Led by researchers from the Gerald J. and Dorothy R. Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University, the study identified the locally available food items that would meet basic nutritional needs with the absolute lowest possible level of greenhouse gas emission and the lowest monetary cost, and compared those diets with foods actually consumed.
The findings address a potential win-win: healthy diets that are both cheaper and more climate friendly.
The findings, which appear in the journal Nature Food, challenge the widespread assumption that climate-friendly healthy eating requires paying more for premium products.
“People can’t see or taste the emissions caused by each food, but everyone can see the item’s price—and within each food group, less expensive options generally cause less emissions,” says Wiliam A. Masters, senior author and a professor at the Friedman School.
As governments and international organizations explore how to cut food system emissions without worsening food insecurity, the findings address a potential win-win: healthy diets that are both cheaper and more climate friendly.
For the study, Masters and his co-investigators sought to identify which foods would be the most sustainable way to meet nutritional requirements, based on the Healthy Diet Basket targets used for global monitoring by UN agencies and national governments around the world.
The team analyzed three kinds of data about each food item: its availability and price in each country, how much of each country’s food supply it accounted for, and the global average greenhouse gas emissions associated with that product.
For each country, they modeled five diets: the healthiest diet with the lowest emissions, the healthiest diet at the lowest cost, and three versions of diets based on the most commonly consumed foods.
“In general, choosing less expensive options in each food group is a reliable way to lower the climate footprint of one’s diet,” says Elena M. Martinez, one of the study’s lead authors, who completed the work as a doctoral student and postdoc at the Friedman School.
“This new study extends that to the extremes, asking which items could meet health needs with the smallest possible climate footprint,” she adds.
In the reference year of 2021, a healthy diet using the most commonly consumed products in each food group emitted 2.44 kilograms of CO₂-equivalent emissions per person per day and cost a global average of $9.96 per day.
In contrast, the benchmark diet to minimize climate harms would have emitted only 0.67 kilograms and cost $6.95. A healthy diet designed to minimize monetary cost would have emitted 1.65 kilograms and cost $3.68.
A third scenario that blended the most commonly consumed products with lower-cost healthy choices fell in between, costing about $6.33 per day and producing 1.86 kilograms of emissions—still well below typical diets, though not as low as the cheapest or lowest-emission options.
In most food groups, the lowest cost options are also least emitting because they generally use less fossil fuels and cause less land-use change. But at the extreme end of low costs and low emissions, there are tradeoffs in two important food groups: animal-source foods and starchy staples.
Among animal-source foods, the most inexpensive option is often milk, for which CO₂-equivalent emissions are much lower than beef and other meats. But fish such as sardines and mackerel have even lower emissions at an intermediate level of cost per calorie.
Among starchy staples, rice is often the least expensive option in countries where wheat or corn would be the lowest-emission products. Emissions for rice are higher than the slightly more expensive wheat or corn, researchers says, primarily because of the methane emitted in flooded rice paddies. That microbial methane causes rice to have higher emissions even though the food is less expensive.
Researchers hope these findings help consumers, food companies, and governments shift priorities toward foods that meet health needs in more sustainable and affordable ways.
“There are situations where reducing emissions costs money, because it involves investment in new equipment and power sources,” says Masters.
“But at the grocery store, frugality is a helpful guide to sustainability. Most people can reduce emissions by choosing less expensive options from each food group, with important exceptions at the extremes of low-cost diets due to methane from dairy and rice.”
Source: Tufts University
Original Study DOI: 10.1038/s43016-025-01270-4
—
Previously Published on futurity.org with Creative Commons License
***
–
The world is changing fast. We help you keep up.
We’ll send you 1 post, 3x per week.
Join The Good Men Project as a Premium Member today.
All Premium Members get to view The Good Men Project with NO ADS. Need more info? A complete list of benefits is here.
—
The Good Men Project is a mission-driven media platform founded in 2010 that helps writers, brands, agencies, and organizations build credibility, audience, and long-term authority. By publishing stories about masculinity, mental health, relationships, fatherhood, identity, and personal development, GMP provides a trusted ecosystem where ideas gain visibility, trust, and resilience in both search and AI-driven discovery. The platform supports individual contributors as well as high-volume agencies through paid guest posts, sponsored content, and bulk publishing systems designed for scale.
—
Photo credit: unsplash
How many extra years can healthy eating really add? Researchers just crunched the numbers
Is litti-chokha healthy? A dietitian breaks down its nutrition
11 Ways To Keep a Healthy Diet on a Frugal Budget