A just transition in animal agriculture is necessary for more effective and equitable One Health outcomes
Abstract
The world’s large and growing appetite for meat and other animal products has profound implications for One Health, given its impacts on human health, the environment and animal health and welfare. Accordingly, there is robust evidence that a reduction of animal product consumption is urgently needed in regions where these consumption levels are currently high. A shift away from industrial animal production should be prioritized, given the high levels of animal product consumption this kind of system enables, its relatively high environmental toll, linkages to increasing risks of antimicrobial resistance and zoonoses emergence and harm to animal welfare. Until recently, however, few governments addressed the issue. On the contrary, many governments actively support industrial animal agriculture through subsidies and other measures.
Now, motivated by both environmental and public health concerns, policy makers in several countries are adopting regulatory and financial measures to address the overconsumption of animal products. Although these changes are clearly necessary and long overdue, it is crucial that they are planned carefully and inclusively to ensure a just transition. In lower-resourced and food-insecure settings, meat and other animal products can be a vital source of nutrients – particularly during infancy and childhood. In addition, meat supply chains support many livelihoods, and meat is an important part of many people’s social and cultural traditions. This means that policies that curtail common production practices, reduce meat output and raise meat prices could have significant impacts across society. A just transition approach can help ensure that the costs and benefits of the transition are more equitably distributed and protect the most vulnerable stakeholders. By doing so, it can also help increase public support for the transition. The concept of just transitions is well established in the energy sector but is only starting to be recognized in the context of the food system. Governments in the Global North should take the lead in this area, given these countries have very high levels of animal product consumption and more resources available to support a transition.
In this Policy Forum, we lay out the case for a just transition in animal agriculture and identify five principles to guide policy makers in promoting a just transition away from systems of industrial meat production and overconsumption.
One Health impact statement
Drawing on expertise from health, climate, biodiversity and animal welfare policy and science across several regions, this Policy Forum demonstrates how current levels of animal product production and consumption threaten One Health. Although a transition to a healthier, more sustainable and more compassionate food system is clearly needed, such a transition will necessarily involve both costs and benefits for affected stakeholders. Identifying lessons from international and national climate policy, and energy policy in particular, the authors highlight the value of an approach that is holistic and centred on just transition principles to support a transition away from large-scale animal product production and consumption that is in line with the One Health approach, with an emphasis on transitioning away from the consumption and production of industrially-produced meat. This Policy Forum is relevant to policy makers, companies and civil society seeking to promote a shift towards food systems that emphasize public and planetary health.
Introduction
A One Health approach urges us to consider the interrelationships between human, animal, and environmental wellbeing to achieve a healthier and more sustainable world (One Health High Level Expert Panel et al., 2022). The approach has strong relevance for the food system, where such interrelationships are widespread (Alarcon et al., 2021; Häsler et al., 2023). For instance, demand for food strains natural resources, affecting the environment and animals including by contributing to climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution, which in turn affect human health (Garcia et al., 2020). The risk of infectious disease emergence increases as a result of current food system practices such as industrial farming and hunting, capture and sale of wild animals for human consumption (Wiebers and Feigin, 2020). This can pose health challenges for both farmed and wild animals, while also introducing risks to human public health and food security.
Adopting a One Health lens to food systems can support a healthier and more sustainable global food system by promoting more holistic approaches to promoting food safety, food security and the sustainability of food systems (Garcia et al., 2020). This requires us to go beyond the status quo and may require reconsidering many of today’s existing practices in a way that more fully recognizes how different aspects of the food system impact One Health (Coghlan et al., 2021; Sellars et al., 2021).
A key feature of the world’s current food system is humanity’s large – and growing – appetite for meat and other animal products. On current trends, daily per capita animal protein consumption is projected to increase by 17% by 2050 from 2012 levels (Henchion et al., 2021), while total meat production is projected to increase more than 60% between 2010 and 2050 (UNEP, 2022).
These trends have multiple implications for One Health. On the one hand, a public health perspective highlights that meat and other animal products can be an important source of protein and nutrients, including for pregnant and lactating women, young children and people on low incomes with little access to alternatives (Godfray et al., 2018; FAO, 2023).
