Feeding climate and biodiversity goals with novel plant-based meat and milk alternatives

Marta Kozicka (), Peter Havlik, Hugo Valin, Eva Wollenberg, Andre Deppermann, David Leclère, Pekka Lauri, Rebekah Moses, Esther Boere, Stefan Frank, Chris Davis, Esther Park and Noel Gurwick
Additional contact information
Marta Kozicka: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
Hugo Valin: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
Eva Wollenberg: Gund Institute, University of Vermont
Andre Deppermann: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
David Leclère: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
Pekka Lauri: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
Rebekah Moses: Impossible Foods
Esther Boere: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
Stefan Frank: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
Chris Davis: Impossible Foods
Esther Park: Impossible Foods
Noel Gurwick: USAID Center for Development, Democracy, and Innovation

Nature Communications, 2023, vol. 14, issue 1, 1-13

Abstract: Abstract Plant-based animal product alternatives are increasingly promoted to achieve more sustainable diets. Here, we use a global economic land use model to assess the food system-wide impacts of a global dietary shift towards these alternatives. We find a substantial reduction in the global environmental impacts by 2050 if globally 50% of the main animal products (pork, chicken, beef and milk) are substituted—net reduction of forest and natural land is almost fully halted and agriculture and land use GHG emissions decline by 31% in 2050 compared to 2020. If spared agricultural land within forest ecosystems is restored to forest, climate benefits could double, reaching 92% of the previously estimated land sector mitigation potential. Furthermore, the restored area could contribute to 13-25% of the estimated global land restoration needs under target 2 from the Kunming Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework by 2030, and future declines in ecosystem integrity by 2050 would be more than halved. The distribution of these impacts varies across regions—the main impacts on agricultural input use are in China and on environmental outcomes in Sub-Saharan Africa and South America. While beef replacement provides the largest impacts, substituting multiple products is synergistic.

Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (6)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-40899-2 Abstract (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:nat:natcom:v:14:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-023-40899-2

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.nature.com/ncomms/

DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-40899-2

Access Statistics for this article

Nature Communications is currently edited by Nathalie Le Bot, Enda Bergin and Fiona Gillespie

More articles in Nature Communications from Nature
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().