Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Brief Communication
  • Published:

Low-cost climate-change informational intervention reduces meat consumption among students for 3 years

Nature Food volume 4, pages 218–222 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Evidence on the impact of information campaigns on meat consumption patterns is limited. Here, using a dataset of more than 100,000 meal selections over 3 years, we examine the long-term effects of an informational intervention designed to increase awareness about the role of meat consumption in climate change. Students randomized to the treatment group reduced their meat consumption by 5.6 percentage points with no signs of reversal over 3 years. Calculations indicate a high return on investment even under conservative assumptions (~US$14 per metric ton CO2eq). Our findings show that informational interventions can be cost effective and generate long-lasting shifts towards more sustainable food options.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Long-term treatment effects on diet and C02eq.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Individual participant data that underlie the results reported in this article, after de-identification, will be made available to researchers who provide a methodologically sound proposal. Proposals should be directed to corresponding author at jalil@oxy.edu; to gain access, data requestors will need to sign a data access agreement. Additional data/materials, that is, GHG data, ROI calculations, informed consent form and intervention materials (handouts, surveys and slides), may be found at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/5H8U7.

Code availability

The code used for this analysis is available from the corresponding author on request.

References

  1. Godfray, H. C. J. et al. Meat consumption, health, and the environment. Science 361, eaam5324 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Poore, J. & Nemecek, T. Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science 360, 987–992 (2018).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Springmann, M., Clark, M. A., Rayner, M., Scarborough, P. & Webb, P. The global and regional costs of healthy and sustainable dietary patterns: a modelling study. Lancet Planet. Health 5, e797–e807 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Springmann, M., Godfray, H. C. J., Rayner, M. & Scarborough, P. Analysis and valuation of the health and climate change cobenefits of dietary change. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 4146–4151 (2016).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Tilman, D. & Clark, M. Global diets link environmental sustainability and human health. Nature 515, 518–522 (2014).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Norwood, F. B. & Lusk, J. L. Compassion, by the Pound: The Economics of Farm Animal Welfare (Oxford Univ. Press, 2011).

  7. Wellesley, L., Froggatt, A. & Happer, C. Changing Climate, Changing Diets: Pathways to Lower Meat Consumption (Chatham House, 2015).

  8. Willett, W. et al. Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT–Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. Lancet 393, 447–492 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bailey, R., Froggatt, A. & Wellesley, L. Livestock—Climate Change’s Forgotten Sector: Global Public Opinion on Meat and Dairy Consumption (Chatham House, 2014).

  10. Pechey, R., Reynolds, J. P., Cook, B., Marteau, T. M. & Jebb, S. A. Acceptability of policies to reduce consumption of red and processed meat: a population-based survey experiment. J. Environ. Psychol. 81, 101817 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Jalil, A. J., Tasoff, J. & Bustamante, A. V. Eating to save the planet: evidence from a randomized controlled trial using individual-level food purchase data. Food Policy 95, 101950 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bianchi, F., Dorsel, C., Garnett, E., Aveyard, P. & Jebb, S. A. Interventions targeting conscious determinants of human behaviour to reduce the demand for meat: a systematic review with qualitative comparative analysis. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 15, 102 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Mathur, M. B. et al. Interventions to reduce meat consumption by appealing to animal welfare: meta-analysis and evidence-based recommendations. Appetite 164, 105277 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Garnett, E. E., Balmford, A., Sandbrook, C., Pilling, M. A. & Marteau, T. M. Impact of increasing vegetarian availability on meal selection and sales in cafeterias. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 20923–20929 (2019).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Garnett, E. E., Marteau, T. M., Sandbrook, C., Pilling, M. A. & Balmford, A. Order of meals at the counter and distance between options affect student cafeteria vegetarian sales. Nat. Food 1, 485–488 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Garnett, E. E., Balmford, A., Marteau, T. M., Pilling, M. A. & Sandbrook, C. Price of change: does a small alteration to the price of meat and vegetarian options affect their sales? J. Environ. Psychol. 75, 101589 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Schwitzgebel, E., Cokelet, B. & Singer, P. Do ethics classes influence student behavior? Case study: teaching the ethics of eating meat. Cognition 203, 104397 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lohmann, P. M., Gsottbauer, E., Doherty, A. & Kontoleon, A. Do carbon footprint labels promote climatarian diets? Evidence from a large-scale field experiment. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 114, 102693 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Nutrient lists from standard reference legacy (2018). USDA https://www.nal.usda.gov/legacy/fnic/nutrient-lists-standard-reference-legacy-2018 (2018).

  20. Rippin, H. L. et al. Variations in greenhouse gas emissions of individual diets: associations between the greenhouse gas emissions and nutrient intake in the United Kingdom. PLoS ONE 16, e0259418 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Nordhaus, W. D. Revisiting the social cost of carbon. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 1518–1523 (2017).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Carfora, V., Catellani, P., Caso, D. & Conner, M. How to reduce red and processed meat consumption by daily text messages targeting environment or health benefits. J. Environ. Psychol. 65, 101319 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Animal Charity Evaluators for funding and to H. Case, M. Haile, S. Herdman, L. Ingram, A. Jack, E. Richman, T. Santos, Y. Li and D. Wright for valuable research assistance. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript. We are indebted to the staff of the host college; without their support, hard work and help, the project would not have been possible.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Andrew J. Jalil

  2. Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA, USA

    Joshua Tasoff

  3. Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Arturo Vargas Bustamante

Authors
  1. Andrew J. Jalil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joshua Tasoff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Arturo Vargas Bustamante
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

A.J.J., J.T. and A.V.B. conceived the idea. A.J.J. and J.T. collected and analysed the data. A.J.J. designed the intervention and wrote the paper. J.T. and A.V.B. edited the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew J. Jalil.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Food thanks Nina Weingarten, Paul Lohmann and Clare D’Souza for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Tables 1–15, Discussion and Figs. 1–4.

Reporting Summary

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jalil, A.J., Tasoff, J. & Bustamante, A.V. Low-cost climate-change informational intervention reduces meat consumption among students for 3 years. Nat Food 4, 218–222 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-023-00712-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-023-00712-1

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing