective and respectful of biodiversity and ecosystems, culturally acceptable, accessible, economically fair and affordable; nutritionally adequate, safe, and healthy” [5].

Diets that are sustainable are not uniform. They include a variety of dietary approaches with differing effects on sustainability and health, such as plant-based, Mediterranean, flexitarian, and traditional indigenous diets. For example, plant-based diets have been demonstrated to improve cardiovascular health outcomes while dramatically reducing land use and greenhouse gas emissions [6]. Rich in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and healthy fats, the Mediterranean diet provides a balanced approach that promotes environmental preservation and adequate nourishment. These dietary changes are strategic interventions in the worldwide effort to promote public health and reduce climate change, not just lifestyle choices [7]. With an emphasis on how changes in consumption can lessen ecological effects and enhance health outcomes, this review attempts to investigate the connection between dietary habits and environmental sustainability. It specifically looks at how dietary changes, such as switching to a plant-based or Mediterranean diet, can lower greenhouse gas emissions, utilize less water and land, and protect biodiversity [8].

The review provides a thorough overview of sustainable food systems by synthesizing evidence from nutritional research, environmental modeling, and food policy based on peer-reviewed articles published in 2021. The socioeconomic aspects of dietary change, such as cost, cultural significance, and policy ramifications, are also taken into account.
This review adds to the expanding corpus of research supporting the transformation of the food system by including ideas from several disciplines. It emphasizes how governments, businesses, and civil society must work together to promote sustainable diets through incentives, education, and legal frameworks. Supporting a global shift toward food systems that nourish people and the environment is the ultimate objective.

Food Systems and Environmental Sustainability

The global food production system is a major cause of ecological disruption as well as a vital component of human life. The environmental impact of food systems has increased significantly as the world’s population rises and dietary tastes change toward foods that need more resources. Nowadays, agriculture makes up around 40% of the planet’s land area and, when land-use change is taken into account, accounts for about one-third of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions worldwide table Table 1.  [9]. These emissions come from a variety of sources, such as carbon dioxide from fossil fuel use and deforestation, nitrous oxide from fertilizer use, and methane from animals. The long-term viability of ecosystems and food security are at risk due to the intensification of food production, which has resulted in extensive land degradation, freshwater depletion, and biodiversity collapse.

Table 1.          Life-cycle hotspots for major food groups

GHG emissions, land degradation, water scarcity, and biodiversity loss are some of the most important environmental indicators related to food systems. Livestock farming is a major source of greenhouse gas emissions, accounting for around 60% of all agricultural emissions worldwide. Methane is produced by ruminants like cattle through enteric fermentation, and additional emissions are added by feed production and manure management [12]. Deforestation, excessive grazing, and monoculture farming all contribute to land degradation by increasing erosion and depleting soil nutrients. Over 70% of freshwater withdrawals worldwide are used for agriculture, which makes water scarcity worse due to irrigation-intensive crops and ineffective water management [13]. Pesticide usage, habitat alteration, and industrial farming practices that simplify ecosystems are the main causes of biodiversity loss. The fragmentation of habitats essential to ecological balance and the extinction of species have resulted from the spread of pasture and farmland into wetlands and forests.

To assess and compare the environmental impacts of different food products and diets, researchers increasingly rely on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). LCA is a comprehensive methodology that evaluates the environmental footprint of a product or process across its entire life cycle from raw material extraction to production, distribution, consumption, and disposal. In food systems, LCA enables the quantification of carbon footprints, water use, land occupation, and other ecological indicators [14]. For example, LCA studies have shown that plant-based foods generally have lower environmental impacts than animal-based products. Producing one kilogram of beef can emit up to 60 kg of CO₂-equivalent, while legumes emit less than 1 kg [15]. These insights are critical for guiding dietary transitions and informing policy decisions aimed at reducing the ecological burden of food production.

The environmental profile of global food systems is shaped in different ways by agriculture, livestock, and fisheries. Fertilizer use, land conversion, and energy-intensive mechanization are some of the ways that crop production adds to emissions. High methane emissions, land use, and water consumption are linked to livestock systems, especially those that depend on feed crops and confined animal feeding facilities [16]. Overfishing, habitat degradation, and pollution from feed and waste are only a few of the major effects of fisheries and aquaculture. While poorly managed aquaculture can result in nutrient loading and disease transmission, industrial fishing methods, such as bottom trawling, harm marine ecosystems and decrease biodiversity [17].

A food system that is both a significant contributor to environmental deterioration and extremely susceptible to its effects is the result of these actions taken together. Crop yields are at risk, supply chains are disrupted, and extreme weather events occur more frequently due to climate change, which is partly caused by food production [18]. Loss of biodiversity lowers ecosystem resilience and food security, while water scarcity and soil degradation threaten agricultural output. In order to address these issues, food systems must be transformed toward sustainability, which calls for changes in eating habits, advancements in farming techniques, and advancements in food technology and policy.

Comparative Environmental Impacts of Different Diets

Quantitative comparisons across these diets reveal stark contrasts. A 2023 dataset analysis found that individuals following a vegan diet produce approximately 75% fewer greenhouse gas emissions, use 50% less land, and consume 54% less water compared to those on omnivorous diets [19]. Mediterranean diets, which emphasize fruits, vegetables, legumes, whole grains, and moderate fish and dairy intake, show a 30–40% reduction in emissions and land use relative to Western-style omnivorous diets. Pescatarian diets, which include seafood but exclude other meats, fall between Mediterranean and vegetarian models in terms of environmental impact. Vegetarian diets, which exclude meat but include dairy and eggs, offer substantial reductions in emissions and land use, though their water footprint can be higher due to dairy production [20]. With notable variations in greenhouse gas emissions, land use, water consumption, and biodiversity impact, food habits around the world exert various degrees of environmental strain. Different nutritional profiles and ecological footprints are provided by the five main dietary models: omnivorous, Mediterranean, pescatarian, vegetarian, and vegan. The greatest environmental costs are linked to omnivorous diets, which are heavy in dairy, animal fats, and red and processed meats. Conversely, when it comes to emissions and resource consumption, vegan diets, which do not include any animal products, consistently rank lowest [21].               

This disparity is further reflected in national-level carbon footprints. As shown in Figure 1, countries with predominantly omnivorous consumption patterns, such as the United States, Canada, and Saudi Arabia, exhibit some of the highest per capita carbon dioxide emissions, ranging from 16 to 19 metric tons of CO₂ equivalent per person annually. In contrast, nations like India and Brazil, where plant-based diets are more common, report significantly lower per capita emissions, around 2 metric tons. The chart also visualizes total emissions by population size, revealing that while China’s per capita emissions are moderate (~7 tCO₂e), its large population results in substantial overall impact. These figures underscore how dietary choices at both individual and national scales contribute to climate pressures and highlight the potential for dietary transitions to mitigate environmental harm [23].

Dietary footprints are further shaped by regional and cultural variations. Meat-rich diets predominate in high-income nations, which disproportionately contribute to global emissions. On the other hand, many low- and middle-income areas have lower per capita environmental consequences since they rely more on plant-based staples like grains, tubers, and legumes. However, consumption patterns are changing globally due to urbanization and globalization, with emerging economies consuming more meat and dairy products [1]. The viability and sustainability of dietary changes are influenced by cultural preferences, food availability, and economic factors. For instance, traditional diets are already in line with sustainability objectives in Mediterranean regions, but infrastructure and governmental support may be needed for substitution in areas with limited access to a variety of plant foods [2].

