Interventions that influence animal-product consumption: A meta-review
•Providing information on environmental consequences can reduce meat consumption.•Conveying health risks, norms, or providing smaller meat portions may be effective.•Few reviews include meta-analyses, so quantifying effect sizes is difficult.•Most reviews focus on meat, despite comparable concerns o...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Future foods : a dedicated journal for sustainability in food science 2022-06, Vol.5, p.100111, Article 100111 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | •Providing information on environmental consequences can reduce meat consumption.•Conveying health risks, norms, or providing smaller meat portions may be effective.•Few reviews include meta-analyses, so quantifying effect sizes is difficult.•Most reviews focus on meat, despite comparable concerns of other animal products.•Techniques to increase dairy intake could be used for plant-based alternatives.
Transitioning toward plant-based diets can alleviate health and sustainability challenges. However, research on interventions that influence animal-product consumption remains fragmented and inaccessible to researchers and practitioners. We conducted an overview of systematic reviews, also known as a meta-review. We searched five databases for reviews that examined interventions that influence (increase or decrease) the consumption of animal products. We quantitatively summarised results using individual studies' directions of effect because reviews rarely reported effect sizes of primary studies. Eighteen reviews met inclusion criteria, 12 of which examined interventions intended to decrease animal-product consumption and 6 of which examined interventions intended to increase animal-product consumption. In total, only two reviews conducted quantitative meta-analyses. Across all reviews, vote counting indicated that providing information on the environmental impact of meat consumption may reduce consumption, with 10 of 11 estimates suggesting reduced consumption (91%, 95% CI [62.3%, 98.4%]; p = .012). Providing information on the health consequences, emphasising social norms, and reducing meat portion sizes also appeared promising, albeit with more limited evidence. Reviews examining interventions that decreased consumption predominately focused on meat (10/12 reviews). Future reviews should conduct quantitative syntheses where appropriate and examine interventions that influence the consumption of animal products other than meat. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2666-8335 2666-8335 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.fufo.2021.100111 |