On the other hand, in high-income and a growing number of middle-income countries, large-scale, industrial production enables high levels of meat consumption, with high red and processed meat consumption associated with increased risks of developing heart disease, type II diabetes and certain cancers (Godfray et al., 2018). Moreover, current animal agriculture production practices are linked to conditions and practices that can catalyse the emergence of infectious diseases and antimicrobial resistance (Jones et al., 2013; Talebi Bezmin Abadi et al., 2019; Van Boeckel et al., 2019).
Furthermore, an environmental perspective reveals animal agriculture as a significant contributor to climate change and a major driver of global biodiversity loss, land and water use, and pollution (Machovina et al., 2015; FAO, 2018; Poore and Nemecek, 2018). Clark et al. (2020) have shown that even if fossil fuel emissions were eliminated immediately, on current trends, emissions from food systems alone, particularly from animal product production, would make it impossible to limit global warming to 1.5°C and difficult even to limit warming to 2°C.
Finally, an animal health perspective helps us identify that industrial production models that are geared to maximizing outputs at the lowest possible costs can cause severe animal suffering, such as extreme confinement and crowding (Singer, 2023).
Against this backdrop, there are increasing calls for a shift towards a greater reliance on plant-based diets, particularly in regions with high levels of meat consumption (FAO and WHO, 2019; Shukla et al., 2019; Willett et al., 2019). Governments in the Global North should take the lead in this regard, given these countries have very high levels of animal product consumption, and more resources available to support a transition (Verkuijl et al., 2022). However, while necessary, large-scale shifts from high levels of animal product consumption and production will require fundamental changes, as many countries in the Global North and beyond actively support current production practices, large numbers of people work in the industry and the consumption of animal-based foods is deeply entrenched. As such, it must be planned carefully with principles of justice and inclusivity at its core.
The case for a just transition in animal agriculture
Just transition policies have gained traction in climate policy in recent years, driven by both ethical and strategic imperatives for realizing a sustainable future. A just transition approach recognises that transitioning towards a more sustainable society requires consideration not just of environmental concerns, but also of social justice.
The initial conceptualization of the term, developed by US trade unions in the 1970s, focused on protecting the rights of workers and communities that would lose jobs and economic opportunities in the face of new environmental regulations (Stevis et al., 2020). The concept has become an important pillar of climate policy agendas, highlighting the different economic and social equity dimensions associated with transitioning away from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources (Wang and Lo, 2021). In this context, the meaning of just transition has also been widened to consider not just job losses, but also impacts on a much wider range of stakeholders whose prior entitlements or expectations are put at risk by climate change policy.
A well-planned and implemented transition can help minimize disruptions and maximize benefits for affected stakeholders – an important goal in its own right (ITUC, 2017; UNFCCC Secretariat, 2016), and it can also help build broader societal support (Klinsky and Winkler, 2018; Robins, 2020). Moreover, by clearly signalling that a shift is coming, a just transition approach can steer investments away from high-emitting practices (Abram et al., 2022), and thus reduce the risk of either ‘locking in’ unsustainable operations for decades to come or creating ‘stranded’ assets that need to be shut down early. It is only recently, however, that the need for just transitions in agriculture, including animal agriculture, has become more widely acknowledged (Anderson, 2019; Blattner, 2020; Tribaldos and Kortetmäki, 2022; Atteridge, 2023).
Yet achieving a just transition will pose a number of significant challenges, pointing to a valuable role for policy making. First, the transition will affect food supplies and diets, which are essential to human wellbeing. Diets come with strong personal and cultural ties that may incur significant resistance to changes. Without deliberate just transition policies, approaches that increase prices or otherwise change food access and availability could adversely affect low-income and food-insecure households.
Second, many millions of people globally are economically dependent on animal agriculture. These include groups that already face significant socio-economic challenges, such as many farmers and rural communities, as well as other workers across the supply chain, who often face exploitation, discrimination and precarious working conditions, and whose interests risk being overlooked if their industry declines.
