Editing IPCC:AR6/WGIII/Chapter-12 (section)

==== 12.4.4.3 Informative Instruments. ====

<div id="h3-14-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div>

'''Sustainable food-based dietary guidelines:''' National food-based dietary guidelines (FBDGs) provide science-based recommendations on food group consumption quantities. They are available for 94, mostly upper- and middle-income, countries globally ( [[#Wijesinha-Bettoni--2021|Wijesinha-Bettoni et al. 2021]] ), are adapted to national cultural and socio-economic context, and can be used as a benchmark for food formulation standards for public and private food procurement, or to inform citizens ( [[#Bechthold--2018|Bechthold et al. 2018]] ; [[#Temme--2020|Temme et al. 2020]] ). Most FBDGs are based on health considerations and only a few mention environmental sustainability aspects ( [[#Bechthold--2018|Bechthold et al. 2018]] ; [[#Ritchie--2018|Ritchie et al. 2018]] ; [[#Ahmed--2019|Ahmed et al. 2019]] ; [[#Springmann--2020|Springmann et al. 2020]] ). Implementation of FBDGs so far focuses largely in the education and health sectors, with few countries also using their potential for guiding food system policies in other sectors ( [[#Wijesinha-Bettoni--2021|Wijesinha-Bettoni et al. 2021]] ).

Despite the fact that 1.5 billion people follow a vegetarian diet from choice or necessity, and that the position statements of various nutrition societies point out that vegetarian diets are adequate if well planned, few FBDGs give recommendations for vegetarian diets ( [[#Costa%20Leite--2020|Costa Leite et al. 2020]] ). An increase in consumption of plant-based food is a recurring recommendation in FBDGs, though an explicit reduction or limit of animal-source proteins is not often included, with the exception of red or processed meat ( [[#Temme--2020|Temme et al. 2020]] ). To account for changing dietary trends, however, FBDGs need to incorporate sustainability aspects ( [[#Herforth--2019|Herforth et al. 2019]] ). A healthy diet respecting planetary boundaries has been proposed by [[#Willett--2019|Willett et al. (2019)]] , though some authors have questioned the validity of the nutritional ( [[#Zagmutt--2019|Zagmutt et al. 2019]] ) or environmental implications, such as water use ( [[#Vanham--2020|Vanham et al. 2020]] ). In October 2019, 14 global cities pledged to adhere to this ‘planetary health diet’ ( [[#C40%20Cities--2019|C40 Cities 2019]] ).

'''Education on food/nutrition and environment:''' Some consumers are reluctant to adopt sustainable healthy dietary patterns because of a lack of awareness of the environmental and health consequences of what they eat, but also out of suspicion towards alternatives that are perceived as not ‘natural’ and that seem to be difficult to integrate into their daily dietary habits ( [[#Hartmann--2017|Hartmann and Siegrist 2017]] ; [[#Stephens--2018|Stephens et al. 2018]] ; [[#McBey--2019|McBey et al. 2019]] ; [[#Siegrist--2020|Siegrist and Hartmann 2020]] ) or simply lack of knowledge on how to prepare or eat unfamiliar foods ( [[#El%20Bilali--2019|El Bilali 2019]] ; [[#Aiking--2020|Aiking and de Boer 2020]] ; [[#Temme--2020|Temme et al. 2020]] ). Misconceptions may contribute, for example, to the belief that packaging or ‘food miles’ dominate the climate impact of food ( [[#Macdiarmid--2016|Macdiarmid et al. 2016]] ). However, spillover effects can induce sustainable behaviour from ‘entry points’ such as concerns about food waste ( [[#El%20Bilali--2019|El Bilali 2019]] ). Early-life experiences are crucial determinants for adopting healthy and sustainable lifestyles ( [[#Bascopé--2019|Bascopé et al. 2019]] ; [[#McBey--2019|McBey et al. 2019]] ), so improved understanding of sustainability aspects in the education of public health practitioners and in university education is proposed ( [[#Wegener--2018|Wegener et al. 2018]] ). Investment in education, particularly of women ( [[#Vermeulen--2020|Vermeulen et al. 2020]] ), might lower the barrier for stronger policies to be accepted and effective ( [[#McBey--2019|McBey et al. 2019]] ; [[#Temme--2020|Temme et al. 2020]] ) ( ''medium evidence, h'' ''igh agreement'' ) ''.''

