Beyond Calories: The New Economics of Nutrition

Finaret, Amelia B.; Masters, William A.

doi:10.1146/annurev-resource-100518-094053

Cited by 30 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 146 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The Great Food Trans formation described in the EAT-Lancet Commission rightly calls for change not only in prices and purchasing power but also in many other factors described in the vast published literature on food choice. 23 Looking across food groups, our analysis confirms that fruits and vegetables and animal source foods are the most expensive components of the EAT-Lancet reference diet, 24 and that retail markets in lower-income countries have some less expensive vegetal foods but more expensive animal source foods than are available in higher-income countries. Other analyses of ICP price data confirm this pattern, 25,26 which could be explained by differences in productivity and farm-to-retail food systems in higher-income countries that feature specialised investment to supply eggs, milk, fish, and other animal-sourced foods at lower unit cost.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 52%

Affordability of the EAT–Lancet reference diet: a global analysis

Hirvonen¹,

Bai

Headey

et al. 2020

The Lancet Global Health

442

339

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The EAT-Lancet Commission drew on all available nutritional and environmental evidence to construct the first global benchmark diet capable of sustaining health and protecting the planet, but it did not assess dietary affordability. We used food price and household income data to estimate affordability of EAT-Lancet benchmark diets, as a first step to guiding interventions to improve diets around the world. Methods We obtained retail prices from 2011 for 744 foods in 159 countries, collected under the International Comparison Program. We used these data to identify the most affordable foods to meet EAT-Lancet targets. We compared total diet cost per day to each country's mean per capita household income, calculated the proportion of people for whom the most affordable EAT-Lancet diet exceeds total income, and also measured affordability relative to a least-cost diet that meets essential nutrient requirements. Findings The most affordable EAT-Lancet diets cost a global median of US$2•84 per day (IQR 2•41-3•16) in 2011, of which the largest share was the cost of fruits and vegetables (31•2%), followed by legumes and nuts (18•7%), meat, eggs, and fish (15•2%), and dairy (13•2%). This diet costs a small fraction of average incomes in high-income countries but is not affordable for the world's poor. We estimated that the cost of an EAT-Lancet diet exceeded household per capita income for at least 1•58 billion people. The EAT-Lancet diet is also more expensive than the minimum cost of nutrient adequacy, on average, by a mean factor of 1•60 (IQR 1•41-1•78). Interpretation Current diets differ greatly from EAT-Lancet targets. Improving diets is affordable in many countries but for many people would require some combination of higher income, nutritional assistance, and lower prices. Data and analysis for the cost of healthier foods are needed to inform both local interventions and systemic changes. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 52%

Affordability of the EAT–Lancet reference diet: a global analysis

Hirvonen¹,

Bai

Headey

et al. 2020

The Lancet Global Health

442

339

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While the complexity of consumer food choices and diets is the starting point of sustainable diets-frameworks, the interconnectedness of multiple food systems components is a focal point for the food systems-frameworks. The sustainable diets community previously primarily leaned on nutrition, health and environmental metrics; however these increasingly incorporate a broader scope of metrics ( Jones et al, 2016 ) and highlight issues such as acceptability and affordability ( Cobiac et al, 2019 ; Finaret and Masters, 2019 ; Mertens et al, 2020 ). Similar trends are seen in the sustainable food systems community, where the number of indicators increases over time, as insights and knowledge on food systems develop ( Béné et al, 2019b ; Chaudhary et al, 2018 ; Gustafson et al, 2016 ).…”

Section: A Review Of Food Systems Framework and Metricsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Sustainability Compass for policy navigation to sustainable food systems

Hebinck

Zurek

Achterbosch

et al. 2021

Global Food Security

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Growing acknowledgement that food systems require transformation, demands comprehensive sustainability assessments that can support decision-making and sustainability governance. To do so, assessment frameworks must be able to make trade-offs and synergies visible and allow for inclusive negotiation on food system outcomes relevant to diverse food system actors. This paper reviews literature and frameworks and builds on stakeholder input to present a Sustainability Compass made up of a comprehensive set of metrics for food system assessments. The Compass defines sustainability scores for four societal goals, underpinned by areas of concern. We demonstrate proof of concept of the operationalization of the approach and its metrics. The Sustainability Compass is able to generate comprehensive food system insights that enables reflexive evaluation and multi-actor negotiation for policy making.

show abstract

“…is a focal point for the food systems-frameworks. The sustainable diets community previously primarily leaned on nutrition, health and environmental metrics; however these increasingly incorporate a broader scope of metrics (Jones et al, 2016) and highlight issues such as acceptability and affordability (Cobiac et al, 2019;Finaret and Masters, 2019;Mertens et al, 2020). Similar trends are seen in frameworks that focus on sustainable food systems, where the number of indicators increases over time, as insights and knowledge on food systems develop (Chaudhary et al, 2018;Gustafson et al, 2016).…”

Section: Existing Metrics-based Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Sustainability Compass for policy navigation to sustainable food systems

Hebinck¹,

Zurek²,

Achterbosch³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The growing acknowledgement that food systems require transformation has led to a call for comprehensive sustainability assessments to support decision-making. For frameworks to serve sustainability governance, they must show the trade-offs and unintended consequences that might result from policy decisions across key goals relevant to food system actors. This paper reviews existing literature and frameworks and builds on stakeholder input to present a sustainability compass with associated metrics for food system assessments. The compass defines sustainability scores for four societal goals, underpinned by areas of concern. The operationalisation approach for assessment balances policy-usability, system complexity and comprehensiveness, while providing actionable insights. It concludes by outlining additional challenges for research to continue development of food system frameworks that support sustainability governance.

show abstract

Beyond Calories: The New Economics of Nutrition

Cited by 30 publications

References 146 publications

Affordability of the EAT–Lancet reference diet: a global analysis

Affordability of the EAT–Lancet reference diet: a global analysis

A Sustainability Compass for policy navigation to sustainable food systems

A Sustainability Compass for policy navigation to sustainable food systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About