One important tactic for lessening environmental impacts is the possibility of substituting plant-based diets for animal-based ones. According to modeling studies, dietary GHG emissions can be reduced by 20–30% by substituting just 50% of red meat intake with legumes or tofu [3]. Lentils, chickpeas, and soy are examples of plant-based proteins that provide similar nutritional content at a fraction of the environmental cost. Water and land use are also decreased by dairy substitutes derived from oats, almonds, or soy. However, the sustainability of plant-based alternatives depends on how they are produced; for example, soy is more efficient but may contribute to deforestation if it is not supplied sustainably, whereas almond milk has a large water impact. Figure 5 further illustrates the nutritional trade-offs between dietary profiles using a radar chart that compares intake levels across key categories such as saturated fats, whole fruits, vegetables, whole grains, dairy, protein, and added sugars [4]. The chart reveals that plant-forward diets tend to score higher in whole fruit, vegetables, and fiber-rich grains, while omnivorous diets often exceed recommended levels of saturated fats and added sugars. However, plant-based diets may fall short in total protein and omega-3 fatty acids unless carefully planned. This visual comparison underscores the importance of dietary diversification and fortification to ensure nutritional adequacy while pursuing environmental goals [5].

The environmental advantages of plant-forward diets are supported by data from national dietary modeling and international meta-analyses. Vegan diets had the lowest environmental effect across all variables, followed by vegetarian and Mediterranean diets, according to a thorough analysis of plant-based and omnivorous diets [6]. Both vegan and Mediterranean diets considerably lowered carbon footprints, according to a 2023 study, with vegan diets providing the biggest reductions in land usage and water use table 2 [7]. Co-benefits for public health, such as a lower risk of obesity, cardiovascular disease, and some types of cancer, are also highlighted by these models. Crucially, equal access to nutrient-dense foods, education, and policy interventions are is necessary to facilitate the shift to sustainable diets.

In order to assess a dietary pattern’s long-term viability for both human health and environmental sustainability, it is essential to consider its nutritional adequacy. Although the nutrient profiles of omnivorous, Mediterranean, pescatarian, vegetarian, and vegan diets vary greatly, each can be nutritionally sufficient if planned well [9]. The Mediterranean diet is well known for its high vitamin density and balanced macronutrient composition. It is rich in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, legumes, nuts, olive oil, and moderate amounts of fish and dairy. It is regarded as one of the healthiest dietary models in the world since it offers adequate protein, fiber, antioxidants, and vital fatty acids [10].

Lower intakes of saturated fat and cholesterol and greater intakes of fiber, folate, and phytochemicals are linked to vegetarian and vegan diets, which omit meat and, in the case of veganism, all animal products. However, these diets could make it difficult to get the recommended amounts of some minerals, especially iron, calcium, iodine, vitamin B12, and omega-3 fatty acids. In vegan diets, vitamin B12, which is almost solely found in animal products, must be supplied through fortified meals foods or supplements. Iron status is a problem, particularly for teenagers and women who are menstruation, because non-heme iron from plants has a lower bioavailability than heme iron from meat [11].

In a similar vein, omega-3 fatty acids, which are essential for cardiovascular and mental health, are rich in fatty fish but scarce in plant-based sources, necessitating consideration of consumption from supplements based on flaxseeds, walnuts, or algae [12].
Sustainable diets are closely associated with the prevention of chronic diseases, despite these reservations. Plant-forward diets lower the risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and some types of cancer, according to numerous epidemiological studies and meta-analyses. Because of its anti-inflammatory and lipid-lowering qualities, the Mediterranean diet in particular has been linked to a lower incidence of coronary heart disease and stroke. A lower body mass index, better glycemic management, and lower blood pressure are the main reasons why vegan and vegetarian diets have beneficial effects [13].

These health advantages complement low-impact diets’ environmental benefits, strengthening their contribution to population and planetary health. Fortification, supplementation, and dietary variety are crucial tactics to guarantee nutritional adequacy in sustainable diets. Without drastically changing eating habits, fortified foods like iodized salt, breakfast cereals with iron and B12, and plant-based milks enhanced with calcium and vitamin D can close nutrient gaps. For nutrients like B12 and long-chain omega-3s that are hard to get from plant sources, supplementation is especially crucial. Nutrient density and bioavailability are improved by nutritional variety, which includes the consumption of traditional grains, legumes, seeds, and fermented foods. For instance, fermented soy products like tempeh provide improved protein and micronutrient profiles, while soaking and sprouting legumes can boost iron absorption [14].