Third, the global meat market alone is worth about US$1 trillion (Verkuijl et al., 2022). The alternative meat industry has seen varied growth patterns. Valued at US$4 billion in 2020 (Bloomberg Intelligence, 2021), recent trends have indicated some challenges in its growth trajectory. Nevertheless, it is clear that significant economic and political interests are vying to shape the future food system.
Finally – and a key difference between this transition and those in the energy or industry sectors – farm animals are sentient beings and will be directly affected by the policies that governments adopt to transform the meat sector. Some proposed climate mitigation strategies – such as increased intensification – could be harmful to animal welfare (Shields and Orme-Evans, 2015). The solutions chosen should reduce, rather than increase, suffering.
Policy lessons
But what can policy makers do to prepare for a transition that is more just and in line with the One Health approach? While there is broad agreement that measures need to be tailored to the specific geographical and sectoral context (ILO, 2015; Healy and Barry, 2017; Galgóczi, 2018), we draw on just transition literature across the energy, industry, and agriculture sectors to identify five broader guiding principles that can guide policy makers in promoting a just transition away from high levels of production and consumption of industrial meat (Verkuijl et al., 2022). The principles – summarized below – touch on different, yet essential, aspects of just transitions, and should be pursued collectively. While we focus here on a just transition in the industrial meat sector, many of these lessons are relevant to industrial dairy, egg, and fish production as well.
PHASE DOWN EXISTING POLICIES, PROGRAMMES AND FISCAL SUPPORT THAT PROMOTE INDUSTRIAL MEAT PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION
A key step in the transition is for governments to stop actively supporting practices that damage public and planetary health. This means phasing out subsidies and other forms of regulatory, financial, and policy support to industrial animal agriculture.
Governments today support the sector in numerous ways, including through subsidies and advantageous laws and regulations (Blattner and Ammann, 2020; Rust et al., 2020; FAO et al., 2021). A report by several UN agencies found that poultry, pork, mutton and beef are among the food products that benefit most from government support, and a majority of subsidies go to industrial production (FAO et al., 2021). The report also found that most global agricultural subsidies distort food prices.
Governments also support the meat industry through promotional campaigns and protective policies. For example, the EU spends tens of millions of euros a year on advertisements to encourage meat consumption (Boffey, 2020), while in Australia, the government provides matching funding for marketing and research and development projects by Meat and Livestock Australia, a company that regulates standards for, and promotes the development of, the meat and livestock sector (MLA, 2021). Several US states have passed laws that criminalize undercover investigations of animal production facilities to expose animal cruelty or environmental or health risks (ASPCA, 2021).
Revisiting such policies is necessary to give the correct signals to markets, investors, and consumers about the direction of travel towards a more sustainable and healthy food system.
INCREASE SUPPORT FOR ALTERNATIVES TO INDUSTRIALLY PRODUCED MEAT, AND ENSURE THEY SAFEGUARD SOCIAL EQUITY, HUMAN HEALTH AND ANIMAL WELFARE
As governments encourage more plant-based diets and end subsidies that artificially reduce the price of meat, it is important to ensure that healthy and sustainable alternatives are readily available and affordable. This might entail repurposing meat industry subsidies to support the production of fruit, vegetables, nuts, seeds and legumes (Springmann and Freund, 2022); bringing more fresh foods to ‘food deserts’; or investing in nutrition programmes to promote access to healthier and more sustainable foods.
Several governments such as Canada, China, Denmark, the Netherlands and Singapore are already actively supporting the development of (novel) meat substitutes (Verkuijl et al., 2022). In this context, it is important that they consider the socio-economic implications of the transition away from meat. For instance, while showing significant promise with regard to environmental impacts, the emerging plant-based meat substitutes and cultivated meat industries raise important questions about the extent to which they might reinforce inequalities or create new ones, both between and across countries (Verkuijl et al., 2022; see also Holmes et al., 2022). More research is also needed to understand the nutritional health implications of these novel plant-based meat substitutes compared to conventional animal products and to traditional plant-based options (Nolden and Forde, 2023).
