Taking meat off our plate is the single biggest individual change we can make to radically reduce our carbon footprint and fight against climate change. Yet even with statistics showing that livestock and their byproducts account for 51 per cent of all greenhouse gas emissions worldwide, it still seems relatively taboo to ask people not to eat meat, fish, and dairy. Even the UN only advocates for a “reduction in meat consumption,” as do most environmental NGOs, with many feeling reluctant to address the need for zero meat consumption. Why is meat so sacrosanct that leading NGOs, government agencies, and politicians refuse to advocate for the complete eradication of meat, fish, and dairy consumption?
Capitalism appears to be the number one factor. Even with a pressing climate emergency which is time sensitive, politicians and governments globally are dragging their feet in any societal changes that lead to a lack of capitalistic interest. One need only consider the ongoing investments in fossil fuel and the continued construction of new oil pipelines throughout the global “west,” such as the Coastal GasLink pipeline in Canada, to see that those in charge follow the money to the detriment of the planet.
The Canadian government not only does not encourage the end of meat consumption, but it also actively pays billions of dollars in subsidies to animal agriculture. As such, it is not a wise government investment to educate its citizens on the negative environmental impact of these industries. Nor would it be wise for the government to fully turn its back on meat and dairy as dietary choices.
Another reason for the lack of advice regarding the complete end to meat consumption could be the cultural status, norms, and values which impact the desire to eat meat. These societal norms are easily observed with most holidays centering around the consumption of some form of meat-based family meal; during the summer it is impossible to go into a grocery store without immediately seeing barbeque equipment and steaks appropriately positioned near the front door, and even a short drive up the highway will pass countless meat-based fast-food chains.
Meat has become synonymous with family, friends, and sharing, and holds deep emotional ties and connections. As such, when people are asked to cut those ties, it can often bring out defensiveness. However, we are living in a time when meat alternatives are readily available, and science has shown that meat and dairy agriculture is diminishing the planet’s resources at an alarming rate. All of which means that now is not the time to be polite, now is not the time to advocate for “a reduction;” now is the time to vehemently contend that “because it tastes good” is not a good enough excuse.
Land, water, and food security are a privilege, ones that are no different from any other social privilege in which some people benefit unfairly and unjustly to the detriment of others. These securities are not globally equal, and as such, the burden for lifestyle changes falls on those living in more “developed” western countries — countries where capitalism means that a wide array of products are available at the click of a button or through rows of stocked shelves at the nearest store. The “western” world produces food at a faster rate than it can consume it, leading to waste and the destruction of our planet. The consumption of meat in the “western” world is far from the days of only consuming what you could catch and making that last for as long as possible. The capitalistic way in which meat and dairy are produced on such a large scale means there is no “sustainable” way to continue. Sustainability in this modern era often feels like a myth — especially in regard to the meat, fishing, and dairy industries, when the sheer scope of agriculture and the amount of people to be fed means the actions themselves are inherently damaging.
Currently we have been given less than a decade to cut our greenhouse gas emissions before the damage caused will be irreparable. Many climate activists and politicians have discussed the concept of becoming “net-zero.” But is net-zero really possible if meat and dairy agriculture continue to cause devastation in the form of land loss, water pollution, and loss of biodiversity? With governments often funding this sector, it becomes the choice of individuals to make lasting change by ensuring that the government funding is financially unsound. This can be done by eradicating the need for animal agriculture by taking meat and dairy off our plates. It is no surprise that often people may become upset when challenged about their eating habits, especially when eating meat is so normative and oftentimes enjoyable. However, this is not an issue that can be put off. The climate emergency is happening now. We need to make lasting changes now.
If being asked to stop eating meat or reading this article has made you defensive, angry, or upset, then it is worth asking yourself: why? And is eating meat, fish, and dairy really worth the environmental impact that it causes?
