Dr. Yinglei WU

Postdoctoral researcher

The University of Tokyo

The global food system resulted in considerable environmental impacts, accounting for approximately 34% of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Facilitating a dietary transition toward more sustainable consumption patterns is essential to mitigating these impacts. The environmentally sustainable diet encompasses various choices at different life cycle stages, including organic food, alternative protein sources, vegetarianism, no-packaged food, local food, and food waste reduction. My research adopts an interdisciplinary approach to explore how consumers can be nudged toward sustainable dietary transitions. This involves three key dimensions: environmental impact estimation, behavioral analysis, and intervention design. To quantify the environmental benefits of dietary changes, I conducted life cycle assessments and scenario analyses to estimate GHG emissions and water consumption associated with dish-based dietary choices. However, even if consumers know the environmental benefits of dietary alternatives, there are still many factors that hinder their behavior changes. Therefore, I designed questionnaire and conducted large-scale surveys to investigate consumer acceptance, motivations, and barriers related to environmentally sustainable dietary transitions. To translate insights into practice, I developed an educational framework combining card games and short lectures aimed at enhancing life cycle thinking regarding food consumption. Educational trials were conducted with university students to evaluate the effectiveness of this approach. The findings revealed that the environmental burden of high-impact beef dishes can be significantly reduced by decreasing portion sizes, choosing organic beef, or substituting beef with other meats. Traditional eating habits strongly influenced acceptance of meat and beef reduction alternatives. Correspondence analysis showed that “healthy,” “environmentally friendly,” and “safe” were the prominent drives for choosing organic food, while “expensive” was the most significant barrier. Comparative analysis of the questionnaire results demonstrated the effectiveness of the educational materials, showing a significant improvement in participants' environmental literacy related to food consumption