Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract Transformation in food systems poses new opportunities for improving environmental sustainability and reducing the use of farmed animals. Discussions about transforming current food systems have been centered mostly on replacing animal source proteins with plant-based alternatives and about how to minimize food waste and loss. Products from cellular agriculture are part of a novel food transition and are presented as new, sustainable alternatives for animal source proteins. However, justice and equity narratives in food system transition discussions concerning cellular agriculture are rare. The aim of this study is to address how cellular agriculture may contribute to a just food system transition and to evaluate the prospects of such foods on this planet by reviewing narratives of cellular agriculture in 36 scientific articles. The data were analyzed using a justice transition framework. The results show that cellular agriculture has a potential to contribute to improving environmental sustainability if developers take justice into account as an important factor. Concerns are that cellular agriculture has the potential to be an exclusive food and may introduce regional variances exacerbating inequalities within the food system. We contribute to the discussion of just food system transitions by highlighting the importance of justice considerations in the context of cellular agriculture. Key aspects include the need for fair distribution along the value chain, global access to cellular agriculture benefits, and the recognition of social transformations in technological solutions. Additionally, transparent decision-making, open data access, and capacity building for stakeholders emerge as critical elements for fostering equitable and sustainable development in cellular agriculture. PubDate: 2024-08-05 DOI: 10.1007/s41055-024-00156-8
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract Before the last century, societies around the globe, including Indigenous Peoples and early settlers to Canada’s west coast, relied on local procurement and preservation of seasonal food to support their food security and food sovereignty. In some instances, Indigenous Peoples and settlers shared and adopted each other’s food provisioning and preservation practices and associated values. Such cross-cultural knowledge exchanges provided wide-ranging food provisioning options for those living in the region. In this paper, we conceptualize such exchanges and varieties of provisioning options as part of Indigenous and local food systems that have been co-created through mutual interdependence, support, and food-related values. Using data from interviews and document analysis, we show that current residents of the Clayoquot Sound Biosphere Region have maintained traditional food procurement and preservation techniques, although with some new methods that have emerged in response to new technologies, innovation, and need. Indigenous and non-Indigenous residents who share food and exchange food provisioning practices simultaneously support their food needs, wellbeing, and cultural maintenance. In contrast to research that examines and conceptualizes local food systems and Indigenous food systems separately, this paper highlights the existence of an interrelated Indigenous and local food system, characterized by historical and contemporary shared food provisioning practices and cross-cultural food knowledge exchanges on Canada’s west coast. The advantage of the joint conceptualization lies in acknowledging how food systems can and do evolve to co-exist over time, and how they create opportunities for people living in remote, sometimes marginalized communities to strengthen food security and food sovereignty through shared food provisioning practices that resonate with their values. PubDate: 2024-08-02 DOI: 10.1007/s41055-024-00155-9
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract Increasing the willingness to reduce animal product consumption has the potential to contribute to ameliorating the impact of animal agriculture on the environment, as well as foster healthier diets and improve the lives of farmed and wild animals. Reduction of animal product consumption is a prosocial behaviour (PSB), and factors that are considered to influence it are empathy and selfishness. In this research, animal-oriented empathy examined empathy specifically for animals. Animal oriented empathy and three types of selfishness: adaptive, egoistic, and pathological were measured to determine if they could predict willingness to reduce animal product consumption. PSB is also influenced by motivations and motivations can lead to willingness. The three most common motivations to reduce animal product consumption: animal welfare, the environment, and health were examined to determine whether they predict willingness. A sample of 492 Australian adults completed questionnaires via the Zoho survey platform, and the data underwent a hierarchical regression. Higher pathological selfishness predicted a greater willingness to reduce animal product consumption, as did environmental and animal welfare motivations. However, higher health motivation predicted a lower willingness to reduce animal product consumption. Interpretation of the perplexing results in relation to pathological selfishness suggested further research. The practical value of utilising environmental and animal motivations to increase willingness to reduce animal products whilst bringing attention to the health issues was also discussed. PubDate: 2024-07-29 DOI: 10.1007/s41055-024-00154-w
