Vincent Moreau

Francesco Salvi, Giuseppe Russo, Adam Barla et al.

Meat consumption is a major driver of global greenhouse gas emissions. While pricing interventions have shown potential to reduce meat intake, previous studies have focused on highly constrained environments with limited consumer choice. Here, we present the first large-scale field experiment to evaluate multiple pricing interventions in a real-world, competitive setting. Using a sequential crossover design with matched menus in a Swiss university campus, we systematically compared vegetarian-meal discounts (-2.5 CHF), meat surcharges (+2.5 CHF), and a combined scheme (-1.2 CHF=+1.2 CHF) across four campus cafeterias. Only the surcharge and combined interventions led to significant increases in vegetarian meal uptake--by 26.4% and 16.6%, respectively--and reduced CO2 emissions per meal by 7.4% and 11.3%, respectively. The surcharge, while effective, triggered a 12.3% drop in sales at intervention sites and a corresponding 14.9% increase in non-treated locations, hence causing a spillover effect that completely offset environmental gains. In contrast, the combined approach achieved meaningful emission reductions without significant effects on overall sales or revenue, making it both effective and economically viable. Notably, pricing interventions were equally effective for both vegetarian-leaning customers and habitual meat-eaters, stimulating change even within entrenched dietary habits. Our results show that balanced pricing strategies can reduce the carbon footprint of realistic food environments, but require coordinated implementation to maximize climate benefits and avoid unintended spillover effects.

Giuseppe Russo, Kristina Gligorić, Vincent Moreau et al.

Reducing meat consumption is crucial for achieving global environmental and nutritional targets. Meat-Free Day (MFD) is a widely adopted strategy to address this challenge by encouraging plant-based diets through the removal of animal-based meals. We assessed the environmental, behavioral, and nutritional impacts of MFD by implementing 67 MFDs over 18 months (once a week on a randomly chosen day) across 12 cafeterias on a large university campus, analyzing over 400,000 food purchases. MFD reduced on-campus food-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions on treated days by 52.9% and contributed to improved fiber (+26.9%) and cholesterol (-4.5%) consumption without altering caloric intake. These nutritional benefits were, however, accompanied by a 27.6% decrease in protein intake and a 34.2% increase in sugar consumption. Moreover, the increase in plant-based meals did not carry over to subsequent days, as evidenced by a 3.5% rebound in animal-based meal consumption on days immediately following treated days. MFD also led to a 16.8% drop in on-campus meal sales on treated days.Monte Carlo simulations suggest that if 8.7% of diners were to eat burgers off-campus on treated days, MFD's GHG savings would be fully negated. As our analysis identifies on-campus customer retention as the main challenge to MFD effectiveness, we recommend combining MFD with customer retention interventions to ensure environmental and nutritional benefits.