Abstract

BackgroundImplementation of food taxes or subsidies may promote healthier and a more sustainable diet in a society. This study estimates the effects of a tax (15% or 30%) on meat and a subsidy (10%) on fruit and vegetables (F&V) consumption in the Netherlands using a social cost-benefit analysis with a 30-year time horizon.MethodsCalculations with the representative Dutch National Food Consumption Survey (2012–2014) served as the reference. Price elasticities were applied to calculate changes in consumption and consumer surplus. Future food consumption and health effects were estimated using the DYNAMO-HIA model and environmental impacts were estimated using Life Cycle Analysis. The time horizon of all calculations is 30 year. All effects were monetarized and discounted to 2018 euros.ResultsOver 30-years, a 15% or 30% meat tax or 10% F&V subsidy could result in reduced healthcare costs, increased quality of life, and higher productivity levels. Benefits to the environment of a meat tax are an estimated €3400 million or €6300 million in the 15% or 30% scenario respectively, whereas the increased F&V consumption could result in €100 million costs for the environment. While consumers benefit from a subsidy, a consumer surplus of €10,000 million, the tax scenarios demonstrate large experienced costs of respectively €21,000 and €41,000 million. Overall, a 15% or 30% price increase in meat could lead to a net benefit for society between €3100–7400 million or €4100–12,300 million over 30 years respectively. A 10% F&V subsidy could lead to a net benefit to society of €1800–3300 million. Sensitivity analyses did not change the main findings.ConclusionsThe studied meat taxes and F&V subsidy showed net total welfare benefits for the Dutch society over a 30-year time horizon.

Highlights

  • Implementation of food taxes or subsidies may promote healthier and a more sustainable diet in a society

  • Food consumption In the reference scenario, in 2048, the total Dutch meat consumption is estimated to be 665,581,000 kg. This translates to an average meat consumption of 39.2 kg per person per year or 107 g per day

  • A meat tax has the most impact on diabetes type 2 prevalence, with between 2093 and 15, 449 (15% tax) or 5550–29,398 (30% tax) averted cases in the year 2048

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Implementation of food taxes or subsidies may promote healthier and a more sustainable diet in a society. There is a growing consensus that decreasing the environmental impact from food production and consumption are crucial to meet the Paris Climate Agreement and its goal to limit global warming [1, 2]. This is not surprising considering that agriculture and food production contribute an estimated 25% of total greenhouse gas Broeks et al BMC Public Health (2020) 20:643. Consumption of red and processed meat exceeds recommended levels in most high and middle-income countries and has been associated with both negative health and environmental impacts [9, 10]

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call