For the benefit of the land? Ethical aspects of the impact of meat production on nature, the environment and the countryside

Abstract

What is the impact of animal production on the world before it becomes the meat we eat? There is little doubt that livestock production substantially affects its surroundings. FAO talks about 'a long shadow' cast over the environment, nature and landscapes on a global scale - and in specific countries. If we take it as a premise that meat production will continue for the foreseeable future, the question is whether meat can be produced in a way that is sustainable in relation to the land, understood as nature, the environment and landscape at once? A prerequisite fact to this question that needs to be remembered is that views differ on what is 'for the benefit' of the land. There is a range of stakeholders whose interests and values may pull in different directions in relation to the question of how and to what extent land is used directly or indirectly for meat production. For example, there are livestock producers who place value on being able to maintain an efficient and rational production. There are various recreational users, such as joggers, hunters and fishermen who value being able to roam the countryside pursuing their special interests. And there are groups, such as nature conservationists who may claim that they not only speak for their own interests, but also on behalf of nature and/or future generations. So what do we - as a society with multiple views and values - want with meat production, and with land, in the light of what we know about the impact of meat production on the rest of the planet? The answer to this question is part of a very complex ethical discussion - a discussion, we will argue, should be conducted in a more realistic, fruitful, open and fair way than it presently is. This paper discusses five 'modest' points to consider in relation to this ambition.