Distance Between Options Affects Diners To Choose A Greener Meal

Reviewed by Emily Henderson, B.Sc.August 13, 2020

Researchers have identified the best food locations to help “nudge” the diner to choose a more earth-friendly meal in the dining room.

Large-scale livestock destruction destroys habitats and generates greenhouse gases, so a meat-rich diet poses a risk to our health as well as to the health of our planet.

Environmentalists at the University of Cambridge are investigating ways to “tempt” people to eat more plants and less meat to reduce the environmental effects caused by excessive intake of animal foods. I will.

Researchers have experimented with customers in cafeterias at two colleges in Cambridge to see if the location of vegetarian options affects the intake of plant-based diets.

They collected and analyzed data from 105,143 diet choices over a two-year period, alternating weekly meat and vegetable food placements and changing patterns monthly.

The scale of the study is unprecedented. Earlier reviews of various studies using “choice architecture” to reduce meat intake amounted to 11,290 observations in total.

Researchers have found that simply placing vegetables in front of the meat in the order of meal options when people entered the serving area had little effect on increasing the green diet at either college.

However, at other universities, sales of plant-based dishes increased by a quarter (25.2%) in the weekly analysis and by almost 40% (39.6) in the monthly comparison.

The difference is that the distance between vegetarian and meat options has increased by almost 1 meter. The first university has a gap of 85 cm and the second university has a gap of 181 cm. The findings are published today in the journal Nature Food.

Reducing meat and dairy consumption is one of the simplest and most influential options we can make to protect climate, environment and other species.

We need to make better choices easier for people. We hope these findings will be used by catering managers and, in fact, those interested in designing cafeterias and menus that promote more environmentally friendly meals. “

Emma Garnett, Principal Investigator, Environmentalist at the Faculty of Zoology, Cambridge.

The latest study builds on a study by Garnett and his colleagues published last fall that adding additional vegetable options to the cafeteria could reduce meat consumption without lowering overall sales. Was shown.

Livestock and aquaculture behind meat, fish, dairy and eggs make up about 58% of the greenhouse gases produced by food in the world, contributing only 18% of the world’s caloric intake. Nevertheless, it occupies 83% of the farmland.

Recently, Cambridge researchers have recommended reducing meat to reduce the risk of future pandemics, and UK civil servants promise to reduce the amount of meat used in schools and hospitals by 20%. did.

The experiments were conducted at two universities (one with 600 students and the other with 900 students), and cafeteria customers were presented with vegetarian and meat options in different orders for lunch and dinner on weekdays. It was.

University members take trays, check the meals offered, and then ask service staff to cook their favorite options. After swiping a college card to buy food, researchers collected anonymous data about only the main diet choices (sandwiches and salads were not counted).

The catering manager helped prepare for the experiment, but the diner was unaware.

Researchers expected that orders alone would make a difference in vegetarian sales, but when placed in “Veggie First”, an additional meter-181 cm gap between food options-increased. It was only university.

To confirm the findings, researchers reduced the dining room gap to just 67 cm, and vegetarian sales fell sharply. In fact, such a small gap made vegetarian food even worse when first lined up (almost 30% less than on a “meat-first” day).

“The effect of the meter is thought to be in the extra effort needed to look for meat. When the first bite is the eye, many people find that the option of vegetable appetizing when meat is hard to find is entirely It looks happy,” Garnett.

“Every cafeteria and restaurant has a design that “pulls” people to something. That’s why it’s wise to use the design that allows you to choose the most healthy and sustainable food options without thinking about it,” she said.

“We know that information alone is not generally enough to change harmful habits. How to set society up so that unrelated default decisions are the best decisions for the climate? More research is needed.”

Garnet’s research has contributed to Cambridge University’s food policy. At Cambridge University, catering services work to reduce meat usage.

Last year, the university cafeteria (apart from the university) announced a 33% reduction in carbon emissions per kilogram of food purchased and a 28% reduction in land use per kilogram of food purchased.