Conservation outcomes of dietary transitions across different values of nature

Patrick Jeetze (), Isabelle Weindl, Justin Andrew Johnson, Pasquale Borrelli, Panos Panagos, Tobias Meyer, Florian Humpenöder, Pascal Sauer, Jan Philipp Dietrich, Hermann Lotze-Campen and Alexander Popp
Additional contact information
Patrick Jeetze: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Member of the Leibniz Association
Isabelle Weindl: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Member of the Leibniz Association
Justin Andrew Johnson: University of Minnesota
Pasquale Borrelli: University of Basel
Panos Panagos: Joint Research Centre (JRC)
Tobias Meyer: Lund University
Florian Humpenöder: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Member of the Leibniz Association
Pascal Sauer: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Member of the Leibniz Association
Jan Philipp Dietrich: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Member of the Leibniz Association
Hermann Lotze-Campen: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Member of the Leibniz Association
Alexander Popp: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Member of the Leibniz Association

Nature Sustainability, 2025, vol. 8, issue 10, 1130-1142

Abstract: Abstract Conservation benefits from dietary change are commonly assessed without accounting for different conservation objectives. By representing fine-scale habitat and landscape change within a dynamic land-system model, we assess how a partial or full transition to healthier diets would affect indicators across the ‘Nature for Nature’ and ‘Nature for Society’ conservation value perspectives. We find that most diet-related conservation benefits are already achieved by a partial shift to healthier diets. This is because, particularly in many countries in tropical Africa and Asia, adopting healthier diets would mainly involve substituting staple foods with more varied plant-based foods rather than replacing resource-intensive livestock products. Conservation action in line with the Global Biodiversity Framework, by contrast, most consistently improves outcomes across both value perspectives, even under current demand trends, showing that spatial planning is central for decoupling conservation outcomes from food demand. However, any progress towards healthier diets not only lowers greenhouse gas emissions but also reduces barriers to effective conservation, such as higher food prices and imports.

Date: 2025
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-025-01595-9 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

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:natsus:v:8:y:2025:i:10:d:10.1038_s41893-025-01595-9

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

DOI: 10.1038/s41893-025-01595-9

Access Statistics for this article

Nature Sustainability is currently edited by Monica Contestabile

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