'''Food labels:''' Instruments to improve transparency and information on food sustainability aspects are based on the assumption of the ‘rational’ consumer. Information gives the necessary freedom of choice, but also the responsibility to make the ‘right choice’ ( [[#Kersh--2015|Kersh 2015]] ; [[#Bucher--2016|Bucher et al. 2016]] ). Studies find a lack of consumer awareness about the link between own food choices and environmental effect ( [[#Grebitus--2016|Grebitus et al. 2016]] ; [[#Leach--2016|Leach et al. 2016]] ; [[#Hartmann--2017|Hartmann and Siegrist 2017]] ; [[#de%20Boer--2018|de Boer et al. 2018]] ) and so effective messaging is required to raise awareness and acceptance of potentially stricter food system policies.

Back-of-package labels usually provide detailed nutritional information ( [[#Temple--2019|Temple 2019]] ). Front-of-package labels simplify and interpret the information: for example, the traffic light system or the Nutri-Score label used in France ( [[#Kanter--2018b|Kanter et al. 2018b]] ) and the health star rating used in Australia and New Zealand ( [[#Shahid--2020|Shahid et al. 2020]] ) provide an aggregate rating based on product attributes such as energy, sugar, saturated fat and fibre content; other labels warn against frequent consumption (e.g., in the 1990s Finland introduced a mandatory warning for products high in salt; the keyhole label was introduced in Sweden in 1989 ( [[#Storcksdieck%20genannt%20Bonsmann--2020|Storcksdieck genannt Bonsmann et al. 2020]] ); and ‘high in’ (energy/saturated fat/sugar) labels were introduced in Chile in 2016 to reduce obesity ( [[#Corvalán--2019|Corvalán et al. 2019]] )). Front-of-package labels serve also as an incentive to industry to produce healthier or more sustainable products, or can serve as a marketing strategy ( [[#Van%20Loo--2014|Van Loo et al. 2014]] ; [[#Apostolidis--2016|Apostolidis and McLeay 2016]] ; [[#Kanter--2018b|Kanter et al. 2018b]] ). Carbon footprint labels can be difficult for consumers to understand ( [[#Hyland--2017|Hyland et al. 2017]] ), and simple, interpretative summary indicators used on front-of-package labels (e.g., traffic lights) are more effective than more complex ones ( [[#Bauer--2019|Bauer and Reisch 2019]] ; [[#Ikonen--2019|Ikonen et al. 2019]] ; [[#Temple--2019|Temple 2019]] ; [[#Tørris--2019|Tørris and Mobekk 2019]] ) ( ''robust evidence, high agreement'' ) ''.'' Reviews find mixed results but overall a positive effect of food labels in improving direct purchasing decisions ( [[#Hieke--2016|Hieke and Harris 2016]] ; [[#Sarink--2016|Sarink et al. 2016]] ; [[#Anastasiou--2019|Anastasiou et al. 2019]] ; [[#Shangguan--2019|Shangguan et al. 2019]] ; [[#Temple--2019|Temple 2019]] ), and in raising levels of awareness, thus possibly increasing success of other policy instruments ( [[#Apostolidis--2016|Apostolidis and McLeay 2016]] ; [[#Samant--2016|Samant and Seo 2016]] ; [[#Al-Khudairy--2019|Al-Khudairy et al. 2019]] ; [[#Miller--2019|Miller et al. 2019]] ; [[#Temple--2019|Temple 2019]] ) ( ''medium evidence'' , ''h'' ''igh agreement'' ).

<div id="12.4.4.4" class="h3-container"></div>

<span id="behavioural-instruments"></span>