Researchers created a new tool to measure how healthy and environmentally friendly people’s diets are across five European and North African regions. They surveyed over 2,200 people about their eating habits and found big differences between countries. Copenhagen and Warsaw had the healthiest diets overall, while most regions ate too much meat. Interestingly, some areas known for healthy eating—like Italy’s Cilento region—actually ate fewer vegetables than expected. The study shows that where you live, your gender, income, and education all affect what you eat, and there’s room for improvement almost everywhere.

The Quick Take

  • What they studied: How well people in different European and North African regions follow a healthy and planet-friendly diet based on what foods they eat
  • Who participated: 2,210 adults from five regions: Cilento (Italy), Copenhagen (Denmark), North Hessia (Germany), Kenitra (Morocco), and Warsaw (Poland)
  • Key finding: Copenhagen and Warsaw residents had the best overall diet quality scores, while most regions ate too much meat and not enough vegetables. Diet quality varied based on where people lived, their gender, income, and education level.
  • What it means for you: Your location and personal circumstances significantly influence your eating habits. If you live in regions with lower diet quality scores, you may benefit from eating more vegetables and beans while reducing meat consumption. However, this study shows what people currently eat, not whether changing these habits would improve health.

The Research Details

Researchers created a new scoring system called the Sustainable Healthy Diet Index (SHDI) based on the Planetary Health Diet—a diet designed to be good for both human health and the environment. They surveyed 2,210 people across five different regions in Europe and North Africa, asking them detailed questions about what foods they ate and how often. The researchers then converted these reported eating habits into actual food amounts and compared them to recommended amounts for a healthy, sustainable diet.

The study looked at 24 different food groups, from vegetables and fruits to meat and grains. Each person received a score based on how closely their eating matched the recommended healthy and sustainable diet. Higher scores meant people were eating more like the recommended diet, while lower scores meant they were eating less healthy and sustainable foods.

The researchers also collected information about each person’s age, gender, income, education level, and where they lived to see if these factors affected their diet quality.

This approach is important because it allows researchers to compare eating habits across different countries and cultures using the same measurement tool. Previous studies often looked at individual countries separately, making it hard to see the big picture. By studying multiple regions at once, researchers can identify which areas are doing well with healthy eating and which need more support. The study also helps us understand how personal factors like income and education influence what people eat.

This study is a snapshot in time—it shows what people reported eating at one moment, not their long-term eating habits. The study relied on people’s memory of what they ate, which can be inaccurate. The researchers estimated health and environmental benefits based on food groups rather than directly measuring actual health outcomes. The study included different numbers of people from each region, which could affect comparisons. However, the study used validated food questionnaires and applied consistent measurement methods across all regions, which strengthens the reliability of the comparisons between areas.

What the Results Show

Copenhagen and Warsaw showed the highest diet quality scores, meaning people in these cities ate more in line with healthy and sustainable eating recommendations. This was particularly driven by higher consumption of beans and legumes—foods that are both nutritious and better for the environment than meat.

Most regions, however, consumed too much meat compared to recommendations. This was especially true in Kenitra, Morocco, where meat intake was notably high. At the same time, most areas didn’t eat enough vegetables, which was surprising in Cilento, Italy, a region famous for the Mediterranean diet that emphasizes vegetables.

The study found important differences based on personal characteristics. In Germany’s North Hessia region, men had significantly better diet quality than women. In Poland, women with higher income and education levels ate healthier diets than those with lower income and education. These patterns suggest that factors beyond just food availability influence what people choose to eat.

One unexpected finding was that Copenhagen had very high legume (beans and lentils) consumption, which is unusual for Northern Europe and suggests successful adoption of sustainable eating practices. The study also revealed that cultural food traditions don’t always match current eating habits—Cilento’s famous Mediterranean diet reputation didn’t translate to high vegetable consumption in the actual survey. These findings suggest that traditional dietary patterns may be changing or that people’s actual eating differs from cultural stereotypes.

This study builds on previous research about healthy and sustainable eating by creating a single measurement tool that works across multiple countries. Earlier studies typically examined individual countries or focused only on health or only on environmental impact, not both together. This research fills a gap by showing how different regions compare when using the same standards. The findings align with previous research showing that meat consumption is generally too high in developed countries, but the regional variations provide new insights into where progress is being made and where more work is needed.

The study has several important limitations. It’s a snapshot—it shows what people ate during the survey period, not their typical long-term eating habits. People reported what they ate from memory, which is often inaccurate. The study estimated environmental and health benefits based on food groups rather than actually measuring whether eating this way improved people’s health or reduced environmental impact. Different regions had different numbers of participants, which could affect how well the results represent each area. The study also didn’t account for food waste or how food was prepared, which can affect both health and environmental impact.

The Bottom Line

Based on this research, most people in Europe and North Africa could benefit from eating more vegetables, fruits, and beans while eating less meat. Copenhagen and Warsaw residents appear to be doing this successfully, suggesting it’s achievable in these regions. However, this study shows current eating patterns, not proven health benefits from changing them. Before making major dietary changes, especially if you have health conditions, consult with a healthcare provider or registered dietitian. The evidence suggests these changes align with both health and environmental goals, but individual results may vary.

This research is relevant to anyone living in Europe or North Africa who wants to eat healthier and more sustainably. It’s particularly useful for policymakers and nutrition educators trying to improve public health. People with higher income and education may find it easier to implement these changes based on the study’s findings. However, the study also highlights that socioeconomic factors affect food choices, so recommendations need to account for real-world barriers like food cost and availability. This research is less directly applicable to people outside these regions, though the general principles about reducing meat and increasing vegetables apply more broadly.

Changes in eating habits typically take several weeks to months to become routine. You might notice improved digestion and energy levels within 2-4 weeks of eating more vegetables and less meat. More significant health benefits like weight changes or improved blood work usually take 8-12 weeks or longer to appear. Environmental benefits from reduced meat consumption are cumulative—the longer you maintain these changes, the greater the positive impact.

Want to Apply This Research?

  • Track daily servings of vegetables, legumes (beans, lentils, peas), and meat consumption. Set a goal to eat at least 5 servings of vegetables daily and 2-3 servings of legumes weekly while reducing meat to 2-3 times per week. Log these in your app to see your progress toward a more sustainable diet.
  • Start by identifying one meal per week to make vegetarian or legume-based instead of meat-based. For example, try a bean chili instead of beef chili, or a lentil soup instead of chicken soup. Once this becomes routine, gradually increase to two meals per week. Use the app to plan these meals and track when you complete them.
  • Weekly review your vegetable and legume intake compared to your goals. Create a visual chart in the app showing your progress over 8-12 weeks. Note any changes in how you feel, energy levels, or digestion. Compare your personal diet quality score to the regional averages from this study to see where you stand and identify areas for improvement.

This study describes current eating patterns across regions and suggests associations between diet composition and sustainability/health principles. It does not prove that changing your diet will improve your health or reduce disease risk. Individual health needs vary based on age, medical conditions, medications, and other factors. Before making significant dietary changes, especially if you have diabetes, heart disease, or other health conditions, consult with your healthcare provider or a registered dietitian. This research is observational and shows what people eat, not the direct health outcomes of eating this way. Results may not apply to all individuals or populations outside the studied regions.