• Energy Research

To reduce environmental burdens from the food system, a shift towards environmentally sustainable diets is needed. In this study, the environmental impacts of the Swedish diet were benchmarked relative to global environmental boundaries suggested by the EAT-Lancet Commission. To identify local environmental concerns not captured by the global boundaries, relationships between the global EAT-Lancet variables and the national Swedish Environmental Objectives (SEOs) were analysed and additional indicators for missing aspects were identified. The results showed that the environmental impacts caused by the average Swedish diet exceeded the global boundaries for greenhouse gas emissions, cropland use and application of nutrients by two- to more than four-fold when the boundaries were scaled to per capita level. With regard to biodiversity, the impacts caused by the Swedish diet transgressed the boundary by six-fold. For freshwater use, the diet performed well within the boundary. Comparison of global and local indicators revealed that the EAT-Lancet variables covered many aspects included in the SEOs, but that these global indicators are not always of sufficiently fine resolution to capture local aspects of environmental sustainability, such as eutrophication impacts. To consider aspects and impact categories included in the SEO but not currently covered by the EAT-Lancet variables, such as chemical pollution and acidification, additional indicators and boundaries are needed. This requires better inventory data on e.g., pesticide use and improved traceability for imported foods.

To reduce environmental burdens from the food system, a shift towards environmentally sustainable diets is needed. In this study, the environmental impacts of the Swedish diet were benchmarked relative to global environmental boundaries suggested by the EAT-Lancet Commission. To identify local environmental concerns not captured by the global boundaries, relationships between the global EAT-Lancet variables and the national Swedish Environmental Objectives (SEOs) were analysed and additional indicators for missing aspects were identified. The results showed that the environmental impacts caused by the average Swedish diet exceeded the global boundaries for greenhouse gas emissions, cropland use and application of nutrients by two- to more than four-fold when the boundaries were scaled to per capita level. With regard to biodiversity, the impacts caused by the Swedish diet transgressed the boundary by six-fold. For freshwater use, the diet performed well within the boundary. Comparison of global and local indicators revealed that the EAT-Lancet variables covered many aspects included in the SEOs, but that these global indicators are not always of sufficiently fine resolution to capture local aspects of environmental sustainability, such as eutrophication impacts. To consider aspects and impact categories included in the SEO but not currently covered by the EAT-Lancet variables, such as chemical pollution and acidification, additional indicators and boundaries are needed. This requires better inventory data on e.g., pesticide use and improved traceability for imported foods.

AbstractA method was developed for designing ‘fair’ diets (not using more than globally available arable land per capita) and for assessing the sustainability of such diets. The diets were based on the principle of ‘ecological leftovers’ for livestock production, i.e. raising livestock on pasture and by-products not suitable for or wanted by humans. The method was applied to Sweden using three different scenarios for livestock production, all taking the starting point that semi-natural pastures should be grazed by ruminants for reasons of biodiversity conservation. The scenarios also included differing use of by-products (from crop production and food processing) to either boost milk production (I-Milk scenario) or produce eggs and pig meat (E-Milk and Suckler scenarios). In I-Milk, milk and meat were produced in intensive systems in which dairy cows and their offspring only grazed to a limited extent, resulting in the human diet containing recommended levels of dairy products (350ml milk per day) and meat twice a week. Milk could also be exported. In E-Milk, pasture was used more for dairy cows and their offspring, resulting in fewer animals and less milk (150ml milk per day) and four servings of meat per week. In the Suckler scenario, pasture was grazed by suckler herds providing no milk but meat four times per week. The environmental impacts of the diets were assessed using the planetary boundaries framework. The results showed substantially lower environmental impacts compared with the average current Swedish diet, but the strict absolute climate boundary and the N and P input boundaries were still exceeded for all diets. The approach adopted, of letting the ecological resource capacity act as the constraining factor for livestock production, is in line with agroecology principles and efficient use of land to improve food security, and could be useful in discussions about sustainable consumption of animal products.

