4 minute read

Sustainable dietary transition

by Hélène Vallée (Volunteer at Action Art)

Vegetarianism, veganism and flexitarianism, emerging trends?

Advertisement

In recent years we have heard a lot about vegetarianism, veganism and flexitarianism. These modes of food consumption are benefiting from a fertile ground that facilitates dietary change, particularly through the growing media coverage, the development of the plant-based offer, the introduction of vegetarian menus in collective catering... But what is the reality of the phenomenon?

To begin with, what do the terms vegetarian, vegan and flexitarian mean and what are their differences? Vegetarianism is a diet that excludes the consumption of meat and fish but not the consumption of foods of animal origin such as eggs or milk. Not to be confused with veganism, which is a way of life. A vegan person excludes all products of animal origin and adopts an animal-friendly lifestyle (clothing, cosmetics, leisure activities, etc.). As far as flexitarianism is concerned, it corresponds to a reduction in meat consumption, and is practised in different ways: by applying a “meat-free day”, by not eating meat at every meal or by reducing the size of portions. Vegetarianism is still a marginal trend, so that it is still difficult to establish the profile of a vegetarian in every country. Nevertheless, the phenomenon seems to attract more women, people under 35 and urban populations or those with a strong cultural capital. On the contrary, flexitarianism, which is more widespread, affects all age groups and seems to respond to different logics. The number of vegetarians is constantly increasing, as numerous studies in different European countries show. In Germany, for example, the number of vegetarians has doubled since 2006. There are now about 7.8 million vegetarians (almost 10% of the population) according to the study by YouGov. As far as the French are concerned, according to Xerfi, vegetarians represent only about 2% of the French population (around 1.3 million people) while flexitarians account for a third of the population, i.e. nearly 23 million people.

What are the reasons to reduce meat consumption ?

The motivations of vegetarians or flexitarians are usually multiple. Awareness of the ethical, environmental and health consequences has led many Europeans to reduce their consumption of meat and dairy products or even to ban them from their diet. This trend is supported by the idea that a reduction of meat consumption is good for your health. A study published in January 2013 by Oxford university has reinforced this claim. Based on blood data from 45,000 British people aged between 50 and 70, it concludes that vegetarians are 32% less likely than non-vegetarians to suffer from coronary heart disease.

Over the past half-century, meat consumption in Europe has increased by 60%. Adding meat to the daily menu had become a dietary habit. Today, the price of meat is a motivation in the decision to limit its consumption, but is a constraint rather than a choice. This motivation is cited by various consumer profiles, important in France (31% cited) and the United Kingdom (32% cited). In France, financial reduction is the first argument of 27% of people who claim to have reduced their meat consumption according to the CREDOC survey for FranceAgriMer carried out in 2018. Anyway, individual choice is still at the base of reducing (or removing) meat consumption, even if there are plenty of reasons supporting its benefits for people and the planet.

If meat has so many side effects why governments and institutions don’t tackle the phenomenon?

One of the main reasons for the lack of institutional initiatives to reduce meat consumption is that animal agriculture is one of the most powerful industries in the world. In 2018, according to FAO, world meat production was estimated at 336,5 million tonnes (in carcass weight equivalent). In addition, according to National Hog Farmer, the US meat and poultry industry accounts for more than $1 trillion in total economic output, with Tyson Foods, Cargill and Smithfield being the world’s largest meat producers. Tyson Foods has been involved in a number of controversies related to the environment, animal welfare and the welfare of its own employees. More researches lead by GRAIN have shown that most of these large companies do not report their greenhouse gas emissions data and that few of them have set targets for reducing their overall emissions. This is especially true as some of them are trying to increase production and exports. Meat and dairy products are a market that has created a lot of profit and will continue to do so.

Conclusion

The greatest fear for companies is not an increasingly demanding customer, but the customer’s ability to boycott to force companies to comply with certain economic, social or environmental rules. A simple individual choice can change the whole market if it is made by more people. We can continue to support the economy of powerful companies, but together we can also stop this system by choosing products more responsibly, by financing local and sustainable businesses. What do you choose?

This article is from: