Food, health, the environment and consumers' dietary choices.

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to examine some of the issues that surround food and the environment, particularly conventional and organic agriculture and food distribution, and to look at some of the health implications. It is argued that the links between food, health and the environment are strong. Consumers have the power to have an impact positively or negatively on the environment via their dietary choices. By providing information and advice about the environmental as well as the health impact of food choices, health and nutrition professionals could increase consumers' awareness of such issues.

Key words: environment, agriculture, food habits, nutrition, health food

(Nutr Diet 2005;62:21-25)

**********

Introduction

Environmental problems affect the health, livelihood and lifestyles of current and future generations of humans. Documented environmental problems worldwide include salinity, deforestation, pollution, global warming, loss of habitat and biological diversity, depletion of natural resources, and decreased air, water and soil quality. Although the general population is generally aware of such issues, the links between the production, distribution and consumption of food and the environment appear to be less well known. Yet consumers have the power through their dietary choices to moderate this impact on the environment. The aim of this paper is to examine some of the issues that surround food and the environment, particularly conventional and organic agriculture and food distribution, and to look at some of the health implications. Issues such as the genetic modification of food and globalisation are also relevant to this discussion, but have been omitted here for reasons of brevity. A review of the literature was undertaken in order to collect a range of papers with varying perspectives on these issues, as well as review papers. By providing information and advice about the environmental, as well as the health impact of food choices, health and nutrition professionals could increase consumers' awareness of such issues.

Conventional farming and food distribution

Conventional farming

The main farming system in use by western countries today developed after the second world war and relies on capital, chemical and mechanised inputs rather than labour to achieve its goal of high yields (conventional farming). Farms tend to grow single-crop monocultures and are large--and increasing--in size (1,2). Synthetic fertilisers, pesticides and herbicides are used to promote growth and control pests and weeds. There is debate about the effectiveness of conventional farming, with one side arguing that it is the only way to provide enough food to feed the expanding world population (3), and the other that it is environmentally unsustainable (4). However, it is generally recognised by proponents of high yield conventional agriculture that attempts to ensure minimal soil erosion, water usage and synthetic pesticide use should be encouraged (5,6). This could involve the utilisation of techniques such as conservation tillage, micro-irrigation of crops and integrated pest management.

Some of the environmental issues associated with conventional farming are water use, chemical use, soil erosion, salinity, desertification, deforestation, and production of greenhouse gases (such as methane from ruminants). It has been stated that conventional agricultural methods have ravaged the Australian environment (7), causing soil erosion, salinity, nutrient loss, and a decrease in biodiversity (8). About two million hectares of agricultural land on about 20 000 farms in Australia are reportedly affected by salinity, with many more hectares at risk (9). Rural environmental degradation costs over AU$2 billion annually in Australia (10).

Some of these environmental issues are also relevant to other forms of farming, such as 'slash and burn' agriculture in the Amazon rainforest and other kinds of subsistence agriculture in Asia, Africa and Latin America that involve activities such as the cultivation of marginal lands, deforestation and excessive grazing (6). Agriculture worldwide is responsible for 20% of annual carbon dioxide anthropogenic emissions and about 50%-75% of anthropogenic emissions of methane and nitrous oxide (6). Agriculture consumes more water than any other human activity, accounting for around 85% of world fresh water consumption (11,12). Water use in Australian agriculture accounts for 67% of total Australian water consumption (13). World water use efficiency is poor, with more than 50% of water used for agriculture typically being wasted (14).

Food distribution

The distribution of food impacts on the environment. Over the past decades, the food supply chain has lengthened, increasing 'food miles', or the distance food travels to the consumer. Vast amounts of energy are used to transport food. For example, in the UK in 1993, 685 000 giga joules of energy (equal to 14 million litres of fuel) were expended to transport 417 207 tonnes of apples into the country, despite such apples being able to be grown in the UK (1). A London study found that purchasing imported apples from a supermarket resulted in carbon dioxide emissions over seven times higher than purchasing locally grown apples (15). Reasons for increased food miles include a decreased emphasis on food self-sufficiency within countries, the ability to purchase cheaper foods from overseas and a desire for year-round availability of fresh produce. Data on food miles are not currently available for Australia. However, it should be noted that given the large size of Australia, it is important to consider the distance travelled by both domestically produced and imported food.

