PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 24, 20260 citationsOpen Access

Investigating interdependencies and trade-offs between sustainability, nutritional and social equity goals: a case study on a meat tax in Italy - Discussion paper

View Full Paper
GTGiulia TiboldoVVVeronica VitaliDMDaniele Moro

Key Points

  • This analysis aims to investigate the effects of a meat tax in Italy on sustainability, nutrition, and social equity.
  • Analyzed Nielsen Household data for Italian households from 2019.
  • Used the Exact Affine Stone Index (EASI) demand system model for food demand estimation.
  • Simulated impacts of meat tax and an alternative plant-based protein support policy scenario.
  • MEAT-TAX scenario reduced carbon footprint by 1.4% and water footprint by 1.1%.
  • PROT-VEG scenario showed smaller reductions of 1.3% in carbon and 1.0% in water footprints.
  • Welfare effects were more favorable for higher-income households, indicating a progressive impact on social equity.

Abstract

Abstract Meat taxes have increasingly been proposed as a policy instrument to promote more sustainable food systems. However, when designed solely to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, such policies may generate trade-offs across other dimensions of sustainability, including water consumption, nutritional quality, and social equity. Along these lines, our analysis investigates the impacts of a “meat tax” in Italy on sustainability from this broader perspective. Using Nielsen Household data for a representative sample of Italian Households in 2019, combined with information on the carbon and water footprints of food items (Petersson et al., 2021) and their nutritional characteristics (CREA) we estimate food demand through the Exact Affine Stone Index (EASI) demand system model (Lewbel and Pendakur, 2009). The estimated price and expenditure elasticities are then used to simulate two policy scenarios: a MEAT-TAX scenario and a PROT-VEG scenario, in which part of the tax revenue is employed to reduce the VAT rate on plant-based protein foods. Results show that both scenarios reduce the environmental footprint of food purchases, although to a limited extent. In the MEAT-TAX scenario, the carbon and water footprints decline by 1.4% and 1.1%, respectively, while the corresponding reductions in the PROT-VEG scenario are slightly smaller (1.3% and 1.0%). The MEAT-TAX scenario also lowers calories, saturated fats, cholesterol, salt, and sweets, but reduces fiber, whereas fiber increases under the PROT-VEG scenario due to higher purchases of plant-based proteins, although this is also associated with a slight increase in sodium. Welfare effects are generally more pronounced among higher-income households relatively to low-income households, indicating an almost progressive reform. Overall, the results from the current analysis confirm that convergence between environmental, nutritional and distributional objectives may be difficult to achieve and may require a combination of policy instruments. Keywords: meat tax, demand analysis, carbon footprint, water footprint, nutrition, distributional effects JEL codes: H23, H31, Q18 The findings presented in this report are preliminary and should not be circulated or cited without the authors’ permission. They remain subject to revision as the work progresses toward academic publication. Citation Tiboldo, G., Vitali, V., MORO, D., Chakrabarti, A., VARACCA, A., SCKOKAI, P., & CASTELLARI, E. (2026). Investigating interdependencies and trade-offs between sustainability, nutritional and social equity goals: a case study on a meat tax in Italy - Discussion paper (Version v01). BrightSpace Horizon Europe project Grant Agreement No. 101060075. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19700634----------------- Funding acknowledgement Funded by the European Union. Grant Agreement No. 101060075. Views and opinions expressed are those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Commission. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them. Legal notice This document was produced under the terms and conditions of Grant Agreement No. 101060075 for the European Commission. It does not necessary reflect the view of the European Union and in no way anticipates the Commission’s future policy in this area. The European Commission is not liable for any consequence stemming from the reuse of this publication. © BrightSpace, 2026 The reuse of this document is authorised under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CCBY 4.0) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This means that reuse is allowed provided appropriate credit is given and any changes are indicated. For any use or reproduction of elements that are not owned by the BrightSpace consortium, permission may need to be sought directly from the respective right holders. Project information BrightSpace Horizon Europe project Grant Agreement No. 101060075 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101060075 CALL: Innovative governance, environmental observations and digital solutions in support of the Green Deal WORK PROGRAMME Topic ID: HORIZON-CL6-2021-GOVERNANCE-01-12 EU agriculture within a safe and just operating space and planetary boundaries BrightSpace Project coordination: Wageningen Economic Research, The Hague, NL Contact: brightspace.wser@wur.nl | Website: www.brightspace-project.eu Project duration: 1 November 2022 – 31 October 2027.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Tiboldo et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69eb0ac4553a5433e34b4ba0https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19700634
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Investigating Firm-Level Strategic Responses to VAT Reform in Animal and Plant-Based Protein Markets - Discussion paper2026
  2. 2Quantity and quality trends of food purchases in France - Discussion paper2026
  3. 3The Dual Impact of Organic Farming Support in Italy - Discussion paper2026
  4. 4Assessing the Potential of Tax Policies in Reducing Environmental Impacts from European Food Consumption2024 · 2 citations
  5. 5A Joint Evaluation of Agri-Environmental Schemes and Organic Farming in the EU - Discussion paper2026