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract The text focuses primarily on the peasant food and culinary culture that takes place inside the stoves and kitchens of the municipality of Bello - Antioquia - Colombia, in order to make the rural kitchen visible as an essential element in the constitution of the municipality’s identity. To this end, it starts from a bibliographic analysis that supports and structures the axes through which the project circulates: food and culinary culture, as well as the kitchen, understood as a feature of identity. The research was approached using a qualitative and ethnographic methodology, in which participant observation was applied, in-depth interviews with inhabitants and tradition bearers of the villages of the municipality of Bello, in addition to tools such as field diaries and photographs. In general, this article provides an overview of the peasant cuisine of the municipality of Bello, its continuities and changes, promoting the knowledge and dissemination of the traditional cuisines of the territory. PubDate: 2024-07-18 DOI: 10.1007/s41055-024-00152-y
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract Understanding evolving public views on food production is vital to ensure agricultural industries remain socially sustainable. To explore public attitudes to the dairy industry, a convenience sample of Australian citizens were asked to write their choice of a ‘love letter’ or ‘breakup letter’ to dairy. The present study provides results from the 19 letters submitted. Participants varied in age, gender identity, income and frequency of consumption of dairy products. The letters were on average 144 words long (range: 48–285), and were categorized into 8 love letters, 6 break-up letters, and 5 ‘distance’ letters that conveyed a conflicted stance. We undertook inductive thematic analysis of all letters, identifying three main themes: (1) personal relationship with dairy; (2) views about dairy as an industry; and (3) views on dairy products. Support for dairy was mainly communicated through participants’ love of dairy products, whilst opposition to dairy largely centered on participants’ ethical concerns about farming practices. Some participants were conflicted in their relationship with dairy, struggling to balance their love of the products and their concerns about farming practices. In contrast, participants who conveyed that they had ‘broken up’ with the dairy industry described an unfailing commitment to their decision. Our findings demonstrate the key role of people’s core values in their relationship with dairy. Efforts to identify and address areas of concern that lead to values misalignment with the public may aid in maintaining the social sustainability of the dairy industry into the future. PubDate: 2024-07-18 DOI: 10.1007/s41055-024-00153-x
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract The use of genetic technology in agriculture is viewed by some as the next frontier of farming but others may view it as a threat. The aim of the current study was to describe the views of experts working in agricultural genetics regarding how best to communicate genetic technology with a broader audience (e.g., clientele, the public). We recruited 10 experts working in roles that involve communication about genetic technology in agriculture. Using semi-structured interviews, we asked participants to describe how they discuss this technology, who they discuss it with, and their thoughts on the involvement of various stakeholders in these discussions. Interview transcripts were subjected to thematic analysis and participant responses were organized into three themes: 1) Communicating and framing genetic technology, including discussing risks, benefits, and applications, distinguishing technology from other similar technologies, and engaging in value-based discussions; 2) Challenges of public communication, including misinformation and opposing opinions, conflation with older technologies, and balancing information provision; and 3) Stakeholder involvement in discussions, which included views on how different groups (e.g., activists, farmers, and scientists) should be included in discussions, and who is best suited to discuss genetic technology with the public. We conclude that leaders in agricultural genetics engage in a variety of approaches to communicate genetic technology, using different frames that they feel are likely to appeal to their audience, and differ in their opinions of who should be involved in these discussions. PubDate: 2024-07-08 DOI: 10.1007/s41055-024-00148-8
