A multicriteria analysis of meat and milk alternatives from nutritional, health, environmental, and cost perspectives

Summary

This multicriteria analysis evaluates 24 meat and milk alternatives across nutritional, health, environmental, and economic dimensions, with emphasis on high-income country contexts. The study finds that unprocessed plant-based foods (peas, soybeans, beans) deliver superior performance across all assessed criteria compared to animal products, whilst processed plant-based alternatives and traditional meat replacements such as tempeh provide meaningful environmental and health benefits despite higher costs and reduced climate advantages. The findings suggest substantial scope for dietary transitions that would simultaneously improve nutritional balance, reduce dietary disease risk, lower environmental resource use and pollution, and—when favouring unprocessed options—reduce diet costs.

UK applicability

The findings are directly applicable to UK policy and practice, particularly in support of dietary shift initiatives toward plant-based foods and reduction of meat/dairy intake. However, the emphasis on high-income countries means specific cost and accessibility barriers in the UK context may differ from the global analysis, requiring localised cost and market availability studies.

Key measures

Nutritional composition, dietary risk reduction, mortality reduction, climate impact, biodiversity/land-use change, freshwater use, and diet cost

Outcomes reported

The study assessed 24 meat and milk alternatives across nutritional, health, environmental, and cost dimensions, comparing their performance relative to conventional animal products. Unprocessed plant-based foods (peas, soybeans, beans) were identified as highest-performing across all domains, whilst processed alternatives offered intermediate benefits.

Topic tags