In line with a One Health approach, policies to promote a shift from large-scale meat consumption to more plant-based foods should be based on a systematic assessment of the potential impacts on human health, the environment, socio-economic conditions, and animal welfare. For example, a tax on meat could have significant negative impacts on animal welfare, since it might shift consumption from larger animals, such as cows and pigs, to lower-cost, smaller animals, such as chickens or fish, requiring many more animals to be raised and slaughtered to produce the same amount of meat (Springlea, 2022). This example also further highlights the need for policy mixes, rather than one single approach. As the transition gathers pace, it will be essential to ensure that increased demand for plant-based foods does not exacerbate the environmental or socio-economic problems linked to conventional, input-intensive monocultures, such as (tropical) deforestation, excessive freshwater use, or agrochemical contamination (HLPE, 2017; IPES-Food and ETC Group, 2021).
ENSURE INCLUSIVE AND PARTICIPATORY PLANNING PROCESSES
Emerging from the work of trade unions, just transition approaches are built on truly inclusive, transparent processes that enable stakeholders to participate meaningfully and produce plans that reflect and account for their concerns and needs (Bergquist et al., 2022; Atteridge, 2023). Achieving such procedural justice first requires systematically mapping relevant stakeholders (see Verkuijl et al., 2022) and engaging relevant government agencies and civil society organizations at all levels. Together, participants can develop a collective vision, supported by mechanisms designed and implemented with broad buy-in from affected stakeholder groups, although the process of bringing together different stakeholder views will necessarily be a contested and delicate exercise.
Given the history of systemic marginalization and discrimination in the farmed animal sector, and across societies more broadly, it is particularly important to ensure the meaningful participation and political empowerment of marginalized groups. These include workers and communities of colour, migrant and female workers, smallholder farmers, and informal and seasonal workers. Lessons from transitions in the coal and industry sectors suggest that transitions with strong local ownership can deliver better outcomes than approaches managed at the national level (Weller, 2019; Atteridge and Strambo, 2020). Intergenerational justice – accounting for transition impacts on future generations – should be addressed by ensuring youth participation in planning processes and dedicated consultations with different age groups (Bidadnure, 2016; Pernice-Warnke, 2019; Piggot et al., 2019).
PROVIDE SUPPORT TO STAKEHOLDERS TO HELP OFFSET THE IMPACTS OF A TRANSITION
It is a common practice in the context of just transitions to provide direct support to stakeholders, such as social safety nets and compensation for the disruptions caused (Pollin and Callaci, 2018). Specific funding mechanisms to assist the people and territories affected by the transition can be established, similar to the EU Just Transition Fund for energy transitions (Bruun, 2021). Taking a more long-term view, policy makers can also invest in local economic diversification to create new economic opportunities and compensate for revenue losses through investments in low-emission, job-rich sectors with existing local assets (Carley et al., 2018; Blattner, 2020). Production facilities for alternatives to conventional meat (e.g., plant-based or cultivated) could be established in rural areas to be closer to crops, revitalize rural areas and help offset revenue and job losses associated with the reduction in conventional meat production (Newton and Blaustein-Rejto, 2021). Transition support must also extend to meat consumers, particularly those who may struggle to adapt to changes in food access and cost as new policies reduce meat production and drive up prices.
Effective and equitable support can also go beyond socio-economic losses to address the physical and mental impacts associated with the breakdown of social networks, cultural practices and traditions, and attachments to place (Green and Gambhir, 2019). For example, cattle ranching and pastoralism can be core parts of a community’s culture, heritage and identity, just as coal production is for some mining communities (Starrs, 2000; Della Bosca and Gillespie, 2018; Sanz-Hernández, 2020). Acknowledging the importance of these non-financial losses and addressing those through non-financial responses is important to receiving broad support and acceptance for transitions (Green and Gambhir, 2019).