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract Meat consumption has long been a staple in China, but its environmental and social impacts have prompted the development of a market for meat substitutes. However, the question remains whether meat substitutes can coexist with traditional food culture in the context of sustainable development. To address this issue, the researchers used a mixed methods approach to examine the factors influencing Chinese consumers' purchase intentions for meat substitutes. This study conducted an online survey to explore the demographic characteristics of Chinese consumers who are more likely to purchase meat substitutes. The online survey focused on environmental factors such as greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), animal welfare, energy efficiency, and waste. Differences in the intention to purchase meat substitutes across various groups were compared using a Chi-square test. The results showed that women were more likely to buy meat alternatives for environmental sustainability, over half of the vegetarians were willing to purchase plant-based meat to reduce GHG emissions, and over a quarter of younger respondents were ready to buy cultured meat to minimize waste. Nearly a third of higher-income earners were willing to purchase cultured meat to protect animal welfare. Furthermore, the study conducted in-depth interviews with experts from various industries to explore consumer perceptions of meat alternatives. Text analysis revealed factors that motivate or discourage consumers from purchasing meat alternatives, such as traditional Chinese medicine, food therapy, masculinity, and other socio-cultural factors. The study highlights the complex interplay of cultural, environmental, and social factors that shape Chinese consumers' attitudes toward meat alternatives, providing new insights into the future of sustainable meat. PubDate: 2024-06-15 DOI: 10.1007/s41055-024-00151-z
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract It has been argued that livestock farming is necessary to feed a growing population, that it enables efficient use of land and biomass that would otherwise be lost from the food system, that it produces manure that is necessary for crop cultivation, and helps improve the sustainability of cropping systems by inclusion of perennial forage crops in otherwise low-diversity crop rotations. In this paper, we analyze these arguments in favor of livestock farming. Through argumentation analysis based on scientific data, we show that the arguments are either invalid or that their validity is limited to certain circumstances. Without taking into consideration any other potential arguments for livestock farming, or arguments against it, we conclude that the arguments analyzed here cannot in isolation provide justification for more than a small proportion of today’s livestock farming. PubDate: 2024-06-07 DOI: 10.1007/s41055-024-00147-9
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract Synthetic meat products promise to serve as inexpensive substitute proteins that can replace meat made through conventional animal agriculture. At least some of the excitement about these products stems from ethical and moral concerns regarding animal welfare, environmental costs, and human health. A governing idea behind the creation of substitute meat is that consumers will recognize the ethical and moral concerns of conventional production and substitute one (better) product for another (worse) product. This approach, however, overlooks a much more practical complication: the problem of indifference. That is,--consumer demand does not in practice greatly hinge on the well-known moral issues in conventional animal agriculture, as evident by the immense scale of the current meat market. In this paper, we ask how consumer indifference and producer strategy might influence the uptake of clean meat in the economic market. We suggest that thinking about the challenge in this way reveals powerful presuppositions that confuse our thinking about the potential of synthetic meat. Rather than understanding synthetic meat in terms of its substitution value, we propose approaching the challenge of synthetic meat from the standpoint of reasons-for and reasons-against. Doing so, we suggest, exposes the complications of “causal indeterminacy” that in turn implicate our thinking both about moral responsibility and the broader nature of technocratic solutions to environmental problems. We argue instead that synthetic meat offers an exciting and novel product, but likely not a substitute that will displace the conventional protein industry. PubDate: 2024-06-05 DOI: 10.1007/s41055-024-00149-7
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract The consumption of meat is a topic of concern because of its environmental and ethical implications. Consequently, plant-based meat alternatives have gained popularity. However, the consumption of these alternatives remains limited and understanding the factors that influence consumers’ intentions to consume them is vital. Current study aims to examine the crucial factors (i.e., knowledge of sustainable food production, problem awareness, outcome efficacy, descriptive social norms, injunctive social norms, and personal norms) that affect consumers’ intentions to consume plant-based meat alternatives, promoting sustainable and ethical food choices. For this purpose, an online survey was conducted and data from 397 participants in China were analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modeling. The findings revealed that knowledge of sustainable food production, problem awareness, outcome efficacy, descriptive social norms, injunctive social norms, and personal norms had significant positive influences on the intention to consume plant-based meat alternatives. Findings can assist policymakers and practitioners in developing targeted strategies to promote sustainable and ethical food choices among consumers, such as improving their knowledge of sustainable food production, raising awareness of problems, promoting social norms, and fostering personal norms related to plant-based meat alternatives consumption. PubDate: 2024-06-03 DOI: 10.1007/s41055-024-00150-0
