Sustainability, animal welfare and ethical food policy: A comparative analysis of sustainable intensification and holistic integrative naturalism

Abstract

In the second half of the twentieth century, agricultural production in the UK intensified, driven first by food security and then economics. Since the 1960s and 1970s both animal welfare and environmental advocates have criticised intensive agriculture. Intensive livestock means confinement, high stocking densities and rapid growth rates, often causing animal suffering. European society demonstrates preference for food from animals reared compassionately in a sustainable way. Livestock agriculture causes 18% of global greenhouse gas emissions, contributing to climate change. Furthermore, the human population is set to reach 9 billion by 2050, meaning greater demand for food, water and energy. In response a UK Government-commissioned report has recommended 'sustainable intensification' of agriculture as a central policy initiative. However, livestock agriculture is a major cause of global warming and intensification might in fact lead to an increase in emissions. This paper proposes an alternative position, holistic integrative naturalism, which argues for more fundamental change in policy prescriptions. These include addressing underlying fundamentals including population growth, excessive consumption of animal products, and economic policy. Philosophically, the ideas of sustainable intensification and holistic naturalism may be based on different conceptions of human nature. Sustainable intensifiers have faith in scientific progress, hold an anthropocentric worldview and see humankind as rightful master of the world. Holistic naturalists are sceptical about science and technology, hold a more biocentric worldview and see humankind as steward of the natural world.