Alternatives to conventional farming and food distribution

Organic farming 

Practices such as organic farming and growing food in community gardens represent alternatives to conventional food production practices. According to the National Standard for Organic and Biodynamic Produce (http://www.ofa.org.au), 'Organic means produced by specific management practices which take care of the environment and soil. Synthetic chemicals (including pesticides and fertilizers) are not permitted'. There are potential environmental benefits associated with organic agriculture, such as improved soil biology and the lack of leaching of pesticides (5,16). However, good management is required in order to ensure some potential problems such as nitrogen leaching are avoided (5,16).

One argument made by opponents of organics is that organic farming practices cannot produce sufficient quantities of food (i.e. yields are low). However, advocates of organics argue that crop yields are sufficient, although 10%-20% lower on average than non-organic (17,18). Furthermore, advocates argue that it is vital to consider the high-energy inputs of conventional farming when estimating food outputs. For example, a study of apple production systems found that although the organic system resulted in similar yields to the conventional system, the output/input ratio for the organic system was 7% greater than that for the conventional system (19). In other words, the organic system was more energy efficient. Inputs that were higher for the conventional than the organic system included fuel, fertiliser, insecticide, and weed control. Labour and fungicide inputs were lower for conventional, while machinery, electricity and infrastructure inputs were similar for organic and conventional systems (19).

Over 22 million hectares of land worldwide are managed organically (20). Almost half of this land (10.5 million hectares) is located in Australia, although most of this is grazing land. This figure represents 2.3% of Australian agricultural area. Countries in Europe have the highest proportion of agricultural area under organic management in the world (e.g. Austria with 11.3%) (20).

Sales of organic foods have risen dramatically over recent years. In 2001, global sales of organic food and drink reached around US$19 billion, a US$3 billion increase from the previous year (20). Retail sales of organic products in Australia have expanded from around AU$28 million in 1990 to around AU$250 million in 2003 (21). Accompanying this growth has been the entry of large-scale producers, processors and retailers into the organic industry. For example, supermarket chains in the UK, such as Tesco, are heavily involved with organics. Almost 80% of organic products are sold via these chains (20). Australian supermarket chains have also become involved with organics (21). For example, Coles has over 150 organic lines, which has increased from 12 two years ago (22). This increases the availability of organics to a larger portion of consumers, but it has been argued that such producers, processors and retailers may not have the same environmental concerns as small-scale organic producers. For example, they may be more concerned with getting a foothold into the growing organic market and receiving higher price premiums for their products--that is, with profit. Large-scale producers, processors and retailers may also be interested in boosting their green credentials to improve their public image (23). Thus, 'organic' may not necessarily denote good environmental practices in areas such as transport, packaging, and growing techniques outside of the use of organically allowed inputs. For example, they may not use crop rotations or vegetation design (18). In particular, the desire to have fresh produce items year-round may lead to increased organic food miles when retailers import these foods to satisfy demand.

Community supported agriculture and farmers' markets 

Various alternatives to the mainstream distribution of food exist, and are increasing in developed countries (24,25). These include community gardens, food cooperatives, farmers' markets and community supported agriculture. Community supported agriculture and farmers' markets will be focused on here. Community supported agriculture involves a local farmer selling produce direct to consumers. Members pay in advance for a season's worth of fresh vegetables and fruit. Thus, farmers are guaranteed a reliable market and income. Members receive freshly picked, seasonal, high quality, often organic food weekly. The money contributed by members is not only for the food but also supports the whole farm. In this way, community supported agriculture strongly links the farmer and the consumer (4).

Community supported agriculture is strong in Japan, the UK, the USA and Canada. For example, in the USA and Canada there are 1000 community supported agriculture farms (4). In Australia there are only a handful of such farms (26), for reasons that are currently unknown. Mimsbrook Farm, near Perth, is one Australian farm which is modelled on community supported agriculture (http://www.biodynamic-food.com/community_agriculture.html). Members pay a weekly subscription of between AU$35 and AU$65 for a set period of time. In return they receive a box of biodynamic (i.e. type of organic) vegetables and herbs each week which they collect from the farm.