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract The negative impacts of agriculture on the environment and the inequity that limits access to healthy food for the entire population impede sustainable development. This article reflects contributions to food security and alternatives for transitioning to sustainable food systems. It is concluded that food, as a human right, is a complex and transdisciplinary issue, which must be integrated as a transversal axis in the economic, social, environmental, governance, and cultural dimensions to contribute to sustainable development and therefore the convenience of making the transition from the concept of food security to that of food sustainability. PubDate: 2024-04-29 DOI: 10.1007/s41055-024-00146-w
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract Amartya Sen’s work has contributed to shifting our focus from food availability to food access and utilisation, together called ‘nutritional capability’. Existing food insecurity instruments have been informed partially by the capability approach, but remain focused on material deprivation and its economic sub-dimensions. This narrow focus has become problematic, particularly in high-income countries, where material deprivation is largely overcome and food poverty manifests itself differently from that in low-income countries. Food poverty in high-income countries should thus be approached from a ‘food capability’ perspective that fully recognises the multidimensionality of eating lives and the multiple factors that affect their dietary standards. To demonstrate the usefulness of this perspective, the Alkire-Foster method for multidimensional food poverty was utilised to analyse food poverty in Japan. The Alkire-Foster measure has a dual cut-off approach and its adapted method can produce a multidimensional food poverty index by setting reasonable food deprivation and poverty thresholds. The national data used for empirical demonstration was obtained from a web-based questionnaire conducted in Japan, to which 973 participants (aged 20–60 years) responded. The measurement identified a 20.6% food-poor population and inequalities in food capabilities among subgroups. Although economic deprivation was tightly linked to food poverty, the results suggested that gender- and age-based inequalities were larger than socioeconomic status-based ones, which reflected much wider societal problems in Japan than growing economic poverty, such as gender inequality and population ageing. The proposed measurement is effective for monitoring food policy impacts and complementing existing food insecurity assessment tools. The results will be useful for promoting social debate about what the minimal dietary standard should be in high-income societies. PubDate: 2024-03-21 DOI: 10.1007/s41055-024-00145-x
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract This study examines the concept of food morality and explores its implications for today's world. The analysis carried out allowed us to develop a theoretical construct that approaches food morality from a holistic and interconnected perspective, providing us with a new way of understanding it. This new perspective on food morality will serve as an overarching framework for guiding individual choices, public policy making, and transformative actions needed to address the complex challenges facing food systems in the modern world. The theoretical approach used in this study focuses on the elements that shape food morality, considering its different contexts. This theoretical approach provides a solid basis for proposing a new food morality. PubDate: 2024-02-16 DOI: 10.1007/s41055-024-00144-y
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract Attention to big data analytics is ubiquitous and growing given the online shopping revolution and its potential to generate individual-specific actionable datasets which were previously unavailable or cumbersome to cultivate. However, the food industry has not drawn much attention to discussions of individualized pricing strategies using online grocery datasets. Considering growth of the online grocery market and consumers data abundance to grocers, this brief viewpoint article focuses on potentials of incorporating big data analytics into pricing strategies in online grocery markets. This discussion informs of various practices of big data analytics and ultimately calls to attention the potential for personalized pricing in online food markets. This article proposes the need for empirical analysis and developing research agendas investigating impacts of personalized pricing on market efficiencies, which is not as unambiguous in practices as it is theoretically. In addition, the status of online groceries, concepts of price differentiation, societal, economic, and regulatory implications of personalized pricing are discussed. PubDate: 2024-02-15 DOI: 10.1007/s41055-024-00142-0