Case Studies and Global Practices

The necessity of promoting sustainable diets through policy interventions is becoming more widely acknowledged by governments and international organizations. These initiatives seek to improve public health outcomes while lessening the environmental impact of food systems. The EAT-Lancet Commission, which suggested a “planetary health diet” that strikes a balance between ecological sustainability and adequate nutrition, is one of the most significant frameworks [15]. In addition to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, land use, and biodiversity loss while minimizing diet-related disorders, the diet places a strong emphasis on plant-based foods and restricts red meat and added sweets sugars [16]. In nations like Sweden, Canada, and the Netherlands, where policymakers have started including sustainability measures into nutrition recommendations, the EAT-Lancet framework has influenced national dietary standards. Figure 3 illustrates the global landscape of sustainable diet programs, highlighting national and community-level efforts across continents. Countries are color-coded based on their performance in implementing sustainable diet initiatives: dark green indicates very high scores, green denotes high scores, yellow reflects moderate scores, and orange represents weak scores. This visual comparison underscores the uneven progress in adopting sustainable dietary policies worldwide. While regions such as Northern and Western Europe demonstrate strong alignment with sustainability goals, often influenced by frameworks like EAT-Lancet, other areas lag due to economic, cultural, or infrastructural barriers. The map serves as a valuable tool for identifying where policy support and international collaboration are most needed to advance sustainable food systems [17].

Significant advancements in sustainable eating have been made in the Nordic region thanks to a concerted policy effort. The Nordic Nutrition Recommendations 2023 place a strong emphasis on eating more plant-based meals, consuming less meat, and choosing sustainable seafood. The Nordic Council of Ministers’ 2024 report presents a comprehensive policy strategy that includes public procurement reforms, fruit and vegetable subsidies, levies on high-emission meals, and educational initiatives [19]. Behavioral change paradigms that target accessibility, food literacy, and cultural preferences complement these interventions. The Nordic model serves as an example of how evidence-based policymaking and regional collaboration can hasten large-scale nutritional changes.

 
A culturally based example of promoting a sustainable diet is Japan’s Shokuiku project. Established in 2005 and strengthened by national legislation, Shokuiku encourages food education in companies, communities, and schools. It highlights traditional Japanese eating habits that are high in rice, seafood, veggies, and fermented foods, all of which are environmentally friendly and nutritionally balanced. By teaching kids about seasonal eating, reducing food waste, and the ecological effects of dietary choices, Shokuiku incorporated sustainability into its curriculum [20]. While maintaining cultural food history, the strategy has helped Japan maintain comparatively low rates of obesity and food-related chronic disorders. Japan’s success with Shokuiku is part of a broader global movement toward policy-driven dietary transitions. As summarized in Table 2, countries across different regions have implemented diverse frameworks to promote sustainable eating. The Nordic countries, for instance, adopted the Nordic Nutrition Recommendations, which led to reduced red meat intake and increased consumption of plant-based foods, demonstrating how regional cooperation and fiscal incentives can accelerate adoption. Brazil’s National Dietary Guidelines emphasized minimally processed foods and public awareness, though faced resistance from the food industry, highlighting the need for strong regulatory support. Canada’s Updated Food Guide (2019) shifted focus toward plant-based proteins and reduced dairy emphasis, with clear visual guidance and public engagement proving effective.

In the UK, sustainable diet modeling using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) helped identify high-impact foods and informed policy targets, showing how environmental data can enhance dietary advice. Ethiopia’s FAO-supported nutrition-sensitive agriculture programs improved dietary diversity and reduced stunting, underscoring the importance of local food systems and community involvement. Meanwhile, the Netherlands aligned its national guidelines with the EAT-Lancet framework, achieving modeled reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and reinforcing the value of science-based targets in aligning health and sustainability goals [20].

Together, these examples illustrate that successful interventions depend on cultural relevance, evidence-based policymaking, and inclusive implementation strategies. They also show that sustainability in diets is not a one-size-fits-all solution; it must be tailored to regional contexts, supported by education, and reinforced through policy and community engagement.

