Abstract (EN):
The adoption of sustainable dietary patterns that consider simultaneously nutritional well-being and reduced environmental impact is of paramount importance. This paper introduces the Dietary Pattern Sustainability Index (DIPASI), as a method to assess the sustainability of dietary patterns by covering the environmental, nutritional, and economic dimensions in a single score. Environmental indicators include carbon footprint, water footprint, and land use, the nutritional quality is evaluated through the Nutritional Rich Diet 9.3 score, and the economic aspects are considered using diet cost. DIPASI measures the deviation (in %) of an individual's diet in relation to a reference diet. The case study utilized dietary data from the Portuguese National Food, Nutrition, and Physical Activity Survey (IAN-AF 2015-2016), which included 2999 adults aged 18 to 64. The Portuguese dietary patterns (covering 1492 food products consumed), were compared against the reference Mediterranean diet. Results indicated that the Portuguese dietary pattern had a higher environmental impact (CF: 4.32 kg CO2eq/day, WF: 3162.88 L/day, LU: 7.03 m(2)/day), a lower nutritional quality (NRD9.3: 334), and a higher cost (6.65 euros/day) when compared to the Mediterranean diet (CF: 3.30 kg CO2eq/day, WF: 2758.84 L/day, LU: 3.67 m(2)/day, NRD9.3: 668, cost: 5.71 euros/day). DIPASI reveals that only 4% of the sample's population does not deviate or presents a positive deviation (> - 0.5%) from the Mediterranean diet, indicating that the majority of Portuguese individuals have lower sustainability performance. For the environmental sub-score, this percentage was 21.3%, for the nutritional sub-score was 10.9%, and for the economic sub-score was 34.2%. This study provides a robust framework for assessing dietary sustainability on a global scale. The comprehensive methodology offers an essential foundation for understanding and addressing challenges in promoting sustainable and healthy dietary choices worldwide.
Language:
English
Type (Professor's evaluation):
Scientific
No. of pages:
16