Ran Ylva, Van Rysselberge Pierre, Macura Biljana, Persson U Martin, Hatab Assem Abu, Jonell Malin, Lindahl Therese, Röös Elin
Department of Energy and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden.
Stockholm Environment Institute, P.O. Box 24218, 104 51, Stockholm, Sweden.
Environ Evid. 2024 Apr 12;13(1):10. doi: 10.1186/s13750-024-00333-6.
The global food system is inflicting substantial environmental harm, necessitating a shift towards more environmentally sustainable food consumption practices. Policy interventions, for example, information campaigns, taxes and subsidies and changes in the choice context are essential to stimulate sustainable change, but their effectiveness in achieving environmental goals remains inadequately understood. Existing literature lacks a comprehensive synthesis of evidence on the role of public policies in promoting sustainable food consumption. Our systematic map addressed this gap by collecting and categorising research evidence on public policy interventions aimed at establishing environmentally sustainable food consumption patterns, in order to answer the primary research question: What evidence exists on the effects of public policy interventions for achieving environmentally sustainable food consumption?
Searches for relevant records (in English) were performed in WoS, Scopus, ASSIA, ProQuest Dissertation and Theses, EconLit, Google Scholar and in bibliographies of relevant reviews. A grey literature search was also performed on 28 specialist websites (searches were made in the original language of the webpages and publications in English, Swedish, Danish and Norwegian were eligible) and Google Scholar (search in English). Screening was performed at title/abstract and full-text levels, with machine learning-aided priority screening at title/abstract level. Eligibility criteria encompassed settings, interventions (public policies on sustainable food consumption), target groups and outcomes. No critical appraisal of study validity was conducted. Data coding covered bibliographic details, study characteristics, intervention types and outcomes. Evidence was categorised into intervention types and subcategories. Visual representation utilised bar plots, diagrams, heatmaps and an evidence atlas. This produced a comprehensive overview of effects of public policy interventions on sustainable food consumption patterns.
The evidence base included 227 articles (267 interventions), with 92% of studies in high-income countries and only 4% in low-income countries. Quantitative studies dominated (83%), followed by mixed methods (16%) and qualitative studies (1%). Most interventions were information-based and 50% of reviewed studies looked at labels. Information campaigns/education interventions constituted 10% of the sample, and menu design changes and restriction/editing of choice context 8% each. Market-based interventions represented 13% of total interventions, of which two-thirds were taxes. Administrative interventions were rare (< 1%). Proxies for environmental impact (85%) were more frequent outcome measures than direct impacts (15%). Animal-source food consumption was commonly used (19%) for effects of interventions on, for example, greenhouse gas emissions. Most studies used stated preferences (61%) to evaluate interventions.
The literature assessing policies for sustainable food consumption is dominated by studies on non-intrusive policy instruments; labels, information campaigns, menu design changes and editing choice contexts. There is a strong need for research on sustainable food policies to leave the lab and enter the real world, which will require support and cooperation of public and private sector stakeholders. Impact evaluations of large-scale interventions require scaling-up of available research funding and stronger multidisciplinary research, including collaborations with industry and other societal actors. Future research in this field should also go beyond the European and North American context, to obtain evidence on how to counteract increasing environmental pressures from food consumption worldwide.
全球粮食系统正在对环境造成重大危害,因此有必要转向更具环境可持续性的食物消费模式。政策干预措施,例如宣传活动、税收和补贴以及选择环境的改变,对于推动可持续变革至关重要,但其在实现环境目标方面的有效性仍未得到充分理解。现有文献缺乏关于公共政策在促进可持续食物消费中作用的全面证据综合。我们的系统综述通过收集和分类有关旨在建立环境可持续食物消费模式的公共政策干预措施的研究证据,来填补这一空白,以回答主要研究问题:关于公共政策干预措施对实现环境可持续食物消费的影响,有哪些证据?
在Web of Science、Scopus、亚洲社会科学索引(ASSIA)、ProQuest学位论文数据库、EconLit、谷歌学术以及相关综述的参考文献中检索相关记录(英文)。还在28个专业网站上进行了灰色文献搜索(以网页的原始语言进行搜索,英文、瑞典文、丹麦文和挪威文的出版物符合要求)以及在谷歌学术上进行英文搜索。在标题/摘要和全文层面进行筛选,在标题/摘要层面进行机器学习辅助的优先筛选。纳入标准包括研究背景、干预措施(关于可持续食物消费的公共政策)、目标群体和结果。未对研究的有效性进行批判性评价。数据编码涵盖文献细节、研究特征、干预类型和结果。证据被分类为干预类型和子类别。可视化呈现使用柱状图、图表、热图和证据图谱。这对公共政策干预措施对可持续食物消费模式的影响进行了全面概述。
证据库包括227篇文章(267项干预措施),其中92%的研究来自高收入国家,只有4%来自低收入国家。定量研究占主导(83%),其次是混合方法研究(16%)和定性研究(1%)。大多数干预措施基于信息,50%的综述研究关注标签。宣传活动/教育干预措施占样本的10%,菜单设计改变以及选择环境的限制/编辑各占8%。基于市场的干预措施占总干预措施的13%,其中三分之二是税收。行政干预措施很少(<1%)。环境影响的代理指标(85%)比直接影响(15%)更常作为结果指标。动物源食物消费常用于评估干预措施对例如温室气体排放的影响(19%)。大多数研究使用陈述偏好(61%)来评估干预措施。
评估可持续食物消费政策的文献主要是关于非侵入性政策工具的研究;标签、宣传活动、菜单设计改变和编辑选择环境。迫切需要开展关于可持续食物政策的研究,使其走出实验室并进入现实世界,这将需要公共和私营部门利益相关者的支持与合作。对大规模干预措施的影响评估需要增加可用研究资金并加强多学科研究,包括与行业和其他社会行为者的合作。该领域未来的研究还应超越欧洲和北美的背景,以获取关于如何应对全球食物消费带来的日益增加的环境压力的证据。