ADDRESS THE ROOT CAUSES OF INJUSTICES IN THE MEAT SECTOR
With inclusive planning, design and investment, a just transition in the meat sector has the potential to help to address the root causes of inequalities (re-)produced by our food systems more broadly. Transformations that emphasize alternatives to meat can be opportunities to provide jobs to marginalized groups, promote healthier diets and design fairer models of land ownership (50by40, 2021; Newton and Blaustein-Rejto, 2021).
Shifting away from industrialized meat production, which prioritizes quantity and economic efficiency, is an opportunity to invest in a food system that rewards sustainability, provides decent and safe jobs, and promotes animal welfare. However, cases of industrial transition in the United States and South Africa have shown that, in the absence of adequate social safety nets and redeployment programmes, the groups that are already most vulnerable are also less likely to find replacement jobs and are more exposed to human and worker rights abuses (Atteridge and Strambo, 2021; Sesele et al., 2021).
For any just transition, a key step is to identify existing inequalities and flaws, to avoid transferring or exacerbating those through transition planning processes (Anderson, 2019). Indeed, support measures should seek to proactively address existing inequalities, and not only to avoid worsening them or creating new ones. And, as many inequalities are deeply embedded in the broader socio-economic paradigm that prevails globally, addressing them will require the involvement of stakeholders beyond the meat sector itself.
Conclusion
Planning and supporting just transitions is essential if we are to successfully transform our food systems. Time is short, and there is a great deal at stake – from the climate, to biodiversity, to human health. Prompt action to start planning a just transition away from large-scale meat production and consumption can benefit One Health outcomes and help ensure a more just and sustainable future for all.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This Policy Forum is based on the findings of a longer report by the same authors: A just transition in the meat sector: why, who and how? A mapping of affected stakeholders in high-income countries, and principles to guide a just transition. Available at: https://www.sei.org/publications/just-transition-meat-sector/.
ETHICS STATEMENT
The authors confirm that the research conducted for this article is in line with relevant ethical guidelines.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
CV and JG conceptualized the study; CV, CS, RH, RB, PA, MB, JAVA, IB, JS, MBL and JG carried out writing – review and editing; CV and JG carried out funding acquisition; and CV administrated the project.
FUNDING STATEMENT
Research for this article was funded by the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida).
References
50by40 (2021) Open Letter to Member States of the United Nations: A Call for a Global Just Livestock Transition to Secure Livelihoods, Mitigate Climate Change, Improve Environment and Health. Available at: https://50by40.Org/2021/09/07/open-letter-to-member-states-of-the-united-nations/.
Abram, S., Atkins, E., Dietzel, A., Jenkins, K., Kiamba, L.et al. (2022) Just transition: A whole-systems approach to decarbonisation. Climate Policy 22(8), 1033–1049.
Alarcon, P., Dominguez-Salas, P., Fèvre, E.M. and Rushton, J. (2021) The importance of a food systems approach to low and middle income countries and emerging economies: A review of theories and its relevance for disease control and malnutrition. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 5, 92.
Anderson, T. (2019) Principles for a Just Transition in Agriculture. ActionAid. Available at: https://actionaid.org/sites/default/files/publications/Principles%20for%20a%20just%20transition%20in%20agriculture_0.pdf.
ASPCA (2021) What Is Ag-Gag Legislation? American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Available at: https://www.aspca.org/improving-laws-animals/public-policy/what-ag-gag-legislation.
Atteridge, A. (2023) Principles for Just Food System Transitions. Envisioning a More Equitable and Sustainable Future and an Inclusive Path Achieving it. Just Rural Transition. Available at: https://justruraltransition.org/resource/principles-for-just-food-system-transitions/.
Atteridge, A. and Strambo, C. (2020) Seven Principles to Realize a Just Transition to a Low-Carbon Economy. SEI Policy Report. Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm.Available at: https://www.sei.org/publications/seven-principles-to-realize-a-just-transition-to-a-low-carbon-economy/.
Atteridge, A. and Strambo, C. (2021) How Can Socio-Economic Transitions Be Better Managed? Lessons from Four Historical Cases of Industrial Transition. SEI Report. Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm. Available at: https://www.sei.org/publications/lessons-from-industrial-transitions/.
