PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 16, 2026Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling1 citationsOpen Access

Replacing meat and dairy with plant-based alternatives in the Netherlands: trade-offs in environmental impacts and critical nutrient intake

YZYinjie ZhuAPAfke C. L. PolitiekEVEmely de Vet

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Plant-based protein sources are promoted as more sustainable alternatives to animal-based protein sources. The Dutch policy aims for 50% of dietary protein to come from plants, yet comprehensive evidence on the environmental and nutritional impacts of this transition is limited. We examined these impacts in the Dutch diet. Dietary intake data from Dutch adults (18–65 years) in the 2019–2021 National Food Consumption Survey served as the reference diet, derived separately for men (n = 585) and women (n = 600). Four replacement scenarios—“no meat and dairy”, “no meat”, “half meat”, and “no red meat”—were modeled by partially or completely substituting meat and/or dairy with plant-based alternatives, using weight- and energy-based replacements. Environmental impacts (greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), land use, water footprint) and 13 macro- and micro-nutrients status were assessed. Replacement scenarios reduced GHG (11.3–39.3%) and land use (7.6–17.9%) but increased water footprint (3.6–60.2%). The 'half meat' scenario met the Dutch 50% plant-based protein target for both sexes while largely preserving nutrient intakes and adequacy, with only a slight increase in vitamin B6 inadequacy in women. All other scenarios had a more negative nutritional impact; for example, the “no meat” and “no red meat” scenarios increased the risk of vitamin B12 and B6 inadequacy and reduced total protein and saturated fat intake. Weight- and energy-based replacements yielded similar results. Replacing animal-based protein sources with plant-based alternatives reduces environmental impact, except for the water footprint. A 50% meat substitution while maintaining dairy intake generally preserves population-level nutrient adequacy.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Zhu et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1ed06f39a2fc2c0b539dddhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00394-026-03908-w
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Energy and nutrient density of foods in relation to their carbon footprint2014 · 172 citations
  2. 2Water footprint: methodologies and a case study for assessing the impacts of water use2011 · 197 citations
  3. 3Assessing the prevalence of nutrient inadequacy1999 · 327 citations
  4. 4Replacement of meat and dairy by plant-derived foods: estimated effects on land use, iron and SFA intakes in young Dutch adult females2013 · 87 citations
  5. 5SPADE, a New Statistical Program to Estimate Habitual Dietary Intake from Multiple Food Sources and Dietary Supplements2014 · 115 citations