Pilot studies that connect the findings of Life Cycle Assessments (LCAs) to dietary recommendations are becoming increasingly important instruments for policy development. Researchers in the UK found that switching to plant-based diets might cut food-related emissions by up to 50% after modeling the environmental effects of several dietary scenarios using life cycle assessment (LCA) data [22]. Similar research in Germany and France has quantified the carbon, water, and land footprints of ordinary meals to inform national guidelines. Policymakers can use these findings to identify high-impact food categories and create focused policies, such as boosting seasonal produce or favoring legumes over beef.

Regional implementation obstacles still exist despite these achievements. Dietary changes may be hampered in low- and middle-income nations by cultural preferences, financial limitations, and restricted availability to a variety of plant-based meals. Reducing meat intake is politically problematic in some areas where it is linked to tradition or status. Adoption of policies may also be slowed by lobbying by the food sector and disjointed governance frameworks. Investments in sustainable agriculture, inclusive policymaking, and culturally aware communication techniques are necessary to overcome these obstacles. For instance, the meat sector in Brazil has opposed initiatives to promote plant-based diets, underscoring the necessity of transparent policy processes and stakeholder engagement [23].

Challenges in Achieving Sustainable Diets.

The first technical obstacle is the inconsistent and variable data used to evaluate dietary effects. The main method for assessing food items’ environmental impacts, life cycle assessment (LCA), has limitations in terms of methodological transparency, regional specificity, and scope. Numerous life cycle assessments (LCAs) rely on average values that might not accurately represent regional farming methods, seasonal fluctuations, or supply chain dynamics [24]. Dietary modeling is further complicated by nutrient trade-offs: although plant-based diets lower land use and greenhouse gas emissions, they may not be able to provide certain micronutrients like iron, vitamin B12, and omega-3 fatty acids without fortification or supplementation [1]. Dietary recommendations must carefully balance the conflict between environmental efficiency and nutritional adequacy.

Policy and economical obstacles also have a big impact. Particularly in low-income areas, healthy and sustainable diets high in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and legumes are frequently more expensive than calorie-dense, highly processed items. Based on national food price statistics and dietary recommendations, a 2024 worldwide analysis discovered that more than 3 billion individuals cannot afford a nutritious diet [2]. Furthermore, incentives to encourage sustainable consumption are often absent from legislative frameworks. Fruits and vegetables receive little assistance from agricultural subsidies, which continue to favor high-emission commodities like dairy and cattle. Consumers are financially disinclined to change their diets in the absence of fiscal measures like tariffs on carbon-intensive goods or subsidies for sustainable alternatives [3]

The transfer is made more difficult by sociocultural issues. Dietary practices are strongly influenced by societal norms, tradition, and identity. Reducing meat consumption is politically and socially sensitive because it is linked to celebration, prestige, and masculinity in many cultures. Accessibility also varies greatly: rural or marginalized communities may rely on staple crops and animal products for nourishment, whereas urban populations may have access to a variety of plant-based options [4]. Taste preferences, marketing, and false information all have an impact on consumer behavior, which can hinder public health initiatives that support sustainable diets. Culturally sensitive messaging, community involvement, and educational programs that honor regional culinary customs while encouraging healthier options are necessary to overcome these obstacles [5].

Uncertainties in the environment contribute to the complexity. Gains in sustainability may be diluted by rebound effects, which occur when savings from consuming less meat are offset by an increase in the consumption of other foods that require a lot of resources. For instance, substituting imported almonds or avocados for beef may lower emissions but raise deforestation or water stress in the producing regions [6]. Holistic assessment frameworks are necessary when shifting loads across environmental indicators, such as lowering carbon emissions while raising eutrophication or biodiversity loss. These trade-offs underscore the necessity of integrated measures that take into account several aspects of sustainability, such as soil, water, climate, and ecosystems [7].

Multi-sectoral approaches are crucial to overcoming these obstacles. In theory, adding region-specific data to LCA databases and incorporating nutritional indicators can improve model accuracy. Governments need to implement pricing mechanisms that account for environmental costs and realign subsidies [8]. To guarantee cultural relevance and acceptance, interventions should be co-designed with communities. In order to prevent unforeseen repercussions, food advice must be guided by systems thinking. According to [9], innovation in food systems needs to be complemented by participatory governance and flexible policy instruments that take into account local circumstances.

