Understanding the Complexity of the Food System: Differences and Commonalities between Two Optimization Models
Background and objectives: There is a compelling need for a more sustainable food system because of climate change and contemporary Western diets, which pose a threat to human and planetary health. The food system is a social–ecological system, consisting of both biophysical and social sub-systems w...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2023-11-01
|
| Series: | Proceedings |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2504-3900/91/1/17 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850090868516585472 |
|---|---|
| author | Samantha N. Heerschop Renee P. M. Cardinaals Sander Biesbroek Argyris Kanellopoulos Johanna M. Geleijnse Pieter van ‘t Veer Hannah H. E. van Zanten |
| author_facet | Samantha N. Heerschop Renee P. M. Cardinaals Sander Biesbroek Argyris Kanellopoulos Johanna M. Geleijnse Pieter van ‘t Veer Hannah H. E. van Zanten |
| author_sort | Samantha N. Heerschop |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background and objectives: There is a compelling need for a more sustainable food system because of climate change and contemporary Western diets, which pose a threat to human and planetary health. The food system is a social–ecological system, consisting of both biophysical and social sub-systems which are interlinked. This implies that changes in one sub-system can lead to synergies and trade-offs elsewhere. To identify such synergies and tradeoffs, researchers are integrating work from a range of disciplines in optimization models. This has resulted in models that are unique but have a similar overarching aim: ‘to create a sustainable food system by understanding the implications of food system choices’. However, the results of these models may differ. Therefore, the aim of this paper was to understand the differences and complementarity of two optimization models to grasp the complexity of the food system. Methods: we compared the Circular Food System (CiFoS) model with the Sustainable, Healthy, Acceptable, Realistic, and Preferable diets (SHARP) model. CiFoS is a biophysical optimization model that aims to produce a healthy diet for a growing population within planetary boundaries. SHARP is a benchmarking model that optimizes current diets for health and sustainability for consumers. Both models propose a healthy and sustainable diet. While CiFoS is detailed on how environmental impacts are calculated, SHARP has a finer grid on the consumption aspects. Results: based on previously modelled scenarios that showed different results in diet composition, we identified that these differences could be explained by fundamental characteristics of the model (e.g., environmental impact calculations or the consideration of distance to the current diet), data input and scenario settings. Besides, the models work complementary regarding the time scale (i.e., solutions for the upcoming years versus upcoming decades), geographic scale and an individual versus population approach. Conclusion: Optimization models may be used for the same goal, e.g., finding an optimal diet, but the nuance chosen will lead to different outcomes. The outcomes of such models are complementary and can therefore be used in conjunction to inform policy or other food system stakeholders. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-c9df50f5d7e743f988e35a60b6fe9f8d |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2504-3900 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2023-11-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Proceedings |
| spelling | doaj-art-c9df50f5d7e743f988e35a60b6fe9f8d2025-08-20T02:42:29ZengMDPI AGProceedings2504-39002023-11-019111710.3390/proceedings2023091017Understanding the Complexity of the Food System: Differences and Commonalities between Two Optimization ModelsSamantha N. Heerschop0Renee P. M. Cardinaals1Sander Biesbroek2Argyris Kanellopoulos3Johanna M. Geleijnse4Pieter van ‘t Veer5Hannah H. E. van Zanten6Division of Human Nutrition and Health, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 PB Wageningen, The NetherlandsFarming Systems Ecology Group, Department of Plant Sciences, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 PB Wageningen, The NetherlandsDivision of Human Nutrition and Health, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 PB Wageningen, The NetherlandsOperations Research and Logistics Group, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 PB Wageningen, The NetherlandsDivision of Human Nutrition and Health, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 PB Wageningen, The NetherlandsDivision of Human Nutrition and Health, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 PB Wageningen, The