Farmers' markets are where farmers directly market their produce to consumers. The number of farmers' markets has been growing in Australia, the USA and UK. The first modern-day farmers' market in Australia began in 1999 (24) and there are now around 74 (Australian Farmers' Markets Association web site http://www.farmersmarkets.org.au). There are over 3100 such markets in the USA (27). One non-environmental benefit of farmers' markets is the possibility of interaction between farmer and consumer. For the consumer, this includes increased knowledge of how the food was produced and how it should be prepared, and enhanced status and identity as a result of purchasing a product with a restricted distribution (28). For the farmer, this includes economic benefits from the lack of a 'middle man' and increased regard due to their specialised knowledge (28).

There are a range of environmental benefits that may be obtained from community supported agriculture and farmers' markets. These are in addition to the health benefits of eating fresh produce, which retains more nutrients (29,30). Eating food that has been produced locally is likely to have strong environmental benefits (low food miles). Minimal energy is expended in transport. Community supported agriculture and farmers' markets increase knowledge of food production and provide opportunities for environmental education (31,32). In addition, an emphasis on small-scale farms nurtures the rural community, both socially and economically, and provides environmental benefits. Small farms are more likely to be mixed enterprises rather than monocultures and less likely to depend on a few varieties of the same food crop. Farmers involved with community supported agriculture are encouraged by customer demand to grow a wide variety of organic plant foods rather than monocultures. They are also more likely to use a variety of different seed types for particular crops, rather than the few varieties used in most agriculture today (a narrow range of genetic variability drastically increases the risk of plant disease and pest infestation). In addition, a move away from large-scale monoculture farming often involves a decreased use of synthetic pesticides and fertilisers.

Consumers' dietary choices

The dietary choices consumers make may affect the environment. Carlsson-Kanyama (33) estimates that current food consumption practices in the developed world are at least four times the level necessary for sustainability. Consumers may 'vote with their forks', for example, by buying organic produce from small-scale local producers (34). Not eating to excess is an additional way to minimise environmental harm, as less food will need to be produced and processed (35).

It is also sometimes argued that eating foods low on the food chain increases environmental sustainability. Plant-based foods such as grains and vegetables are low on the food chain, whereas foods such as eggs and meat are higher up the food chain. One argument for predominantly eating foods low on the food chain is that they require less energy and resources such as water in their production (14,36). The environmental problems related to meat are exacerbated by modern intensive livestock farming methods and the vast and increasing numbers of domestic animals in the modern world (37). The argument may not be as simple as merely eating less meat, however (33,38). Carlsson-Kanyama's (33) analysis shows that vegetarian meals do not necessarily have lower green-house gas emissions than meals that contain meat. For example, meals composed of exotic vegetarian foods may result in higher emissions than those composed of locally produced meat and vegetables (33). Greenhouse gas emissions result from activities such as the use of fossil fuel in agriculture and transportation, fertiliser production, the digestive processes of livestock, and the use of refrigerants in cold storage facilities (33).

Food, health and the environment

Some elements of health, food and the environment have already been touched on previously in this paper. For example, eating freshly picked foods may provide health benefits as they retain more nutrients than less fresh foods (29,30). Activities associated with obtaining foods locally, such as talking with farmers at a farmers' market or helping out on farms, leads to improved knowledge of food production and increased respect for the food (28). In turn, this leads to an increased consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables. Indeed, surveys of community supported agriculture members in the USA have found that the majority had made dietary changes (32,39). For example, in a survey of members in the mid-Atlantic region of the USA, over half had increased the amount of produce they consumed and around three-quarters ate a greater variety of produce as a result of their membership (39).

There are also health benefits associated with eating minimally processed foods which are low on the food chain, such as wholegrain bread and fresh fruits and vegetables. For example, diet-related disease risk, such as cardiovascular disease and cancer, is reduced (40,41). Eating such foods also results in environmental benefits, such as less energy used in processing. Eating to satisfy nutritional requirements, rather than to excess, results in health gains through decreased obesity, which is high in Australia and many other countries (42). Eating less food also results in environmental gains, as less energy and resources are required to produce and process foods. Yet the food industry spends millions of dollars every year promoting their products, in comparison to which the budget for nutrition education is miniscule (43). For example, Eat Well Australia (a national strategic framework to help improve Australians' diets) received less than AU$400 000 from government sources for the 2002-2004 period (National Public Health Partnership Secretariat, personal communication).

