Scientists looked at research studies from 2015 to 2024 about how we can change our food systems to be better for both human health and the environment. They reviewed 20 different studies that looked at things like sustainable diets, urban farming, and food education programs. The researchers found that most studies focus on just one or two benefits (like environmental or social impact) rather than looking at all the ways food systems affect us. They concluded that we need more research that looks at the whole picture—how food choices impact our health, our communities, and our planet all at the same time.

The Quick Take

  • What they studied: How different food system changes (like eating sustainable diets, growing food in cities, and teaching people about nutrition) affect both human health and environmental sustainability
  • Who participated: This was a review of 20 previously published research studies conducted between 2015 and 2024. The studies themselves involved thousands of people, but this analysis looked at what those studies found overall
  • Key finding: Most research on food system changes focuses on only one or two benefits (like helping the environment OR helping communities) rather than looking at all three important areas: environmental health, social fairness, and economic benefits
  • What it means for you: Food system changes can help both people and the planet, but we need better research that shows how all these benefits work together. This suggests that the most effective food changes will likely need to address multiple goals at once

The Research Details

This was an umbrella review, which means researchers looked at summaries of other research studies rather than conducting their own experiments. They searched five major scientific databases for studies published between 2015 and 2024 that examined food system initiatives—things like changing what people eat, growing food locally, improving how food is produced and distributed, and teaching people about nutrition. They started with 2,770 research records and carefully selected 20 studies that met their criteria. These 20 studies had to describe food system changes that had benefits for both human health and at least one type of sustainability outcome (environmental, social, or economic).

The researchers organized the studies by topic area. They found studies about sustainable diets (eating in ways that are better for the environment), food security (making sure everyone has enough food), urban agriculture (growing food in cities), food supply chains (how food gets from farms to stores), nutrition education, and global health challenges. They then analyzed which studies looked at environmental impacts, social impacts (like fairness and community health), and economic impacts (like costs and jobs).

This approach allowed the researchers to see patterns across many different studies and identify gaps in the research. Rather than testing a new idea themselves, they were able to see what the scientific community has already learned about how food system changes affect both people and the planet.

An umbrella review is valuable because it helps scientists and policymakers understand the big picture. Instead of looking at one study about sustainable diets or one study about urban farming, this approach shows how all these different approaches work together. This type of analysis is especially important for complex topics like food systems, where changes in one area (like what we eat) affect many other areas (like the environment, the economy, and community health). By looking at all the research together, scientists can identify which approaches work best and where more research is needed.

This study is a systematic review, which is considered a high-quality type of research because it follows strict rules for finding and analyzing studies. The researchers searched multiple databases to make sure they found relevant studies, and they clearly described their methods so others could check their work. However, the quality of the conclusions depends on the quality of the 20 studies they reviewed. The fact that they found no clear patterns between different food system changes and their outcomes suggests that the existing research may not be comprehensive enough yet. The researchers themselves noted that most studies don’t look at all three types of sustainability together, which limits what we can conclude about how food system changes affect everything at once.

What the Results Show

The research found that scientists are studying many different ways to improve food systems. The most common topic was sustainable diets—ways of eating that are better for the environment (7 studies). Other popular research areas included food security programs (3 studies), growing food in cities and local areas (4 studies), improving how food is produced and delivered (3 studies), teaching people about nutrition (2 studies), and addressing major global health challenges (1 study).

A striking finding was that very few studies looked at all three types of sustainability together. Only 3 out of 20 studies (15%) examined environmental, social, and economic impacts all at the same time. This means most research focuses on just one or two areas. For example, some studies only looked at whether a food program helped the environment, while others only looked at whether it helped communities or reduced costs.

When researchers looked at which outcomes were studied together, they found that economic impacts were rarely examined. Economic sustainability (like job creation or cost savings) was only studied alongside social impacts (4 studies) or environmental impacts (3 studies), but never with both. Social and environmental outcomes were more commonly studied together (4 studies), but many studies still looked at just one of these areas in isolation.

