IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i6p5278-d1099091.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Dietary Carbon Footprint of Portuguese Adults: Defining and Assessing Mitigation Scenarios for Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Author

Listed:
  • Cristóvão Fraga Andrade Pereira da Rocha

    (LEPABE—Laboratory for Process Engineering, Environment, Biotechnology and Energy, Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto, Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal
    ALiCE—Associate Laboratory in Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto, Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Catarina de Sousa Tavares Pinho da Silva

    (LEPABE—Laboratory for Process Engineering, Environment, Biotechnology and Energy, Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto, Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal
    ALiCE—Associate Laboratory in Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto, Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Rafaela Martins da Silva

    (Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto, Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal)

  • Manuel Joaquim da Silva Oliveira

    (DEMM—Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto, Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal)

  • Belmira de Almeida Ferreira Neto

    (LEPABE—Laboratory for Process Engineering, Environment, Biotechnology and Energy, Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto, Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal
    ALiCE—Associate Laboratory in Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto, Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal
    DEMM—Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto, Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal)

Abstract

The food chain is a large contributor to environmental pollution, especially greenhouse gas emissions, strongly associated with the consumption of animal-based proteins. The understanding of the negative environmental impacts of dietary habits by the population is of the utmost importance to provide the means to effect change to more sustainable eating patterns. The main purpose of this study was to assess the carbon footprint of animal protein consumption in Portugal, while also evaluating six mitigation scenarios aiming to lower greenhouse gas emissions through strategic changes to the animal protein consumption of current dietary habits. Overall, the carbon footprint associated with animal protein consumption is 2.63 kg CO 2 eq/(cap⋅day) nationally and 28.4 t CO 2 eq/month for the faculty canteen. Meat is by far the largest contributor to the carbon footprint in both cases, with beef being its “hotspot”. All scenarios showed significant reduction potentials, with values ranging from 16% (lower value for both the national case and the faculty canteen) to 71% (faculty canteen). In sum, substantial carbon footprint reductions can be attained if policymakers support the implementation of effective measures to promote a shift in the current animal protein consumption towards more sustainable eating habits.