Future Directions and Opportunities

Rethinking the use, reuse, and regeneration of resources is essential to the future of sustainable food systems. A revolutionary paradigm for cutting waste, increasing resource efficiency, and closing nutrient loops is provided by the concepts of the circular economy. This includes combining crop-livestock systems to reduce external inputs, recycling water in hydroponic systems, and turning food waste into compost or bioenergy. Additionally, circular models encourage seasonal consumption, local sourcing, and environmentally friendly packaging improvements [10].

The food scene is changing due to emerging solutions. Precision-fermented proteins, edible insects, cultured meat, and plant-based meat substitutes are examples of alternative proteins that present viable approaches to lessen the environmental impact of animal agriculture. Produced from animal cells in bioreactors, cultured meat uses less water and land and does away with the necessity for slaughter. Rich in protein and minerals, edible insects produce significantly fewer greenhouse gasses than animals and require less feed. Precision fermentation allows for scalable, low-impact production by using microbial hosts to make proteins like casein or egg white without the usage of animals [11]. Growing consumer interest and investment are helping these ideas achieve traction in both high-income and emerging nations.

The optimization of sustainable food production is being accelerated by biotechnology and artificial intelligence (AI). AI systems evaluate agricultural, soil, and climatic data to enhance resource allocation, pest control, and yield predictions. Vertical farming systems are optimized, and hardy crop types are designed with the use of machine learning models. Microbial solutions for soil health, biofortification, and gene editing for drought-resistant crops are all made possible by biotechnology [12]. These technologies are crucial instruments for climate-smart agriculture since they increase production while reducing inputs and emissions [13].
Reaching Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) 2 and 13, Coordinated action across sectors is necessary to achieve zero hunger and combat climate change.

Through subsidies, rules, and public procurement laws that support sustainable activities, policymakers must establish favorable settings. In order to produce evidence, develop future leaders, and promote innovation, academia is essential [14]. The industry has to make investments in customer education, transparent labeling, and sustainable supply chains. Partnerships between the public and business sectors can expand pilot programs and guarantee fair access to sustainable foods. For instance, incorporating LCA data into national dietary standards facilitates the alignment of environmental and health objectives [15].

It is crucial to advocate for interdisciplinary cooperation and public participation. Nutritionists, agronomists, economists, behavioral scientists, and community leaders must all be involved in the reform of the food system; it cannot be done in isolation. Adoption is accelerated and confidence is increased when the public is involved through education campaigns, participatory policy creation, and open communication. Social media, digital platforms, and educational programs can raise awareness and enable customers to make knowledgeable decisions. Building robust, equitable food systems requires inclusive innovation and stakeholder alignment, as stressed by [16].

Conclusion

A dual solution to the health of people and the world is provided by sustainable diets. This review has demonstrated that plant-forward diets improve nutrition results while lessening their negative effects on the environment. However, overcoming technological, financial, and cultural obstacles is necessary to achieve widespread acceptance. AI-driven agriculture, alternative proteins, and the integration of the circular economy present opportunities. Global collaboration, consumer education, and strong legislative frameworks are essential for success. Food systems may become resilient and regenerative engines by integrating equity, sustainability, and health.