The researchers found no clear pattern showing that certain types of food system changes always led to certain types of benefits. This suggests that the relationship between what we change about food systems and what benefits result is more complicated than previously thought.

The review revealed that urban agriculture (growing food in cities) is an emerging research area with 4 studies, suggesting growing interest in local food production. Food supply chain improvements (how food moves from production to consumers) were studied in 3 research papers, indicating awareness that changes throughout the entire system matter. The research also showed that education and awareness programs are being studied, though less frequently than dietary changes. One study examined the connection between food systems and major global health challenges, suggesting that researchers are beginning to see food as part of larger health and sustainability issues.

This review builds on previous research by taking a broader look at food system changes. Earlier research often focused on single issues—either environmental sustainability or health benefits or economic impacts. This umbrella review shows that the field is evolving to recognize that food systems are complex and interconnected. However, the finding that most studies still don’t look at all three sustainability dimensions together suggests that the field hasn’t yet fully embraced this systems-thinking approach. The review indicates that current research is still catching up to the reality that real-world food system changes affect multiple areas simultaneously.

This study has several important limitations. First, it only looked at research published between 2015 and 2024, so it may have missed older studies that could provide important context. Second, the researchers only included studies that specifically examined both health and sustainability outcomes together, which means they excluded many studies that looked at just one of these areas. This could make it seem like there’s less research on certain topics than there actually is. Third, the 20 studies included in the review varied greatly in quality and methods, making it difficult to draw strong conclusions. Fourth, the researchers found no clear patterns, which could mean either that food system changes work differently in different situations, or that the current research isn’t detailed enough to show the patterns. Finally, this review doesn’t tell us which food system changes are most effective—it only tells us what research has been done so far.

The Bottom Line

Based on this research, we can say with moderate confidence that changing food systems in multiple ways (sustainable diets, local food production, better supply chains, and education) appears to have benefits for both people and the planet. However, the evidence is still developing. The strongest recommendation is that future food system changes should be designed to benefit multiple areas at once—environmental health, community wellbeing, and economic fairness—rather than focusing on just one goal. This requires more research and better planning, but the current evidence suggests this approach is worth pursuing.

This research matters for policymakers and organizations working on food, health, and environmental issues. It’s relevant for people interested in sustainable eating, local food systems, and global health. Farmers, food companies, schools, and community organizations should care about this because it suggests that their food system changes can have multiple positive effects. However, this research is not a personal health recommendation for individuals—it’s more about how we should design food systems overall. People with specific health conditions should still consult their doctors about diet choices.

Changes to food systems typically take time to show results. Environmental benefits might appear within 1-2 years (like reduced waste or lower carbon emissions), while health benefits in communities might take 2-5 years to become visible. Economic benefits could vary widely depending on the specific change. Individual health benefits from changing your own diet could appear within weeks to months, but systemic changes across entire food systems would take years or even decades to fully develop.

Want to Apply This Research?

  • Track your food choices weekly by logging: (1) how many meals included sustainable or locally-sourced ingredients, (2) how many plant-based meals you ate, and (3) how much food you wasted. This gives you concrete numbers to see your progress toward more sustainable eating
  • Start with one sustainable food change per week: Week 1 - buy one locally-grown vegetable; Week 2 - try one plant-based meal; Week 3 - reduce food waste by meal planning. This gradual approach makes change manageable and helps you see which changes work best for your life
  • Create a monthly sustainability score by combining your tracking data: count sustainable meals, plant-based meals, and waste reduction efforts. Review this monthly to see trends and celebrate progress. Share your goals with friends or family to build community support for food system changes

This research is a review of existing studies and does not provide personal medical or dietary advice. The findings suggest general directions for food system improvements but don’t apply equally to all people or situations. Individual dietary choices should be made in consultation with healthcare providers, especially for people with specific health conditions, allergies, or nutritional needs. This review identifies gaps in current research, meaning more evidence is needed before making major policy or personal decisions based solely on these findings. Food system changes work differently in different communities and countries, so what works in one place may not work the same way elsewhere.