Carbon Footprinting Dietary Choices in Ontario: A life cycle approach to assessing sustainable, healthy & socially acceptable diets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent studies have established the link between food consumption and its broad impact on the environment. However, environmental implications of dietary choices have not been previously studied in Canada. Given geographic variations of eating habits and environmental impacts, this study aims to explore current dietary patterns and their environmental implications in Ontario. \nThis exploratory study assesses the environmental impact of seven dietary patterns and investigates the role of nutrition and dietary guidelines in evaluating sustainability of diets. Food baskets representing each dietary pattern were formed based on data obtained from dietary recall survey. Using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), greenhouse gas emissions were estimated for farm operations, processing, distribution and household processes associated with current food consumption. Canada’s dietary guidelines were used to assess the nutritional quality of current diets and propose nutritionally optimal dietary changes. \nResults showed that Ontario population overconsumes protein. Popular dietary patterns including foods rich in animal protein exhibit the highest impact. \nThis interdisciplinary approach helps combine nutritional and environmental research which can facilitate the formulation of environmentally friendly, healthy and socially acceptable diets. The study outlines key limitations in diet-related LCA, provides recommendations for improvement and serves as a primer for further diet-related research in Canada.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".