Sustainability has become an integral consideration of the dietary guidelines of many countries in recent decades. However, a lack of clear metrics and a shared approach to measuring the multiple components of sustainable diets has hindered progress toward generating the evidence needed to ensure the credibility of new guidelines. We performed a systematic literature review of empirical research studies on sustainable diets to identify the components of sustainability that were measured and the methods applied to do so. Two independent reviewers systematically searched 30 databases and other sources with the use of a uniform set of search terms and a priori exclusion criteria. In total, 113 empirical studies were included in the final review. Nearly all of the studies were focused on high-income countries. Although there was substantial heterogeneity in the components of sustainability measured, the estimated greenhouse gas emissions (GHGEs) of various dietary patterns were by far most commonly measured (n = 71 studies). Estimating the GHGEs of foods through various stages of production, use, and recycling with the use of the Life Cycle Assessment approach was the most common method applied to measure the environmental impacts of diets (n = 49 studies). Many components of sustainable diets identified in existing conceptual frameworks are disproportionately underrepresented in the empirical literature, as are studies that examine consumer demand for sustainable dietary alternatives. The emphasis in the literature on high-income countries also overlooks the production and dietary alternatives most relevant to low- and middle-income countries. We propose 3 methodological and measurement approaches that would both improve the global relevance of our understanding of sustainable diets and attend more completely to the existing multidimensional, multiscale conceptual framing of sustainable diets.

Poor self-regulation (i.e., inability to harness cognitive, emotional, motivational resources to achieve goals) is hypothesized to contribute to unhealthy behaviors across the lifespan. Enhancing early self-regulation may increase positive health outcomes. Obesity is a major public health concern with early-emerging precursors related to self-regulation; it is therefore a good model for understanding self-regulation and health behavior. Preadolescence is a transition when children increase autonomy in health behaviors (e.g., eating, exercise habits), many of which involve self-regulation. This paper presents the scientific rationale for examining self-regulation mechanisms that are hypothesized to relate to health behaviors, specifically obesogenic eating, that have not been examined in children. We describe novel intervention protocols designed to enhance self-regulation skills, specifically executive functioning, emotion regulation, future-oriented thinking, and approach bias. Interventions are delivered via home visits. Assays of self-regulation and obesogenic eating behaviors using behavioral tasks and self-reports are implemented and evaluated to determine feasibility and psychometrics and to test intervention effects. Participants are low-income 9-12 year-old children who have been phenotyped for self-regulation, stress, eating behavior and adiposity through early childhood. Study goals are to examine intervention effects on self-regulation and whether change in self-regulation improves obesogenic eating.

The current global food system is inadequate to meet the needs of the current world population without compromising future well-being. For example, current intensified production systems lead to undernutrition in some regions coupled with epidemics of obesity in others while compromising their underlying ecological foundations, such as creating areas of ocean hypoxia. Such common observations challenge the research community to ask new types of basic questions and apply novel analytical frameworks for analyzing them. Elaboration of an integrated applied research agenda is imperative to addressing these global food system challenges. We propose that core competencies of a new analytical framework lie at the intersection of four domains: (1) the ecology of agroecosystems; (2) equity in global and local food systems; (3) cultural dimensions of food and agriculture; and (4) human health. This intersection constitutes a new analytical framework for transitions toward global food system sustainability.

Food sovereignty has been defined as “the right of peoples to healthy and culturally appropriate food produced through ecologically sound and sustainable methods, and their right to define their own food and agriculture systems.” Human health is an implied component of this definition through the principle of healthy food. In fact, improved human health is commonly cited as a benefit of transforming food production away from the dominant practices of industrial agriculture. Yet, does the use of “ecologically sound and sustainable methods” of food production necessarily translate into better human health outcomes? Does greater choice in defining an agricultural or food system create gains in health and well-being? We elucidate the conceptual linkages between food sovereignty and human health, critically examine the empirical evidence supporting or refuting these linkages, and identify research gaps and key priorities for the food sovereignty-human health research agenda. Five domains of food sovereignty are discussed including: (1) use of agroecological management practices for food production, (2) the localization of food production and consumption, (3) promotion of social justice and equity, (4) valuation of traditional knowledge, and (5) the transformation of economic and political institutions and structures to support self-determination. We find that although there are many plausible linkages between food sovereignty and human health, the empirical evidence in support of the hypothesis that increasing food sovereignty yields improvements to human health is weak. We propose that a concerted effort to generate new empirical evidence on the health implications of these domains of food sovereignty is urgently needed, and suggest areas of research that may be crucial for addressing the gaps in the evidence base.