Abstract Various strategies across food systems are needed for a systemic change, with dietary shifts representing a meaningful pathway—particularly in high-income nations. Plant-based analogues (PBAs) that mimic animal-based foods, represent a promising strategy to facilitate such shifts because they require minimal behaviour adjustments. This review aims to synthesise nutritional, health and environmental evidence on PBAs by examining their benefits, challenges, and research gaps to inform and support evidence-based policy and practice. PBAs generally have lower greenhouse gas emissions, land use and water use than their animal-based counterparts. Nutritionally, PBAs are complex, varying across product brands, product types, processing techniques and primary ingredients. The limited health evidence shows that consumption of plant-based meat analogues tends to be associated with positive health outcomes, while consumption of some plant-based drinks can be linked to micronutrient deficiencies. Fortified PBAs can contribute to daily recommended intakes and sometimes provide more micronutrients than their animal-based counterparts, while also providing more fibre, and less energy and saturated fat. Despite these potential benefits, debates persist around processing classifications and their health implications. Given this complex landscape, assessing what kind of role PBAs could play in our food systems will demand product-specific evaluation, targeted dietary recommendations, and expanding the range of healthier PBAs. To advance the field and accelerate dietary shifts without unintended consequences, critical considerations include strengthening the nutritional evidence-base, classifying PBAs further for dietary recommendations and informed regulatory approaches, understanding processing effects and use of additives, and standardising environmental outcomes and research beyond single ingredients.
Espinosa et al. (Mon,) studied this question.