![Sample our Environment & Sustainability journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5935/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Environment-Sustainability.jpg"})
Abstract
This paper examines the factors shaping non-governmental organization (NGO) messaging decisions on how meat consumption should be altered in light of climate change. In particular, we sought to understand the relative absence of messages promoting meat-free diets and the decision of some NGOs to pair meat reduction messages with messages encouraging consumers to switch to meat from ruminant grass-fed animals. Interviews were conducted with 27 staff members from environmental, food-focused, and animal protection NGOs from the USA, Canada, and Sweden. While strategic considerations consistently led to the use of modest messages for meat reduction, NGO missions were also key to shaping the specifics of messaging goals. The relatively low personal comfort levels that some NGO staffers held toward meat-free diets also led to the use of more modest requests for meat reduction. Findings highlight the complex nature of the factors underlying the environmental communication messages of NGOs.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by a Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future—Lerner Fellowship, the Johns Hopkins University Environment, Energy, Sustainability, & Health Institute, the Culture and Animals Foundation, and the Lipitz Public Health Policy Fund located in the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Office of Public Health Practice and Training. The authors have no conflicts of interest to report. Thanks go to the study participants.
Notes
1. While some NGOs also promote a switch to organic meat more generally, which can include lower-emissions meat from monogastric animals such as chickens, prior research (Laestadius et al., Citation2013) indicates a more common focus on promoting meat from grass-fed, pasture raised animals (e.g. cattle, goats, sheep). Accordingly, this study focused on the motivations underlying the latter.
2. FAO per capita meat supply is used as a proxy for consumption.
3. Of the NGOs that failed to respond to interview requests, four were Canadian, one was Swedish, and five were from the USA. With the exception of one animal protection NGO, all of the organizations that failed to respond were environmental NGOs. Website examinations of these NGOs suggested that most had minimal to no content focused on reducing meat consumption in light of climate change. A small number had content more explicitly suggesting changes to meat consumption. There did not appear to be any notable differences between the included and non-responsive/declining groups.