Two of the important issues relating to organic food and health are food safety and nutritional concerns. We need to look at evidence about pesticide levels in organic and conventional foods and whether there are health risks in organic foods from possible contamination from animal manures. We also need to consider the levels of nutrients, including phytonutrients, in organic produce. Unfortunately, there are few well-controlled studies to shed light on these issues, although nitrate content may be lower and vitamin C content may be higher in organic foods (44-47). It seems that there are no peer-review papers to provide evidence that organic food may present a health hazard with regard to contamination with animal manures. Animal manures are composted prior to application to crops in order to prevent food safety risks (48). Pesticide residues are likely to be lower on organic foods than conventionally grown foods (44,45). Indeed, one recent study has found organophosphorus pesticide exposure to be lower among children who consume an organic diet (49). A recent study of Victorian certified organic fruits and vegetables found that all of the samples were compliant with food safety requirements for heavy metals and pesticide residues (50).

The interrelationships between agriculture and the food system, health, food security and environmental sustainability are strong and should not be considered in isolation. According to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, 'food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food for a healthy and active life' (http://www.fao.org/spfs/). Only sustainable food production and distribution can ultimately ensure an adequate future supply of good quality, healthy foods to promote the health of the public (51).

Discussion

Research has shown that the public is concerned about the environment (52). A 2001 survey found that 62% of Australian adults stated that they were concerned about environmental problems (53). It is likely that consumers are not as aware of the impact of agriculture on the environment as they are about industrial pollution, wildlife conservation and so on. However, we do not have many indicators of whether consumers perceive a link between food and the environment or on their perceptions of sustainably produced foods, although a few studies have been conducted (54-56). The growth of organics, farmers' markets and community supported agriculture may be tapping into discontent with current mass production and distribution methods, but non-environmental factors such as food quality, health and taste are likely to play a prominent role here.

Consumers can make dietary choices to ameliorate the current and future environmental situation, as well as to improve their health. Health and nutrition professionals are in a position where they may be able to not only make changes as practitioners to be more environmentally friendly, but to improve consumers' awareness of the links between food, health and the environment. Dietitians and nutritionists are used 'often' as a source of food, health and nutrition information by around a tenth of the population and are trusted by almost three-quarters of the population, according to the results of a South Australian survey (57). They therefore have the potential to influence consumers' dietary choices to be more environmentally sustainable. Community and public health dietitians and nutritionists in Australia can use the opportunities for community contact to raise awareness of environmental issues that are presented by some of their most common practice activities: responding to requests for advice from individuals, clinical one-on-one situations, and implementation of community-wide nutrition education programs (58).

Relevant publications for nutrition and dietetic professionals include the American Dietetic Association's position paper for dietetic professionals on environmental conservation (59), Gussow's dietary guidelines for sustainability papers (34,35), Coveney's papers on nutrition, food security and environmental sustainability (7,54), and the Special Considerations section of the latest Dietary Guidelines for Australian Adults on dietary guidelines and sustainability (60). In conclusion, as suggested by Lang, it would be beneficial if issues of health and public health, the environment, social justice, and consumer issues were strongly welded, in order to provide a solid base for a single, overarching message (51).

Acknowledgments

The author is supported by an Australian Research Council Postdoctoral Research Fellowship. Dr Lea chairs the 'Food and the Environment' distance learning course at Deakin University.

References

1. Lang T, Barling D, Caraher M. Food, social policy and the environment: towards a new model. Soc Policy Adm 2001;35:538-58.

2. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Australia Now--Australian Social Trends: Farming Families. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics; 2003. http://www.abs.gov.au Accessed 21 July 2003.

3. Avery DT. Saving nature's legacy through better farming. Sci Technol 1997;14:59-65.

4. Pretty J. Agri-Culture: reconnecting people, land and nature. London: Earthscan; 2002.

5. Kirchmann H, Thorvaldsson G. Challenging targets for future agriculture. Eur J Agron 2000;12:145-61.

6. Lal R. Offsetting global C[O.sub.2] emissions by restoration of degraded soils and intensification of world agriculture and forestry. Land Degrad Dev 2003;14:309-22.

7. Coveney J, Santich B. A question of balance: nutrition, health and gastronomy. Appetite 1997;28:267-77.

8. Hamblin A. Land. Australia State of the Environment Report 2001 (Theme Report). Canberra: CSIRO Publishing on behalf of the Department of the Environment and Heritage; 2001.

9. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Main Features--Environment: Salinity on Australian farms. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics; 2002. http://www.abs.gov.au Accessed 18 March 2003.

