Environmental changes threaten agricultural production, food security, and health. Previous reviews suggest that environmental changes will substantially affect future yields of starchy dietary staples. To date, no comprehensive global analysis of the impacts of environmental change on (nonstaple) vegetables and legumes—important constituents of healthy diets—has been reported. We systematically searched for articles published between 1975 and 2016 on the effects of ambient temperature, tropospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂), and ozone (O₃) concentrations, water availability, and salinization on yields and nutritional quality of vegetables and legumes. We estimated mean effects of standardized environmental changes using observed exposure-response relationships and conducted meta-analyses where possible. We identified 174 relevant papers reporting 1,540 experiments. The mean (95% CI) reported yield changes for all vegetables and legumes combined were +22.0% (+11.6% to +32.5%) for a 250-ppm increase in CO₂ concentration, −8.9% (−15.6% to −2.2%) for a 25% increase in O₃ concentration,−34.7% (−44.6% to −24.9%) for a 50% reduction in water availability, and −2.3% (−3.7% to −0.9%) for a 25% increase in salinity. In papers with baseline temperatures >20 °C, a 4 °C increase in temperature reduced mean yields by −31.5% (−41.4% to −21.5%). Impacts of environmental changes on nutritional quality were mixed. In a business-as-usual scenario, predicted changes in environmental exposures would lead to reductions in yields of nonstaple vegetables and legumes. Where adaptation possibilities are limited, this may substantially change their global availability, affordability, and consumption in the mid to long term. Our results stress the importance of prioritizing agricultural developments, to minimize potential reductions in vegetable and legume yields and associated negative health effects. Significance Environmental changes, including climate change, air pollution, and water scarcity and salinization, threaten global agricultural production, food security, and health. There is evidence that environmental change will reduce the yields of starchy staple crops, but impacts on (nonstaple) vegetables and legumes—important constituents of healthy diets—remain largely unknown. We systematically reviewed the available published evidence from experimental studies on the impact of environmental changes on yields and nutritional quality of (nonstaple) vegetables and legumes and found that environmental change would have a negative impact on yields without suitable responses from the agricultural sector. An enhanced understanding of the scale of environmental impacts on agricultural production is essential for the development of effective strategies to protect global population health.

A global transformation towards sustainable food systems is crucial for delivering on climate change mitigation targets worldwide. In high- and middle-income settings, plant-based meat and dairy alternatives present potential substitutes for animal sourced foods, and a pathway to transition to more sustainable diets.

Agricultural water requirements differ between foods. Population-level dietary preferences are therefore a major determinant of agricultural water use. The “water footprint” (WF) represents the volume of water consumed in the production of food items, separated by water source; blue WF represents ground and surface water use, and green WF represents rain water use. We systematically searched for published studies using the WF to assess the water use of diets. We used the available evidence to quantify the WF of diets in different countries, and grouped diets in patterns according to study definition. “Average” patterns equated to those currently consumed, whereas “healthy” patterns included those recommended in national dietary guidelines. We searched 7 online databases and identified 41 eligible studies that reported the dietary green WF, blue WF, or total WF (green plus blue) (1964 estimates for 176 countries). The available evidence suggests that, on average, European (170 estimates) and Oceanian (18 estimates) dietary patterns have the highest green WFs (median per capita: 2999 L/d and 2924 L/d, respectively), whereas Asian dietary patterns (98 estimates) have the highest blue WFs (median: 382 L/d per capita). Foods of animal origin are major contributors to the green WFs of diets, whereas cereals, fruits, nuts, and oils are major contributors to the blue WF of diets. “Healthy” dietary patterns (425 estimates) had green WFs that were 5.9% (95% CI: −7.7, −4.0) lower than those of “average” dietary patterns, but they did not differ in their blue WFs. Our review suggests that changes toward healthier diets could reduce total water use of agriculture, but would not affect blue water use. Rapid dietary change and increasing water security concerns underscore the need for a better understanding of the amount and type of water used in food production to make informed policy decisions.