AbstractA method was developed for designing ‘fair’ diets (not using more than globally available arable land per capita) and for assessing the sustainability of such diets. The diets were based on the principle of ‘ecological leftovers’ for livestock production, i.e. raising livestock on pasture and by-products not suitable for or wanted by humans. The method was applied to Sweden using three different scenarios for livestock production, all taking the starting point that semi-natural pastures should be grazed by ruminants for reasons of biodiversity conservation. The scenarios also included differing use of by-products (from crop production and food processing) to either boost milk production (I-Milk scenario) or produce eggs and pig meat (E-Milk and Suckler scenarios). In I-Milk, milk and meat were produced in intensive systems in which dairy cows and their offspring only grazed to a limited extent, resulting in the human diet containing recommended levels of dairy products (350ml milk per day) and meat twice a week. Milk could also be exported. In E-Milk, pasture was used more for dairy cows and their offspring, resulting in fewer animals and less milk (150ml milk per day) and four servings of meat per week. In the Suckler scenario, pasture was grazed by suckler herds providing no milk but meat four times per week. The environmental impacts of the diets were assessed using the planetary boundaries framework. The results showed substantially lower environmental impacts compared with the average current Swedish diet, but the strict absolute climate boundary and the N and P input boundaries were still exceeded for all diets. The approach adopted, of letting the ecological resource capacity act as the constraining factor for livestock production, is in line with agroecology principles and efficient use of land to improve food security, and could be useful in discussions about sustainable consumption of animal products.

This is a comprehensive dataset of the agriculture and food system scenarios co-developed with stakeholders with the agricultural land use model BioBaM-GHG 2.0 and presented in Deliverable 4.2 of the H2020 project UNISECO. It includes sub-national (NUTS1/2-level) data on agricultural production and consumption, land use, greenhouse gas emissions from livestock and agricultural activities, etc. for the base year 2012 and the scenario years 2030 and 2050. The scenarios include a Business as usual case and four scenarios with focus on organic and agro-ecological farming practices in the EU, based on different storylines. Further information is available from the above-mentioned deliverable. A detailed model description is provided in the paper "Exploring the option space for land system futures at regional to global scales: The diagnostic agro-food, land use and greenhouse gas emission model BioBaM-GHG 2.0", in which these scenarios are also presented as an exemplary application of the model BioBaM-GHG 2.0. This work was funded by the ERA-NET SusAn project 101243 AnimalFuture, as well as by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and its funding of the H2020 UNISECO project under grant agreement N°773901.

This is a comprehensive dataset of the agriculture and food system scenarios co-developed with stakeholders with the agricultural land use model BioBaM-GHG 2.0 and presented in Deliverable 4.2 of the H2020 project UNISECO. It includes sub-national (NUTS1/2-level) data on agricultural production and consumption, land use, greenhouse gas emissions from livestock and agricultural activities, etc. for the base year 2012 and the scenario years 2030 and 2050. The scenarios include a Business as usual case and four scenarios with focus on organic and agro-ecological farming practices in the EU, based on different storylines. Further information is available from the above-mentioned deliverable. A detailed model description is provided in the paper "Exploring the option space for land system futures at regional to global scales: The diagnostic agro-food, land use and greenhouse gas emission model BioBaM-GHG 2.0", in which these scenarios are also presented as an exemplary application of the model BioBaM-GHG 2.0. This work was funded by the ERA-NET SusAn project 101243 AnimalFuture, as well as by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and its funding of the H2020 UNISECO project under grant agreement N°773901.

SummaryThe European Commission recently embraced the concept of agroecology as a pathway to reduce negative impacts from agri‐food systems on the environment. So far, it remains unclear whether agroecology can deliver on these high hopes if implemented on a large scale. We here assess socio‐economic and environmental implications of multiple agroecological futures in the European Union in 2050, based on a novel diagnostic scenario approach, i.e. the biomass balancing model BioBaM‐GHG 2.0. We find that agroecological measures from the plot to the food systems level can indeed reduce environmental pressures while maintaining domestic food availability within the EU. Such measures are, for example, more hedgerows on croplands or reduced biomass harvest on high natural value – HNV grasslands. However, a key prerequisite is an overall reduction of the food system's size (based on the reduction of animal production, food wastes, and export production) and an optimised crop‐livestock integration. Only then does the transformation towards an agroecological agri‐food system in the EU not risk overstretching domestic land availability or produce insufficient agricultural commodities. Mitigating the accompanied trade‐off of reduced farm income is a central mandate for policy development aimed at re‐designing agriculture in Europe to align with the Green Deal goals.