10. Madden B, Hayes G, Duggan K. National Investment in Rural Landscapes. An investment scenario for National Farmers' Federation and Australian Conservation Foundation with the assistance of Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation. Melbourne: ACF and NFF; 2000.

11. Shiklomanov IA. World fresh water resources. In: Gleick PH, editor. Water in crisis: A guide to the world's fresh water resources. New York: Oxford University Press; 1993, p. 13-24.

12. Gleick PH. The world's water 2000-2001. Washington DC: Island Press; 2000.

13. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Water Account, Australia. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics; 2004. http://www.abs.gov.au Accessed 6 August 2004.

14. Pimentel D, Houser J, Preiss E, White O. Water resources: agriculture, the environment, and society. BioSci 1997;47:97-106.

15. Jones A. An environmental assessment of food supply chains: a case study on dessert apples. Environ Manag 2002;30:560-76.

16. Hansen B, Alroe HF, Kristensen ES. Approaches to assess the environmental impact of organic farming with particular regard to Denmark. Agr Ecosyst Environ 2001;83:11-26.

17. Mader P, Fliessbach A, Dubois D, Gunst L, Fried P, Niggli U. Soil fertility and biodiversity in organic farming. Sci 2002:1694-7.

18. Lotter DW. Organic agriculture. J Sustain Agr 2003;21:59-128.

19. Reganold JP, Glover JD, Andrews PK, Hinman HR. Sustainability of three apple production systems. Nature 2001:926-30.

20. Yussefi M, Willer H. The World of Organic Agriculture--Statistics and future prospects--2003. Tholey-Theley: International Federation of Organic Agricultural Movements; 2003.

21. Biological Farmers of Australia. The Organic Food and Farming Report Australia 2003. Toowoomba: Biological Farmers of Australia; 2003.

22. Keighley J. Healthy living: organic (Coles supermarket web site). Melbourne: Coles; 2004. http://www.coles.com.au/healthyliving/nutrition_notes/natural_selection.asp Accessed 16 August 2004.

23. Lawrence G, Lyons K, Lockie S. Healthy for you, healthy for the environment: corporate capital, farming practice and the construction of 'green' foods. Rural Soc 1999;9:543-53.

24. Adams JK, Schofield L. Bathurst hosts first national Farmers' Market Conference [media release]. 2002. http://bathurst.local-e.nsw.gov.au/news Accessed 20 July 2003.

25. Lass D, Stevenson GW, Hendrickson J, Ruhf K. CSA Across the Nation: findings from the 1999 CSA survey. Madison: Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems; 2003.

26. Parker A. Feasibility of Community Supported Agriculture in Australia. Victoria: Department of Natural Resources and Environment; 2002.

27. United States Department of Agriculture. Farmers market facts. United States Department of Agriculture; 2003. http://www.ams.usda.gov/farmersmarkets/facts.htm Accessed 30 July 2003.

28. Sage C. Social embeddedness and relations of regard: alternative 'good food' networks in south-west Ireland. J Rural Stud 2003;19:47-60.

29. Serafini M, Bugianesi R, Salucci M, Azzini E, Raguzzini A, Maiani G. Effect of acute ingestion of fresh and stored lettuce (Lactuca sativa) on plasma total antioxidant capacity and antioxidant levels in human subjects. Br J Nutr 2002;88:615-23.

30. Vallejo F, Tomas-Barberan F, Garcia-Viguera C. Health-promoting compounds in broccoli as influenced by refrigerated transport and retail sale period. J Agric Food Chem 2003;51:3029-34.

31. Donahue T. P. Community-supported agriculture: opportunities for environmental education. J Environ Educ 1994;25:4-5.

32. Perez J, Allen P, Brown M. Community supported agriculture on the central coast: the CSA member experience (Research Brief #1). Santa Cruz: The Centre for Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems, University of California; 2003.

33. Carlsson-Kanyama A. Climate change and dietary choices--how can emissions of greenhouse gases from food consumption be reduced? Food Policy 1998;23:277-93.

34. Gussow JD. Dietary guidelines for sustainability: twelve years later. J Nutr Educ 1999;31:194-200.

35. Gussow JD, Clancy KL. Dietary guidelines for sustainability. J Nutr Educ 1986;18:1-5.

36. Pimentel D, Pimentel M. Sustainability of meat-based and plant-based diets and the environment. Am J Clin Nutr 2003;78(3 Suppl):660S-3S.

