Group 10
Dietary Decisions and Global Emissions: How Everyday Food Choices Shape Climate Outcomes
Dear Group 10,
Thank you for your Research Kick-off Report on dietary choices and global emissions. You did a nice job highlighting the role of high-emission foods (especially meat) and linking them to externalities. The project has strong potential, especially if you narrow the scope to a small set of foods and connect your narrative more tightly to externality theory and clear, literature-based emission estimates.
Remember that you are working toward a presentation and a final proposal. Focus on environmental economics reasoning, using existing studies, emission factors, and descriptive evidence to build your argument and inform policy recommendations.
Next Steps
Over the next few weeks, aim to:
Narrow the scope of foods
Choose a small set of foods (e.g., one or two high-emission items and one lower-emission alternative) so that your comparisons and scenarios are clear and concrete.Use existing emission estimates (no original data work needed)
Draw on published life-cycle analysis estimates of emissions for your chosen foods and summarize them in a simple table or figure. You can treat any numerical examples as illustrative rather than as a full data-analysis project.Develop one or two diet-shift scenarios
Specify a small number of diet-shift scenarios (e.g., modest reductions in a high-emission food or partial substitution toward a lower-emission option) and approximate the associated emissions changes using the literature-based factors you find.Tie everything to externality theory
Relate your scenarios explicitly to externality theory:- How do unpriced emissions from food production lead to overconsumption of certain foods?
- How would your proposed policy tools (taxes, subsidies, information campaigns, standards, etc.) help move behavior closer to the social optimum?
- How do unpriced emissions from food production lead to overconsumption of certain foods?
Clarify your policy implications
Draft a short policy implications section that explains how your economic framework and illustrative calculations could inform efforts to align dietary choices with climate objectives, while also considering equity (who is most affected by price and policy changes).
Suggested References
You do not need to read everything in full detail, but it will be helpful to cite and draw simple descriptive figures or tables from some of these:
- “Food systems are responsible for a third of global anthropogenic GHG emissions” (Nature Food, 2021)
- “Global food system emissions could preclude achieving the 1.5° and 2°C climate change targets” (Science, 2020)
- “Livestock-related greenhouse gas emissions: impacts and options for policy makers” (Environmental Science & Policy, 2009)
Whenever possible, I strongly recommend adding at least one clear visualization and/or descriptive statistic from these references (or similar work) to your presentation slides and final proposal. For example:
- A visualization showing the share of global emissions from food systems or livestock.
- A table comparing emissions per kilogram (or per serving) of a few key foods.
- A graph illustrating how food-system emissions interact with 1.5°C or 2°C climate pathways.
These visuals will help motivate your research question and make the economic stakes more tangible for your audience.
Questions to Think About as You Refine Your Final Proposal
You do not need to answer all of these, but they may help you refine your narrative, economic reasoning, and policy recommendations:
a. Behavioral & Information Barriers
- What are the main behavioral and information barriers to shifting diets toward lower-carbon options (e.g., misperceptions about nutrition or climate impact, habits, social norms, identity, taste preferences)?
- How might these barriers differ across income groups or cultures, and how could that shape which policy tools (taxes, subsidies, information campaigns, labeling, defaults) are most appropriate?
b. Consumer vs. System Perspective
- How much can individual dietary changes achieve in isolation, assuming the broader food system (prices, availability, menus, marketing) does not change much in the short run?
- In contrast, where do system-level changes (e.g., institutional procurement, school and workplace menus, labeling standards, public procurement) become necessary for large emission reductions, and how would you describe the interaction between individual choices and system-level constraints in economic terms?