Meat matters - making the case for a valuable food in a hostile environment

Abstract

Contemporary views on meat reflect an ambiguous status of appreciation and rejection, especially in the urbanised West, and tend to come with strong moral overtones. The portrayal of (red) meat as an intrinsically harmful food choice by certain academics, non-governmental organisations, mass media, and public-private partnerships contributes to this tension. Although most of these voices are merely calling for a moderation of the consumption of meat in areas with high intake, others are radical and demand a drastic reduction or even elimination, as will be documented in this article. Some scientists are beginning to articulate their concern about an ongoing trend towards unbalanced communications and anti-meat militancy in both academic and policy circles. The perceived threat is not only that the vilification of meat may add to the ongoing moralisation of dietary choices and societal polarisation, but also that it may further undermine an already precarious situation of public health and a fragile food system, especially (but not only) in the Global South. Minimising livestock may also come with unintended harmful effects on ecosystems and livelihoods. The ‘Dublin Declaration of Scientists on the Societal Role of Livestock’, issued in October 2022, exemplifies such concern. Together with the body of evidence to which it refers, the Dublin Declaration is to be read as a petition for pragmatism, demanding sufficiently high standards of evidence, and more respect for the principle of caution when it comes to policies that have the intention to severely challenge the role of meat and other animal source foods in future diets.

HIGHLIGHTS

• There is an ongoing trend towards unbalanced communications and anti-meat militancy in media and academic and policy circles

• Minimising livestock beyond a critical threshold may come with unintended harmful effects on nutrient security, ecosystems, and livelihoods

• The ‘Dublin Declaration of Scientists on the Societal Role of Livestock’ serves as petition for pragmatism, caution, and evidence-based policies

Keywords:

• Meat
• vegetarian
• vegan
• food system
• food policy

Disclosure statement

FL is a non-remunerated board member of various academic non-profit organisations including the Belgian Association for Meat Science and Technology (president), the Belgian Society for Food Microbiology (president), and the Belgian Nutrition Society. On a non-remunerated basis, he also serves on the Scientific Board of World Farmers’ Organisation (WFO) and FAO/COAG Sub-Committee on Livestock. ML is a non-remunerated President of the European Federation of Animal Science, he chairs the UK Universities Climate Network–Net Zero Universities group, and also serves as a member of the Technical Advisory Board for the FAO/LEAP on integrating circular bioeconomy approaches in the environmental assessment of livestock. The views the authors express in this commentary are theirs alone and not necessarily those of the aforementioned organisations.

Data availability statement

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Research Council of the Vrije Universiteit Brussel, under grants SRP7 (FL), SRP71 (FL), IOF3017 (FL), IRP11 (FL), and IRP21 (FL, FH, KW).