37. Gussow JD. Ecology and vegetarian considerations: does environmental responsibility demand the elimination of livestock? Am J Clin Nutr 1994;59:1110S-6S.

38. Reijnders L, Soret S. Quantification of the environmental impact of different dietary protein choices. Am J Clin Nutr 2003;78:664S-8S.

39. Oberholtzer L. Community supported agriculture in the Mid-Atlantic region: results of a shareholder survey and farmer interviews. Stevensville MD: Small Farm Success Project; 2004.

40. World Cancer Research Fund, American Institute for Cancer Research. Food, Nutrition and the Prevention of Cancer: a global perspective. Washington, DC: American Institute for Cancer Research; 1997.

41. Joshipura KJ, Hu FB, Manson JE, Stampfer MJ, Rimm EB, Speizer FE, et al. The effect of fruit and vegetable intake on risk for coronary heart disease. Ann Intern Med 2001;134:1106-14.

42. Australian Bureau of Statistics. National Nutrition Survey Selected Highlights Australia 1995. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service; 1997.

43. Nestle M. Toward more healthful dietary patterns--a matter of policy. Public Health Rep 1998;113:420-3.

44. Soil Association. Organic farming, food quality and human health: a review of the evidence. Bristol: Soil Association; 2001.

45. Bourn D, Prescott J. A comparison of the nutritional value, sensory qualities, and food safety of organically and conventionally produced foods. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2002;42:1-34.

46. Carbonaro M, Mattera M, Nicoli S, Bergamo P, Cappelloni M. Modulation of antioxidant compounds in organic vs conventional fruit (peach, Prunus persica L., and pear, Pyrus communis L.). J Agric Food Chem 2002;50:5458-62.

47. Williams CM. Nutritional quality of organic food: shades of grey or shades of green? Proc Nutr Soc 2002;61:19-24.

48. Biological Farmers of Australia. The Organic Standard (version 6). Toowoomba; 2003. http://www.bfa.com.au/Downloads/Documents/Organic_Standard_Version6_REVISIONS.pdf Accessed 30 September 2004.

49. Curl CL, Fenske RA, Elgethun K. Organophosphorus pesticide exposure of urban and suburban preschool children with organic and conventional diets. Environ Health Perspect 2003;111:377-82.

50. Department of Primary Industries, Victoria. Organic produce comes up clean. Food Partnerships in Asia [newsletter] 2003;20(September):3. http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/dpi/nrenti.nsf Accessed 18 August 2004.

51. Lang T. Food policy for the 21st century: can it be both radical and reasonable? In: Koc M, MacRae R, Mougeot LJA, Welsh J, editors. For Hunger-proof Cities: sustainable urban food systems. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre; 1999, p. 216-24.

52. Mertig AG, Dunlap RE. Environmentalism, new social movements, and the new class: a cross-national investigation. Rural Sociol 2001;66:113-36.

53. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Australia Now--Year Book Australia: Environmental views and behaviours. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics; 2003. http://www.abs.gov.au Accessed 26 August 2003.

54. Coveney J. Food security and sustainability: are we selling ourselves short? Asia Pac J Clin Nutr 2000;9(Suppl):97S-100S.

55. Bissonnette MM, Contento IR. Adolescents' perspectives and food choice behaviors in terms of the environmental impacts of food production practices: application of a psychosocial model. J Nutr Educ 2001;33:72-82.

56. Robinson R, Smith C. Psychosocial and demographic variables associated with consumer intention to purchase sustainably produced foods as defined by the Midwest Food Alliance. J Nutr Educ Behav 2002;34:316-25.

57. Worsley A, Lea E. Consumers' personal values and sources of nutrition information. Ecol Food Nutr 2003;42:129-51.

58. Hughes R. Work practices of the community and public health nutrition workforce in Australia. Nutr Diet 2004;61:38-45.

59. American Dietetic Association. Position of the American Dietetic Association: dietetics professionals can implement practices to conserve natural resources and protect the environment. J Am Diet Assoc 2001;101:1221-7.

60. National Health and Medical Research Council. Dietary Guidelines for Australian Adults. Canberra: National Health and Medical Research Council; 2003.

Centre for Physical Activity and Nutrition Research, Deakin University, Melbourne

E. Lea, PhD, Postdoctoral Research Fellow

Correspondence: E. Lea, Centre for Physical Activity and Nutrition Research, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood VIC 3125.

Email: [e-mail]