Objectives: To assess the health impacts and environmental consequences of adherence to national dietary recommendations (the Eatwell Guide (EWG)) in the UK. Design and setting: A secondary analysis of multiple observational studies in the UK. Participants: Adults from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer - Oxford(EPIC-Oxford), UK Biobank and Million Women Study, and adults and children aged 5 and over from the National Diet and Nutrition Survey (NDNS). Primary and secondary outcome measures risk of total mortality from Cox proportional hazards regression models, total greenhouse gas emissions (GHGe) and blue water footprint (WF) associated with ‘very low’ (0–2 recommendations), ‘low’ (3–4 recommendations) or ‘intermediate-to-high’ (5–9 recommendations) adherence to EWG recommendations. Results: Less than 0.1% of the NDNS sample adhere to all nine EWG recommendations and 30.6% adhere to at least five recommendations. Compared with ‘very low’ adherence to EWG recommendations, ‘intermediate-to-high adherence’ was associated with a reduced risk of mortality (risk ratio (RR): 0.93; 99% CI: 0.90 to 0.97) and −1.6 kg CO ₂ eq/day (95% CI: −1.5 to −1.8), or 30% lower dietary GHGe. Dietary WFs were similar across EWG adherence groups. Of the individual Eatwell guidelines, adherence to the recommendation on fruit and vegetable consumption was associated with the largest reduction in total mortality risk: an RR of 0.90 (99% CI: 0.88 to 0.93). Increased adherence to the recommendation on red and processed meat consumption was associated with the largest decrease in environmental footprints (−1.48 kg CO ₂ eq/day, 95% CI: −1.79 to 1.18 for GHGe and −22.5 L/day, 95% CI: −22.7 to 22.3 for blue WF). Conclusions: The health and environmental benefits of greater adherence to EWG recommendations support increased government efforts to encourage improved diets in the UK that are essential for the health of people and the planet in the Anthropocene.

The adoption of healthy diets with low environmental impact has been widely promoted as an important climate change mitigation strategy. Typically, these diets are high in plant-sourced and low in animal-sourced and processed foods. Despite the fact that their environmental impacts vary, they are often referred to as ‘sustainable diets’. Here we systematically review the available published evidence on the effect of ‘sustainable diets’ on environmental footprints and human health. Eight databases (OvidSP-Medline, OvidSP-Embase, EBSCO-GreenFILE, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, OvidSP-CAB-Abstracts, OvidSP-AGRIS, and OvidSP-Global Health) were searched to identify literature (published 1999–2019) reporting health effects and environmental footprints of ‘sustainable diets’. Available evidence was mapped and pooled analysis was conducted by unique combinations of diet pattern, health and environmental outcome. Eighteen studies (412 measurements) met our inclusion criteria, distinguishing twelve non-mutually exclusive sustainable diet patterns, six environmental outcomes, and seven health outcomes. In 87% of measurements (n = 151) positive health outcomes were reported from ‘sustainable diets’ (average relative health improvement: 4.09% [95% CI −0.10–8.29]) when comparing ‘sustainable diets’ to current/baseline consumption patterns. Greenhouse gas emissions associated with ‘sustainable diets’ were on average 25.8%[95%CI −27.0 to −14.6] lower than current/baseline consumption patterns, with vegan diets reporting the largest reduction in GHG-emissions (−70.3% [95% CI: −90.2 to −50.4]), however, water use was frequently reported to be higher than current/baseline diets. Multiple benefits for both health and the environment were reported in the majority (n = 315[76%]) of measurements. We identified consistent evidence of both positive health effects and reduced environmental footprints accruing from ‘sustainable diets’. The notable exception of increased water use associated with ‘sustainable diets’ identifies that co-benefits are not universal and some trade-offs are likely. When carefully designed, evidence-based, and adapted to contextual factors, dietary change could play a pivotal role in climate change mitigation, sustainable food systems, and future population health.

Climate change adaptation responses are being developed and delivered in many parts of the world in the absence of detailed knowledge of their effects on public health. Here we present the results of a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature reporting the effects on health of climate change adaptation responses in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The review used the ‘Global Adaptation Mapping Initiative’ database (comprising 1682 publications related to climate change adaptation responses) that was constructed through systematic literature searches in Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar (2013–2020). For this study, further screening was performed to identify studies from LMICs reporting the effects on human health of climate change adaptation responses. Studies were categorised by study design and data were extracted on geographic region, population under investigation, type of adaptation response and reported health effects. The review identified 99 studies (1117 reported outcomes), reporting evidence from 66 LMICs. Only two studies were ex ante formal evaluations of climate change adaptation responses. Papers reported adaptation responses related to flooding, rainfall, drought and extreme heat, predominantly through behaviour change, and infrastructural and technological improvements. Reported (direct and intermediate) health outcomes included reduction in infectious disease incidence, improved access to water/sanitation and improved food security. All-cause mortality was rarely reported, and no papers were identified reporting on maternal and child health. Reported maladaptations were predominantly related to widening of inequalities and unforeseen co-harms. Reporting and publication-bias seems likely with only 3.5% of all 1117 health outcomes reported to be negative. Our review identified some evidence that climate change adaptation responses may have benefits for human health but the overall paucity of evidence is concerning and represents a major missed opportunity for learning. There is an urgent need for greater focus on the funding, design, evaluation and standardised reporting of the effects on health of climate change adaptation responses to enable evidence-based policy action.