Suggested Citation

  • Cristóvão Fraga Andrade Pereira da Rocha & Catarina de Sousa Tavares Pinho da Silva & Rafaela Martins da Silva & Manuel Joaquim da Silva Oliveira & Belmira de Almeida Ferreira Neto, 2023. "The Dietary Carbon Footprint of Portuguese Adults: Defining and Assessing Mitigation Scenarios for Greenhouse Gas Emissions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-22, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:6:p:5278-:d:1099091
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/6/5278/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/6/5278/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Antje Gonera & Erik Svanes & Annechen Bahr Bugge & Malin Myrset Hatlebakk & Katja-Maria Prexl & Øydis Ueland, 2021. "Moving Consumers along the Innovation Adoption Curve: A New Approach to Accelerate the Shift toward a More Sustainable Diet," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-21, April.
    2. Dyer, James A & Verge, Xavier P. C. & Desjardins, Raymond L. & Worth, Devon E., 2014. "A Comparison of the Greenhouse Gas Emissions From the Sheep Industry With Beef Production in Canada," Sustainable Agriculture Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 3(3).
    3. Nijdam, Durk & Rood, Trudy & Westhoek, Henk, 2012. "The price of protein: Review of land use and carbon footprints from life cycle assessments of animal food products and their substitutes," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 760-770.
    4. Cheila Almeida & Sofia Vaz & Friederike Ziegler, 2015. "Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of a Canned Sardine Product from Portugal," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 19(4), pages 607-617, August.
    5. Pelletier, Nathan & Pirog, Rich & Rasmussen, Rebecca, 2010. "Comparative life cycle environmental impacts of three beef production strategies in the Upper Midwestern United States," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(6), pages 380-389, July.
    6. Nguyen, Thu Lan T. & Hermansen, John E. & Mogensen, Lisbeth, 2010. "Fossil energy and GHG saving potentials of pig farming in the EU," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 2561-2571, May.
    7. United Nations UN, 2015. "Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development," Working Papers id:7559, eSocialSciences.
    8. Jones, A.K. & Jones, D.L. & Cross, P., 2014. "The carbon footprint of lamb: Sources of variation and opportunities for mitigation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 97-107.
    9. van Dooren, C. & Marinussen, Mari & Blonk, Hans & Aiking, Harry & Vellinga, Pier, 2014. "Exploring dietary guidelines based on ecological and nutritional values: A comparison of six dietary patterns," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 36-46.
    10. O'Brien, D. & Bohan, A. & McHugh, N. & Shalloo, L., 2016. "A life cycle assessment of the effect of intensification on the environmental impacts and resource use of grass-based sheep farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 95-104.
    11. Payandeh, Z. & Kheiralipour, K. & Karimi, M. & Khoshnevisan, B., 2017. "Joint data envelopment analysis and life cycle assessment for environmental impact reduction in broiler production systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 768-774.
    12. Pedro Henrique Presumido & Fernando Sousa & Artur Gonçalves & Tatiane Cristina Dal Bosco & Manuel Feliciano, 2018. "Environmental Impacts of the Beef Production Chain in the Northeast of Portugal Using Life Cycle Assessment," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-19, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Danilo Bertoni & Daniele Cavicchioli & Franco Donzelli & Giovanni Ferrazzi & Dario G. Frisio & Roberto Pretolani & Elena Claire Ricci & Vera Ventura, 2018. "Recent Contributions of Agricultural Economics Research in the Field of Sustainable Development," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-20, December.
    2. Morena Bruno & Marianne Thomsen & Federico Maria Pulselli & Nicoletta Patrizi & Michele Marini & Dario Caro, 2019. "The carbon footprint of Danish diets," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 156(4), pages 489-507, October.
    3. Helen Harwatt & Joan Sabaté & Gidon Eshel & Sam Soret & William Ripple, 2017. "Substituting beans for beef as a contribution toward US climate change targets," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 143(1), pages 261-270, July.
    4. Oriana Gava & Fabio Bartolini & Francesca Venturi & Gianluca Brunori & Alberto Pardossi, 2020. "Improving Policy Evidence Base for Agricultural Sustainability and Food Security: A Content Analysis of Life Cycle Assessment Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-29, February.
    5. Jennifer A. Jay & Raffaella D’Auria & J. Cully Nordby & David Andy Rice & David A. Cleveland & Anthony Friscia & Sophie Kissinger & Marc Levis & Hannah Malan & Deepak Rajagopal & Joel R. Reynolds & We, 2019. "Reduction of the carbon footprint of college freshman diets after a food-based environmental science course," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 154(3), pages 547-564, June.
    6. Louise Seconda & Julia Baudry & Benjamin Allès & Christine Boizot-Szantai & Louis-Georges Soler & Pilar Galan & Serge Hercberg & Brigitte Langevin & Denis Lairon & Philippe Pointereau & Emmanuelle Kes, 2018. "Comparing nutritional, economic, and environmental performances of diets according to their levels of greenhouse gas emissions," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 148(1), pages 155-172, May.
    7. Forte, Annachiara & Zucaro, Amalia & De Vico, Gionata & Fierro, Angelo, 2016. "Carbon footprint of heliciculture: A case study from an Italian experimental farm," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 99-111.
    8. Pablo L. Peri & Yamina M. Rosas & Brenton Ladd & Ricardo Díaz-Delgado & Guillermo Martínez Pastur, 2020. "Carbon Footprint of Lamb and Wool Production at Farm Gate and the Regional Scale in Southern Patagonia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-26, April.
    9. Tsakiridis, Andreas & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Hynes, Stephen & Kilcline, Kevin, 2020. "A Comparison of Environmental and Economic Sustainability across Seafood and Livestock Product Value Chains," Working Papers 309507, National University of Ireland, Galway, Socio-Economic Marine Research Unit.
    10. Goldstein, Benjamin & Hansen, Steffen Foss & Gjerris, Mickey & Laurent, Alexis & Birkved, Morten, 2016. "Ethical aspects of life cycle assessments of diets," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 139-151.
    11. Chung, Yessica C.Y. & Lee, Tsung-Chen, 2020. "Tele-connecting urban food consumption to land use at multiple spatial scales: A case study of beef in Taiwan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    12. Apostolidis, Chrysostomos & McLeay, Fraser, 2016. "Should we stop meating like this? Reducing meat consumption through substitution," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 74-89.
    13. Amy E. Culliford & Jane Bradbury & Elphee B. Medici, 2023. "Improving Communication of the UK Sustainable Healthy Dietary Guidelines the Eatwell Guide: A Rapid Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-23, April.
    14. Recktenwald, Erin B. & Ehrhardt, Richard A., 2024. "Greenhouse gas emissions from a diversity of sheep production systems in the United States," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    15. Johanna Ruett & Lena Hennes & Jens Teubler & Boris Braun, 2022. "How Compatible Are Western European Dietary Patterns to Climate Targets? Accounting for Uncertainty of Life Cycle Assessments by Applying a Probabilistic Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-21, November.
    16. Elinor Hallström & Quentin Gee & Peter Scarborough & David A. Cleveland, 2017. "A healthier US diet could reduce greenhouse gas emissions from both the food and health care systems," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 142(1), pages 199-212, May.
    17. Farrell, L. & Herron, J. & Pabiou, T. & McHugh, N. & McDermott, K. & Shalloo, L. & O'Brien, D. & Bohan, A., 2022. "Modelling the production, profit, and greenhouse gas emissions of Irish sheep flocks divergent in genetic merit," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    18. Hyland, J.J. & Styles, D. & Jones, D.L. & Williams, A.P., 2016. "Improving livestock production efficiencies presents a major opportunity to reduce sectoral greenhouse gas emissions," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 123-131.
    19. Paulina Schiappacasse & Bernhard Müller & Le Thuy Linh, 2019. "Towards Responsible Aggregate Mining in Vietnam," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-15, August.
    20. Pina Puntillo, 2023. "Circular economy business models: Towards achieving sustainable development goals in the waste management sector—Empirical evidence and theoretical implications," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(2), pages 941-954, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:6:p:5278-:d:1099091. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.