Bergquist, M., Nilsson, A., Harring, N. and Jagers, S.C. (2022) Meta-analyses of fifteen determinants of public opinion about climate change taxes and laws. Nature Climate Change 12(3), 235–240.
Bidadnure, J. (2016) Youth quotas, diversity, and long-termism: Can young people act as proxies for future generations? In: González-Ricoy, I. and Gosseries, A. (eds) Institutions for Future Generations. Oxford University Press Oxford, UK, p. 266–281.
Blattner, C. (2020) Just transition for agriculture? A critical step in tackling climate change. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development 9(3), 53–58.
Blattner, C. and Ammann, O. (2020) Agricultural exceptionalism and industrial animal food production: Exploring the human rights nexus. Journal of Food Law & Policy 15(2), 92–151 Available at: https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jflp/vol15/iss2/9.
Bloomberg Intelligence (2021) Plant-Based Foods Poised for Explosive Growth. Bloomberg Finance LP. Available at: https://www.bloomberg.com/company/press/plant-based-foods-market-to-hit-162-billion-in-next-decade-projects-bloomberg-intelligence/.
Boffey, D. (2020) EU spending tens of millions of euros a year to promote meat eating. The Guardian. Available at: https://www.Theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/14/eu-spending-tens-of-millions-of-euros-a-year-to-promote-meat-eating.
Bruun, L. (2021) Opinion: Why it’s time for just transition within food systems. Devex. Available at: https://www.devex.com/news/sponsored/opinion-why-it-s-time-for-just-transition-within-food-systems-101635.
Carley, S., Evans, T.P. and Konisky, D.M. (2018) Adaptation, culture, and the energy transition in American coal country. Energy Research & Social Science 37, 133–139.
Clark, M.A., Domingo, N.G.G., Colgan, K., Thakrar, S.K., Tilman, D.et al. (2020) Global food system emissions could preclude achieving the 1.5° and 2°C climate change targets. Science 370(6517), 705–708.
Coghlan, S., Coghlan, B.J., Capon, A. and Singer, P. (2021) A bolder One Health: Expanding the moral circle to optimize health for all. One Health Outlook 3, 1–4.
Della Bosca, H. and Gillespie, J. (2018) The coal story: Generational coal mining communities and strategies of energy transition in Australia. Energy Policy 120, 734–740.
FAO (2018) Global Livestock Environmental Assessment Model (GLEAM) | GLEAM 2.0 – Assessment of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Mitigation Potential. Available at: https://www.fao.org/gleam/results/en/.
FAO (2023) Contribution of Terrestrial Animal Source Food to Healthy Diets for Improved Nutrition and Health Outcomes – An Evidence and Policy Overview on the State of Knowledge and Gaps. FAO, Rome.
FAO and WHO (2019) Sustainable Healthy Diets: Guiding Principles. Available at: http://www.fao.org/3/ca6640en/ca6640en.pdf.
FAO, UNDP and UNEP (2021) A Multi-Billion-Dollar Opportunity – Repurposing Agricultural Support to Transform Food Systems. FAO, UNDP, and UNEP, Rome.
Galgóczi, B. (2018) Just Transition towards Environmentally Sustainable Economies and Societies for All. ILO, Geneva. ILO ACTRAV Policy Brief.
Garcia, S.N., Osburn, B.I. and Jay-Russell, M.T. (2020) One health for food safety, food security, and sustainable food production. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 4(1), 1–9.
Godfray, C., Aveyard, P., Garnett, T., Hall, J., Key, T.et al. (2018) Meat consumption, health, and the environment. Science 361(6399), 1–8.
Green, F. and Gambhir, A. (2019) Transitional assistance policies for just, equitable and smooth low-carbon transitions: Who, what and how?Climate Policy 20(8), 902–921.
Häsler, B., Queenan, K., Alarcon, P., Raj, E. and Whatford, L. (2023) Where One Health meets food systems teaching and learning: Expanding skillsets for food system transformation. In: One Health Cases. CABI, Wallingford, UK, pp. 1–13.
