Overview: Measuring forced labor risk in popular dietary patterns
As Americans increasingly weigh cost, nutrition, and personal values when choosing foods, researchers are quantifying a troubling question: how might well-intentioned healthy eating choices intersect with exploitation in supply chains? A first‑of‑its‑kind study from Tufts University and the University of Nottingham’s Rights Lab examines the risk of forced labor behind ingredients in five dietary patterns recommended in U.S. guidelines, as well as the current average American diet. Published in Nature Food on October 8, the work aims to inform how governments and institutions buy food at scale while safeguarding workers’ rights.
What the study analyzed
Researchers evaluated more than 200 commonly consumed foods, rating their risk for forced labor based on where and how they are produced, harvested, processed, and sourced in the United States. The five diets included three guideline‑endorsed patterns—the Healthy U.S.-Style Diet, the Healthy Mediterranean-Style Diet, and the Healthy Vegetarian Diet—plus the Planetary Health Diet proposed by EAT-Lancet, and the current American diet derived from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data.
Key findings: risk varies by the makeup of the diet
Overall, protein foods emerged as the largest risk driver across the five patterns, but the contributors varied with each diet. The team accounted for distinct stages of animal agriculture—slaughter, meat processing, and even feed production—as well as crop harvesting practices. For example, fruits that require handpicking or nuts that demand manual shelling tend to carry higher risk, while certain seafood sectors also show elevated vulnerability.
Notably, the Healthy Mediterranean-Style diet, which emphasizes plant foods and seafood with some dairy and red meat, showed a higher forced labor risk than the current average American diet when analyzed as a whole. Red meat and dairy, along with the seafood component, significantly increased risk for this pattern, while fruit contributions added to the burden. In contrast, the Healthy U.S.-Style diet, with its mix of nutrient‑dense foods and higher dairy intake, also demonstrated substantial risk, driven largely by dairy.
Conversely, the Healthy Vegetarian diet (beans, soy, nuts, seeds, fruits, vegetables, and whole grains) and the Planetary Health diet (predominantly plant‑based, with minimal meat and dairy) exhibited lower overall risks. However, they were not risk‑free—the analysis highlighted outsized risk from nuts and seeds in these patterns, underscoring how even plant‑forward menus carry ethical considerations depending on sourcing.
Implications for policy, procurement, and equity
The authors argue that while changes at the individual plate level can contribute to reducing exploitation, broader changes are essential. Public programs shaped by the Dietary Guidelines for Americans—such as school meals—and municipal or institutional procurement policies increasingly rely on sustainable, healthful diets like Planetary Health. The study’s insights suggest that policy design should account for supply chain labor risk as a factor in determining what to buy, not just what is healthy or affordable.
Jessica Decker Sparks, assistant professor at the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy and the paper’s corresponding author, emphasizes that solutions must center workers themselves. “Let workers lead in shaping solutions and back those efforts with legally binding protections from retaliation,” she says. Models such as the Fair Food Program demonstrate how farm workers can spearhead reforms when included in decision‑making and enforcement processes. Strong trade policies that curb imports produced under forced labor are also highlighted as a mechanism to level the playing field for companies committed to ethical sourcing.
Looking ahead: turning findings into action
The authors describe this work as a starting point for communities seeking dietary transitions that advance health, equity, and sustainability. By linking dietary choices to labor rights in a transparent risk framework, the research offers a basis for rethinking procurement at schools, hospitals, and other large buyers. As governments and institutions reevaluate their food purchasing strategies, integrating labor‑rights considerations could help ensure that healthier diets do not come at the expense of exploited workers.
Authors and collaboration
The study was conducted by researchers from the Tufts Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy and the University of Nottingham Rights Lab and School of Geography, illustrating an interdisciplinary effort to connect nutrition science with labor rights and policy.
