Mindfulness and sustainable diets: a meta-analysis and CO2 emission savings scenarios

Clinical Snapshot

Key Findings

• P Value: Statistically significant (CI excludes zero); exact p-value not reported in abstract

• Effect Size: Cohen's d = 0.28 (overall mindfulness–sustainable diet); d = 0.25 (mindfulness–reduced meat consumption / vegetarian intentions)

• Primary Outcome: Positive association between mindfulness and sustainable dietary behaviour across 12 articles (13 studies); observational studies showed stronger effects than interventional designs; Asian samples showed larger effects than Western samples; facets of observing, describing, and non-reactivity were most strongly associated

• Nnt Or Sensitivity: Not applicable as a direct NNT; CO2 scenario modelling: full EAT-Lancet diet adoption projected to yield cumulative savings of up to 11% of Germany's total emissions budget by 2040; incorporating population willingness to reduce meat intake yielded more conservative cumulative savings of 2.8% over the same period

• Confidence Interval: 95% CI [0.13, 0.43] for primary outcome

Clinical Application

Mindfulness-based interventions are generally low-cost, scalable, and acceptable across diverse settings (clinical, community, digital). However, the small effect sizes and heterogeneous evidence base mean that mindfulness alone is unlikely to drive meaningful population-level dietary change without integration into broader behaviour change frameworks. Intervention fidelity, dose, and cultural adaptation remain unresolved implementation challenges No Australian-specific data are included in this meta-analysis. The CO2 scenario modelling is restricted to Germany, UK, and US, limiting direct applicability to Australian emissions targets. In the Australian context: (1) RACGP guidelines on preventive health and lifestyle medicine support dietary counselling but do not currently recommend mindfulness specifically for dietary behaviour change; (2) Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) are not PBS-listed as standalone interventions for dietary modification, though they may be accessed via Mental Health Treatment Plans (Better Access); (3) The TGA does not regulate mindfulness as a therapeutic intervention; (4) Australia's National Preventive Health Strategy 2021–2030 emphasises healthy eating and sustainability, providing a policy context where mindfulness-diet research could be relevant; (5) Given Australia's high per-capita meat consumption and significant agricultural emissions, the translational CO2 modelling framework — if adapted with Australian Life Cycle Assessment data — could be policy-relevant; (6) Cultural diversity in Australia, including significant Asian-Australian populations where larger mindfulness effects were observed, warrants culturally tailored research Adult general populations with interest in or capacity for mindfulness practice; potentially most applicable to individuals already engaged in health-promoting behaviours or those in structured mindfulness programmes. Findings may be less generalisable to populations with food insecurity, low health literacy, or limited access to mindfulness resources

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Dietary habits are a major driver of both human health outcomes and global greenhouse gas emissions, with excessive meat consumption being a key contributor. Mindfulness, understood as purposeful and non-judgmental awareness of the present moment, has been suggested as a psychological factor that can foster more sustainable food choices. However, the empirical evidence on the link between mindfulness and sustainable diets remains fragmented. MAIN BODY: This study presents the first systematic review and meta-analysis of the association between mindfulness and sustainable dietary behaviors. Twelve articles with 13 studies, published between 2018 and 2025, were included, covering both observational and interventional designs with sample sizes ranging from 16 to 560 participants. A random-effects model revealed a small but significant positive association between mindfulness and sustainable diets (d = 0.28, 95% CI [0.13, 0.43]). Subgroup analyses indicated that observational studies tended to show stronger effects than interventions, and that cultural context played an important moderating role, with larger effects reported in Asian samples. Facet-specific analyses suggested that certain mindfulness dimensions - particularly observing, describing, and non-reactivity - were more strongly associated with sustainable food choices, while others showed weaker or non-significant links. A focused analysis on meat consumption revealed that mindfulness was positively associated with reduced meat intake or vegetarian dietary intentions (d = 0.25). Scenario modelling using national Life Cycle Assessment data from Germany, the UK, and the U.S. demonstrated that the potential reductions in meat intake could translate into substantial CO2 emission savings. A full adoption of the EAT-Lancet diet was projected to result in cumulative savings of up to 11% of Germany's total emissions budget by 2040, whereas incorporating the population's willingness to reduce meat intake yielded more conservative cumulative savings of 2.8% over the same period. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis provides systematic evidence that mindfulness is positively associated with more sustainable dietary behavior and reduced meat consumption. While effects are modest and heterogeneous, the findings suggest that mindfulness could represent a promising lever for promoting dietary change aligned with planetary health goals. Future research should further investigate cultural differences, the role of specific mindfulness facets, and the feasibility of scaling mindfulness-based interventions to support both individual well-being and climate targets.

References

1. 1.Kosteletzky, A., Thomas, S. M., & Jochem, C. (2026). Mindfulness and sustainable diets: a meta-analysis and CO2 emission savings scenarios. Nutrition Journal. https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.111.018978 [Note: DOI as supplied by submitting author; metadata discrepancy between stated DOI prefix (AJCN) and stated journal (Nutrition Journal) requires independent verification prior to citation]