NetherlandsFarming Systems Ecology Group, Department of Plant Sciences, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 PB Wageningen, The NetherlandsBackground and objectives: There is a compelling need for a more sustainable food system because of climate change and contemporary Western diets, which pose a threat to human and planetary health. The food system is a social–ecological system, consisting of both biophysical and social sub-systems which are interlinked. This implies that changes in one sub-system can lead to synergies and trade-offs elsewhere. To identify such synergies and tradeoffs, researchers are integrating work from a range of disciplines in optimization models. This has resulted in models that are unique but have a similar overarching aim: ‘to create a sustainable food system by understanding the implications of food system choices’. However, the results of these models may differ. Therefore, the aim of this paper was to understand the differences and complementarity of two optimization models to grasp the complexity of the food system. Methods: we compared the Circular Food System (CiFoS) model with the Sustainable, Healthy, Acceptable, Realistic, and Preferable diets (SHARP) model. CiFoS is a biophysical optimization model that aims to produce a healthy diet for a growing population within planetary boundaries. SHARP is a benchmarking model that optimizes current diets for health and sustainability for consumers. Both models propose a healthy and sustainable diet. While CiFoS is detailed on how environmental impacts are calculated, SHARP has a finer grid on the consumption aspects. Results: based on previously modelled scenarios that showed different results in diet composition, we identified that these differences could be explained by fundamental characteristics of the model (e.g., environmental impact calculations or the consideration of distance to the current diet), data input and scenario settings. Besides, the models work complementary regarding the time scale (i.e., solutions for the upcoming years versus upcoming decades), geographic scale and an individual versus population approach. Conclusion: Optimization models may be used for the same goal, e.g., finding an optimal diet, but the nuance chosen will lead to different outcomes. The outcomes of such models are complementary and can therefore be used in conjunction to inform policy or other food system stakeholders.https://www.mdpi.com/2504-3900/91/1/17CiFoSSHARPSustainable food systemdiet modellingdiet optimizationhealthy and sustainable diet |
| spellingShingle | Samantha N. Heerschop Renee P. M. Cardinaals Sander Biesbroek Argyris Kanellopoulos Johanna M. Geleijnse Pieter van ‘t Veer Hannah H. E. van Zanten Understanding the Complexity of the Food System: Differences and Commonalities between Two Optimization Models Proceedings CiFoS SHARP Sustainable food system diet modelling diet optimization healthy and sustainable diet |
| title | Understanding the Complexity of the Food System: Differences and Commonalities between Two Optimization Models |
| title_full | Understanding the Complexity of the Food System: Differences and Commonalities between Two Optimization Models |
| title_fullStr | Understanding the Complexity of the Food System: Differences and Commonalities between Two Optimization Models |
| title_full_unstemmed | Understanding the Complexity of the Food System: Differences and Commonalities between Two Optimization Models |
| title_short | Understanding the Complexity of the Food System: Differences and Commonalities between Two Optimization Models |
| title_sort | understanding the complexity of the food system differences and commonalities between two optimization models |
| topic | CiFoS SHARP Sustainable food system diet modelling diet optimization healthy and sustainable diet |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2504-3900/91/1/17 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT samanthanheerschop understandingthecomplexityofthefoodsystemdifferencesandcommonalitiesbetweentwooptimizationmodels AT reneepmcardinaals understandingthecomplexityofthefoodsystemdifferencesandcommonalitiesbetweentwooptimizationmodels AT sanderbiesbroek understandingthecomplexityofthefoodsystemdifferencesandcommonalitiesbetweentwooptimizationmodels AT argyriskanellopoulos understandingthecomplexityofthefoodsystemdifferencesandcommonalitiesbetweentwooptimizationmodels AT johannamgeleijnse understandingthecomplexityofthefoodsystemdifferencesandcommonalitiesbetweentwooptimizationmodels AT pietervantveer understandingthecomplexityofthefoodsystemdifferencesandcommonalitiesbetweentwooptimizationmodels AT hannahhevanzanten understandingthecomplexityofthefoodsystemdifferencesandcommonalitiesbetweentwooptimizationmodels |