Some 30% of the UK's greenhouse gas emissions can be attributed to what we put on our plates.

With this in mind, the YouGov survey for Eblex/Bpex caught my eye (Burgers matter more to Brits than foreign travel, The Grocer, 24 April).

The results showed more people are willing to recycle (82%) and use energy-saving lightbulbs (80%) to cut their carbon emissions than to fly less (23%) or eat less meat (21%). The survey also indicates how many people would consider cutting the meat in their diets more than one in five.

You suggest the figures "will be bad news for the vegetarian organisations and environmental groups that are hoping to persuade shoppers to give up meat".

There are two points here. First, most environmental groups are not hoping to persuade shoppers to give up meat; at WWF-UK we believe consumers can continue to eat meat just less. Unless we do, we'll have no hope of cutting emissions from food consumption by 70% by 2050. How much less we eat depends on advancements in technology and the drive of the industry to improve efficiency.

Secondly, the figures are far from bad news: changes to consumer behaviour take time (look at semi-skimmed milk or recycling) which is why consumption needs to be part of the mix in debates now not in 10 years' time when it will be too late.

Retailers have huge sway on consumer shopping habits and their support and initiative will be vital if we have any hope of that 'one in five' consumers becoming two, three, or possibly, four in five.

Mark Driscoll, head of One Planet Food programme, WWF-UK