4.7 Review

Can nudging improve the environmental impact of food supply chain? A systematic review

Journal

TRENDS IN FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Volume 91, Issue -, Pages 184-192

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE LONDON
DOI: 10.1016/j.tifs.2019.07.004

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: According to the prediction of the Food and Agriculture Organization, food supply must increase by almost 70 percent by 2050, with tremendous consequences in terms of land depletion, natural resource use, and greenhouse gas emissions. The current agri-food system is incapable to cope with this raising demand meanwhile preserving the environment. There is urgent need to reorient the food system onto a more sustainable trajectory: producers should pursue more conscious and environmentally friendly practices and consumers should account for sustainability issues while making their daily food consumption decisions. Scope and approach: The goal of this systematic review is to gather existing evidence on green nudging interventions geared at leveraging more environmentally sustainable behaviours among the agents of the food chain, from the producers to the final consumers. An extensive literature search was conducted on Web of Science, Scopus, EconLit, and CAB Abstracts, restricting the selection to the last ten years, and using nudg* or choice architecture as primary research strings. Finally, 25 studies were included in the review. Key finding and conclusions: Almost all studies on farmers as well as on consumers included in this review provide evidence that green nudging can be effective in leveraging more sustainable practices. Overall, we propose that green nudges should not be meant to replace stricter environmental and food policies, but rather they should be regarded as potential complements to be implemented with the aim of gradually moving society in a direction that might benefit all.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available