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract Calls for public engagement on emerging agricultural technologies, including genetic engineering of farm animals, have resulted in the development of information that people can interact and engage with online, including “Frequently Asked Questions” (FAQs) developed by organizations seeking to inform or influence the debate. We conducted a frame analysis of FAQs webpages about genetic engineering of farm animals developed by different organizations to describe how questions and answers are presented. We categorized FAQs as having a regulatory frame (emphasizing or challenging the adequacy of regulations), an efficiency frame (emphasizing precision and benefits), a risks and uncertainty frame (emphasizing unknown outcomes), an animal welfare frame (emphasizing benefits for animals) or an animal dignity frame (considering the inherent value of animals). Animals were often featured as the object of regulations in FAQs, and questions about animals were linked to animal welfare regulations. The public were represented using a variety of terms (public, consumer) and pronouns (I, we). Some FAQs described differences between technology terms (gene editing, genetic modification) and categorized technologies as either well-established or novel. This framing of the technology may not respond to actual public concerns on the topic. Organizations seeking to use FAQs as a public engagement tool might consider including multiple viewpoints and actual questions people have about genetic engineering. PubDate: 2024-02-12 DOI: 10.1007/s41055-024-00143-z
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract In Just Fodder: The Ethics of Feeding Animals, I explore a range of overlooked practical questions in animal ethics and the philosophy of food, developing a new approach to animal ethics. According to the position I defend, animals have negative rights based on their possession of normatively significant interests, and we have positive obligations towards (and concerning) animals based on our normatively salient relationships with them. Gary O’Brien, Angie Pepper, Clare Palmer, and Leon Borgdorf offer a range of insightful challenges to my framework and its applications. Here, I respond to them around five themes: extensionism, agency, predation, interventionism, and environmentalism. PubDate: 2024-01-17 DOI: 10.1007/s41055-023-00139-1
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract In Just Fodder: The Ethics of Feeding Animals, Josh Milburn thinks through the implications of feeding animals by focusing on the relationships between humans and three different groups of animals: (1) animal companions; (2) animal neighbours; and (3) wild animals. In my comments, I concentrate on how the actions and agency interests of these animals problematise some of Milburn’s assumptions and normative prescriptions. My overall aim is to show how giving animal agency more prominence in our thinking about what we owe to them has significant implications. It is my view that current theorising about other animals focuses too heavily on their experiential welfare and not enough on what animals do and the normative significance of what they do. Though I agree with Milburn that all animals have a right against being killed and made to suffer, a full ethical analysis of our relations with other animals must also consider their (equally weighty) interest in self-determination. PubDate: 2024-01-15 DOI: 10.1007/s41055-023-00141-7
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract In assessing the welfare of dairy cows and laying hens, longevity has recently been introduced as an indicator. This paper presents recent attempts to transfer the normative power of longevity to non-human animals and evaluates this choice systematically. It first shows that the normative power of longevity can be justified by utilitarianism but not by rights-based approaches. The case of the ban to kill day-old chicks in Germany is then used to show that public opinion leans neither to the utilitarian approach nor to the rights-based one but draws a firm line between killing animals before and after reaching an adult age. This may be not so much a desire for longevity among farmed animals but a first sign of empathy that may transform our relationship with farmed animals. PubDate: 2023-12-18 DOI: 10.1007/s41055-023-00137-3
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract In Just Fodder, Josh Milburn defends the view that sentient animals have negative rights. Since non-human animals are not moral agents, and can’t themselves violate anyone’s rights, wild predation is normally ethically unproblematic. However, Milburn argues, there are occasions when humans can become morally responsible for an animal’s predation. In cases like these, predation does violate the prey animal’s rights. The difficulty here lies in determining when a human is ‘sufficiently’ morally responsible for an animal’s predation for the predation to count as a rights violation. In this paper, I pick out what I take to be the relevant criteria Milburn identifies for moral responsibility: creating increased predation risk, foreseeability of increased predation risk, intending predation to happen, having some kind of special responsibility for the predator, and having some kind of special relationship to the prey. I argue that, at least as applied by Milburn, these criteria can lead to a kind of moral over-extension, one that rules out most forms of wild animal rehabilitation, species reintroduction and rewilding. PubDate: 2023-12-18 DOI: 10.1007/s41055-023-00138-2
Hybrid journal (It can contain Open Access articles)
[2468 journals]