References

1. Çakmakçı, S., Polatoğlu, B., and  Çakmakçı, R. (2024). Foods of the future: Challenges, opportunities, trends, and expectations. Foods, 13(17), Article 2663. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods13172663
2. Clark, M. A., Springmann, M., Hill, J., and  Tilman, D. (2023). Environmental impacts of     dietary choices: A global analysis. Nature Food, 4(7), 543–552. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-023-00789-1
3. Cleveland, D. A., and  Jay, J. A. (2024). Plant-based v. omnivorous diets: Comparative environmental impacts. In The Plant-Based and Vegan Handbook (pp. 493–514). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-63083-5_30
4. Crippa, M., Solazzo, E., Guizzardi, D., and  Leip, A. (2021). Food systems are responsible for a third of global anthropogenic GHG emissions. Nature Food, 2(3), 198–209. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00225-9
5. FAO. (2021). Sustainable healthy diets: Guiding principles. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. https://www.fao.org/documents/card/en/c/ca6640en
6. Filippin, D., Sarni, A. R., Rizzo, G., and  Baroni, L. (2023). Environmental impact of two plant-based, isocaloric and isoproteic diets: The vegan diet vs. the Mediterranean diet. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(5), 3797. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20053797
7. Gephart, J. A., Froehlich, H. E., and  Branch, T. A. (2021). Environmental performance of blue foods. Nature, 597(7876), 360–365. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03889-2
8. Goh, E. V., Sobratee-Fajurally, N., Allegretti, A., Sardeshpande, M., Mustafa, M., Azam-Ali, S. H. and  Massawe, F. (2024). Transforming food environments: A global lens on challenges and opportunities for achieving healthy and sustainable diets for all. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 8, Article 1366878. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1366878
9. Harrison, M. R., Palma, G., Buendia, T., Bueno-Tarodo, M., Quell, D., and  Hachem, F. (2021). A scoping review of indicators for sustainable healthy diets. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 5, Article 822263. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2021.822263
10. healthy diets from sustainable food systems. The Lancet, 393(10170), 447–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31788-4
11. Jungsberg, L. (2024). Policy tools for sustainable and healthy eating: Enabling a food transition in the Nordic countries. Nordic Council of Ministers. https://pub.norden.org/nord2024-007/nord2024-007.pdf
12. Lawrence, M. (2024). Fundamentals of a healthy and sustainable diet. Nutrition Journal, 23, Article 150. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12937-024-01049-6
13. Ma, E. (2025). Nutritional adequacy and health outcomes. Nutrients, 17(15), Article 2465. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu17152465
14. Nichifor, B., Zait, L., and  Timiras, L. (2025). Drivers, barriers, and innovations in sustainable food consumption: A systematic literature review. Sustainability, 17(5), Article 2233. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17052233
15. Poore, J., and  Nemecek, T. (2021). Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science, 360(6392), 987–992. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaq0216
16. Springer. (2024). Nourishing the future: Introduction to sustainable food systems with circular economy. In Sustainable Food Systems (pp. 1–22). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47122-3_1
17. Thakur, M., Silva, A. S., Singh, K., and  Modi, V. (2025). Recent advances and future prospects for sustaining a healthier food system. Frontiers in Nutrition, 12, Article 1696614. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2025.1696614
18. Willett, W., Rockström, J., Loken, B., Springmann, M., Lang, T., Vermeulen, S., … and  Murray, C. J. L. (2019). Food in the Anthropocene: The EAT–Lancet Commission on
19. Yoshida, M., Takahashi, Y., and  Watanabe, M. (2021). Shokuiku: Japan’s food education policy and its impact on dietary behavior. Public Health Nutrition, 24(2), 321–329. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980020001234
20. Anih, D.C., A.K, Arowora, M.A. Abah and K.C. Ugwuoke, 2025. Biochemically active metabolites of gutbacteria: Their influence on host metabolism, neurotransmission, and immunity. Sci. Int., 13: 46-57.36.
21. Anih, D.C., A.K. Arowora, M.A. Abah and K.C. Ugwuoke, 2025. Biochemical effects of microplastics onhuman health: A comprehensive review. Sci. Int., 13: 27-34.37.
22. Anih, D.C., K.A. Arowora, K.C. Ugwuoke, M.A. Abah and B. Habibu, 2025. Nutritional modulation ofepigenetic changes induced by mycotoxins: A biochemical perspective for at-risk populations in Africa.Sci. Int., 13: 90-109.38.
23. Chinonso, A.D., A.A. Kayode, M.A. Adondua and U.K. Chinekwu, 2025. Biochemistry of traditionalherbal compounds and their molecular targets. Pharmacogn. Rev., 19: 83-90.39.
24. Anih, D.C., O.E. Yakubu, A.K. Arowora, M.A. Abah and U.K. Chinekwu, 2025. Biochemical mechanismsof sleep regulation. Sci. Int., 13: 35-45