Healy, N. and Barry, J. (2017) Politicizing energy justice and energy system transitions: Fossil fuel divestment and a “just transition”. Energy Policy 108, 451–459.
Henchion, M., Moloney, A.P., Hyland, J., Zimmermann, J. and McCarthy, S. (2021) Review: Trends for meat, milk and egg consumption for the next decades and the role played by livestock systems in the global production of proteins. Animal 15, 100287.
HLPE (2017) Sustainable Forestry for Food Security and Nutrition. A Report by the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security. FAO, Rome Available at: https://www.fao.Org/publications/card/en/c/1c591030-7384-47ab-b998-e93f0952e0d1/.
Holmes, D., Humbird, D., Dutkiewicz, J., Tejeda-Saldana, Y., Duffy, B.et al. (2022) Cultured meat needs a race to mission not a race to market. Nature Food 3(10), 785–787.
ILO (2015) Guidelines for a Just Transition towards Environmentally Sustainable Economies and Societies for All. International Labour Organization Available at: https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/-ed_emp/-emp_ent/documents/publication/wcms_432859.pdf.
IPES-Food and ETC Group (2021) A Long Food Movement: Transforming Food Systems by 2045. Available at: https://www.ipes-food.org/_img/upload/files/LongFoodMovementEN.pdf.
ITUC (2017) Where Are We Now and What’s Next? A Guide to National Policies and International Climate Governance. International Trade Union Confederation, Brussels Available at: https://www.ituc-csi.org/just-transition-where-are-we-now?lang=en.
Jones, B.A., Grace, D., Kock, R., Alonso, S., Rushton, J.et al. (2013) Zoonosis emergence linked to agricultural intensification and environmental change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 110(21), 8399–8404.
Klinsky, S. and Winkler, H. (2018) Building equity in: Strategies for integrating equity into modelling for a 1.5°C world. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 376(2119), 20160461.
Machovina, B., Feeley, K.J. and Ripple, W.J. (2015) Biodiversity conservation: The key is reducing meat consumption. Science of The Total Environment 536. 419–431.
MLA (2021) How We are Funded. Meat & Livestock Australia. Available at: https://www.Mla.com.au/about-mla/how-we-are-funded/.
Newton, P. and Blaustein-Rejto, D. (2021) Social and economic opportunities and challenges of plant-based and cultured meat for rural producers in the US. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 5, 10.
Nolden, A.A. and Forde, C.G. (2023) The nutritional quality of plant-based foods. Sustainability 15(4), 3324.
One Health High Level Expert Panel, Adisasmito, W.B., Almuhairi, S., Behravesh, C.B., Bilivogui, P., Bukachi, S.A.et al. (2022) One Health: A new definition for a sustainable and healthy future. PloS Pathogens 18(6), e1010537.
Pernice-Warnke, S. (2019) Intergenerational justice procedural ways to ensure intergenerational justice. The Oxford Institute of Population Ageing. Available at: https://www.ageing.ox.ac.uk/blog/intergenerational-justice.
Piggot, G., Boyland, M., Down, A. and Torre, A.R. (2019) Realizing a Just and Equitable Transition Away from Fossil Fuels. Stockholm Environment Institute, Seattle, WA Available at: https://www.sei.org/publications/just-and-equitable-transition-fossil-fuels/.
Pollin, R. and Callaci, B. (2018) The economics of just transition: A framework for supporting fossil fuel–dependent workers and communities in the United States. Labor Studies Journal 44(2), 93–138.
Poore, J. and Nemecek, T. (2018) Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science 360(6392), 987–992.
Robins, N. (2020) How a just transition can speed up the race to net-zero. Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and theEnvironment. Available at: https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/news/how-a-just-transition-can-speed-up-the-race-to-net-zero/.
Rust, N.A., Ridding, L., Ward, C., Clark, B., Kehoe, L.et al. (2020) How to transition to reduced-meat diets that benefit people and the planet. Science of The Total Environment 718, 137208.
Sanz-Hernández, A. (2020) How to change the sources of meaning of resistance identities in historically coal-reliant mining communities. Energy Policy 139, 111353.
Sellars, L., Bernotas, K. and Sebo, J. (2021) One Health, COVID-19, and a right to health for human and nonhuman animals. Health and Human Rights 23(2), 35.
Sesele, K., Marais, L., van Rooyen, D. and Cloete, J. (2021) Mine decline and women: Reflections from the free state goldfields. The Extractive Industries and Society 8(1), 211–219.
Shields, S. and Orme-Evans, G. (2015) The impacts of climate change mitigation strategies on animal welfare. Animals 5(2), 361–394.
Shukla, P.R., Skea, J., Calvo Buendia, E., Masson-Delmotte, V., Roberts, D.C.et al. (eds) (2019) Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on Climate Change, Desertification, Land Degradation, Sustainable Land Management, Food Security, and Greenhouse Gas Fluxes in Terrestrial Ecosystems. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Geneva. Available at: https://www.ipcc.ch/srccl/.
Singer, P. (2023) Animal Liberation Now: The Definitive Classic Renewed. Diversion Books, New York.
Springlea, R. (2022) Meat Tax Campaigns. Animal Ask Available at: https://c2b5df1e-0ba2-4201-9fb6-87e92e6ad2c0.usrfiles.com/ugd/c2b5df_ecf0945e31054a62b33da5fd0816a86f.pdf.
Springmann, M. and Freund, F. (2022) Options for reforming agricultural subsidies from health, climate, and economic perspectives. Nature Communications 13(1), 82.
Starrs, P.F. (2000) Let the Cowboy Ride: Cattle Ranching in the American West. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.
Stevis, D., Morena, E. and Krause, D. (2020) Introduction: The genealogy and contemporary politics of just transition. In: Just Transitions. Social Justice in the Shift Towards a Low-Carbon World. Pluto Press, London, pp. 1–31.
Talebi Bezmin Abadi, A., Rizvanov, A.A., Haertlé, T. and Blatt, N.L. (2019) World health organization report: Current crisis of antibiotic resistance. BioNanoScience 9(4), 778–788.
Tribaldos, T. and Kortetmäki, T. (2022) Just transition principles and criteria for food systems and beyond. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 43, 244–256.
UNEP (2022) Emissions Gap Report 2022. United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi. Available at: http://www.unep.org/resources/emissions-gap-report-2022.
UNFCCC Secretariat (2016) Just Transition of the Workforce, and the Creation of Decent Work and Quality Jobs. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Bonn, Germany. Available at: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2016/tp/07.pdf.
Van Boeckel, T.P., Pires, J., Silvester, R., Zhao, C., Song, J.et al. (2019) Global trends in antimicrobial resistance in animals in low-and middle-income countries. Science 365(6459).
Verkuijl, C., Strambo, C., Hocquet, R., Butterfield, R., Achakulwisut, P.et al. (2022) A Just Transition in the Meat Sector: Why, Who, and How? SEI Report. Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm.
Wang, X. and Lo, K. (2021) Just transition: A conceptual review. Energy Research & Social Science 82(102291), 1–11.
Weller, S.A. (2019) Just transition? Strategic framing and the challenges facing coal dependent communities. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space 37(2), 298–316.
Wiebers, D.O. and Feigin, V.L. (2020) What the COVID-19 crisis is telling humanity. Neuroepidemiology 54(4), 283–286.
Willett, W., Rockström, J., Loken, B., Springmann, M., Lang, T.et al. (2019) Food in the Anthropocene: The EAT–Lancet Commission on healthy diets. The Lancet 393(10170), 447–492.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
2023
Copyright
© The Authors 2023. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
History
Issue publication date: 1 January 2023
Submitted: 21 January 2023
Accepted: 4 August 2023
Published online: 12 October 2023
Keywords:
Language
English
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
SCITE_
Citations
Export citation
Select the format you want to export the citations of this publication.
EXPORT CITATIONSExport Citation
View Options
View options
Get Access
Login Options
Check if you access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.