Food and sustainability: meat consumption and vegetarianism in Brazil and the United Kingdom

Authors

  • Emily Wolstenholme PhD in Psychology, Postdoctoral Research Associate, Cardiff University, School of Geography and planning, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9558-068X
  • Tiago Ribeiro Duarte PhD in Sociology, Assistant Professor of Sociology, Institute of Social Sciences, University of Brasília, Brasília, DF, Brazil
  • Thaís Rozas Teixeira Masters in Sociology, University of Brasília, Brasília, DF, Brazil https://orcid.org/0009-0000-8945-4655
  • Lorraine Whitmarsh PhD in Psychology, Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9054-1040
  • Wouter Poortinga PhD in Environmental Sciences, Professor, Welsh School of Architecture, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6926-8545

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18472/SustDeb.v15n3.2024.55739

Keywords:

Meat consumption, Vegetarianism, Sustainability, Cross-cultural comparison, 4 n’s of meat consumption, Thematic analysis

Abstract

There is a growing literature on meat consumption and reduced meat diets, given the negative impacts of meat on the environment. However, much of the literature has focussed on global North countries, limiting cross-cultural generalisability and overlooking the role of cultural differences in motivating food choices. The present paper provides a cross-cultural comparison of the motivations for meat consumption and vegetarianism in Brazil and the United Kingdom. This was done by conducting a total of 63 semi-structured interviews with meat-eaters, vegetarians, and vegans in Brazil (n = 41) and the UK (n = 22). The data was analysed thematically and the findings were compared across the participant samples. The findings showed that meat consumption was similarly motivated and justified in each country through the 4 N’s of justification for meat consumption. However, participants’ experiences of reducing meat consumption varied between the two countries, influenced by distinct motivations, aversions, and constraints. In the UK, price served as a motivation for choosing meatless meals, whereas in Brazil it acted as a constraint to reducing meat consumption. Additionally, in the UK, disgust was identified as a significant aversion particularly towards eating parts of meat that visibly resembled the animal of origin — a sentiment not observed in the Brazilian sample. Lastly, while environmental concerns were not a primary reason for adopting a plant-based diet in either country, they often became a significant motivator for maintaining it after dietary change.

Author Biographies

  • Emily Wolstenholme, PhD in Psychology, Postdoctoral Research Associate, Cardiff University, School of Geography and planning, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom

    Emily Wolstenholme received her PhD in Psychology from Cardiff University. Her research focuses on attitudes and behaviours related to climate change, behaviour change interventions and public policy. She has published in journals such as Frontiers in Psychology and Appetite.

  • Tiago Ribeiro Duarte, PhD in Sociology, Assistant Professor of Sociology, Institute of Social Sciences, University of Brasília, Brasília, DF, Brazil
    Tiago Ribeiro Duarte is an Assistant Professor of Sociology at the University of Brasília. He has published in journals such as Environmental Science & Policy, Biological Conservation and Engaging Science, Technology, and Society. His research is situated in the field of Science and Technology Studies and he is interested in topics such as the science-policy interface, interdisciplinarity, environmental controversies and conflicts, anti-environmentalism and denialism.
  • Thaís Rozas Teixeira, Masters in Sociology, University of Brasília, Brasília, DF, Brazil
    She has researched the reasons for adopting a plant-based diet and controversies over sustainable livestock farming in Brazil based on the Science and Technology Studies literature.
  • Lorraine Whitmarsh, PhD in Psychology, Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom
    Lorraine Whitmarsh is a Professor of Environmental Psychology at the University of Bath, and Director of the UK Centre for Climate Change and Social Transformations (CAST). She is specialised in perceptions and behaviour in relation to climate change, energy, food, and transport, and was a Lead Author for IPCC’s Working Group II of Sixth Assessment Report.
  • Wouter Poortinga , PhD in Environmental Sciences, Professor, Welsh School of Architecture, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom
    Wouter Poortinga is a Professor of Environmental Psychology at Cardiff University and Associate Director of the UK Centre for Climate Change and Social Transformations (CAST). He conducts research on a number of topics related to human-environment interactions, including environmental risk perception, sustainable behaviours and lifestyles, and housing, neighbourhoods and health.

References

AIKING, H.; De BOER, J. The next protein transition. Trends in Food Science and Technology, v. 105, p. 515-522, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2018.07.008

BAILEY, R.; FROGGATT, A.; WELLESLEY, L. Livestock—Climate change’s forgotten sector: Global public opinion on meat and dairy consumption. Chatham House Report. 2014. Available at: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2014/12/livestock-climate-changes-forgotten-sector-global-public-opinion-meat-and-dairy-consumption. Access at: 05 oct. 2024.

BAJZELJ, B. et al. Importance of food-demand management for climate mitigation. Nature Climate Change, v. 4, n. 10, p. 924–929, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2353

BASTIAN, B.; LOUGHNAN, S. Resolving the Meat-Paradox: A Motivational Account of Morally Troublesome Behavior and Its Maintenance. Personality and Social Psychology Review, v. 21, n. 3, p. 278–299, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868316647562

BASTIAN, B. et al. Don’t mind meat? The denial of mind to animals used for human consumption. Personality and Social Psychology Psychology Bulletin, v. 38, p. 247-256, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211424291

BEKKER, G.A.; TOBI, H., FISCHER, A.R.H. Meet meat: an explorative study on meat and cultured meat as seen by Chinese, Ethiopians and Dutch. Appetite, v. 114, p. 82-92, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.03.009

BENNINGSTAD, N. C. G.; KUNST, J. R. Dissociating meat from its animal origins: A systematic literature review. Appetite, v. 147, p. 104554, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.104554

BENSON, A. et al. The food and you survey. Food Standards Agency. 2019. Available at: https://www.food.gov.uk/sites/default/files/media/document/food-and-you-wave-5-secondary-analysis-current-food-landscape.pdf. Access at: 05 oct. 2024.

BRATANOVA, B.; LOUGHNAN, S.; BASTIAN, B. The effect of categorization as food on the perceived moral standing of animals. Appetite, v. 57, n.1, p. 193–196, 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2011.04.020

BRAUN, V.; CLARKE, V. Using thematic analysis in Psychology. Qualitative research in Psychology, v. 3, n. 2, p. 77-101, 2006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

BRAUN, V.; CLARKE, V. Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC e Melbourne: SAGE Publishing, 2022.

DAGEVOS, H. Exploring flexitarianism: Meat reduction in a meat-centred food culture. In: RAPHAELY, T; MARINOVA, D. (ed.). Impact of meat consumption on health and environmental sustainability. Hershey, PA: IGI global, 2016. p. 233-243.

DE BACKER, C. J. S.; HUDDERS, L. From Meatless Mondays to Meatless Sundays: Motivations for Meat Reduction among Vegetarians and Semi-vegetarians Who Mildly or Significantly Reduce Their Meat Intake. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, v. 53, n. 6, p. 639–657, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03670244.2014.896797

DE BOER, J.; AIKING, H. Prospects for pro-environmental protein consumption in Europe: Cultural, culinary, economic and psychological factors. Appetite, v. 121, p. 29-40, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.10.042

DEPARTMENT OF FOOD ENVIRONMENT AND RURAL AFFAIRS. Family Food FYE 2022. United Kingdom: DEFRA, 2023. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-food-fye-2022/family-food-fye-2022. Access at: 05 oct. 2024.

DELGADO, C. L. Rising consumption of meat and milk in developing countries has created a new food revolution. The Journal of nutrition, v. 133, n. 11, p. 3907S-3910S, 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jn/133.11.3907S

DERBYSHIRE, E. J. Flexitarian Diets and Health: A Review of the Evidence-Based Literature. Frontiers in Nutrition, v. 3, p. 55, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.3389/fnut.2016.00055

DICKINSON, D. L.; KAKOSCHKE, N. Seeking confirmation? Biased information search and deliberation in the food domain. Food Quality and Preference, v. 91, p. 104189, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FOODQUAL.2021.104189

FEIGIN, S.V. et al. Proposed solutions to anthropogenic climate change: A systematic literature review and a new way forward. Heliyon, v. 9, n. 10, p. e20544, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20544

FESTINGER, L. A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1957.

FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS. Census data, 2019. Dataset. FAOSTAT. Available at: https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/. Access at: 05 oct. 2024.

FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS. With major processing by Our World in Data. 2023. Available at: https://ourworldindata.org/meat-production. Access at: 05 oct. 2024.

FOX, N.; WARD, K. Health, ethics and environment: A qualitative study of vegetarian motivations. Appetite, v. 50, n. 2–3, p. 422–429, 2008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2007.09.007

GÓMEZ-LUCIANO, C. A. et al. Consumers’ willingness to purchase three alternatives to meat proteins in the United Kingdom, Spain, Brazil and the Dominican Republic. Food Quality and Preference, v. 78, p. 103732, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2019.103732.

HAMILTON, M. Eating death: Vegetarians, meat and violence. Food, Culture & Society, v. 9, n. 2, p. 155-177, 2006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2013.02.009

HARTMANN, C.; SIEGRIT, M. Consumer perception and behaviour regarding sustainable protein consumption: A systematic review. Trends in Food Science and Technology, v. 61, p. 11-25, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2016.12.006.

HEDENUS, F.; WIRSENIUS, S.; JOHANSSON, D. J. A. The importance of reduced meat and dairy consumption for meeting stringent climate change targets. Climatic Change, v. 124, p. 79–91, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-014-1104-5

HOCQUETTE, J. F. (2023). Consumer perception of livestock production and meat consumption; an overview of the special issue “Perspectives on consumer attitudes to meat consumption”. Meat Science, v. 200, p. 109163, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MEATSCI.2023.109163

HOFFMAN, S.R. et al. Differences between health and ethical vegetarians. Strength of conviction, nutrition knowledge, dietary restriction, and duration of adherence. Appetite, v. 65, p. 139-144, 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2013.02.009

IPSOS. An exploration into diets around the world. 2018. Available at: https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2018-09/an_exploration_into_diets_around_the_world.pdf. Access at: 05 oct. 2024.

ISHIGE, N. The history of food culture exchange for long-term periods: Japan as an example. Enri Ethnological Studies, v. 100, p. 11-22, 2019. Available at: https://ndlsearch.ndl.go.jp/books/R100000136-I1390853649752187264. Access at: 05 oct. 2024.

JOY, M. Why we love dogs, eat pigs, and wear cows. An introduction to carnism. San Francisco, CA: Red Wheel/Weiser, 2010.

KEMPER, J. A. Motivations, barriers, and strategies for meat reduction at different family lifecycle stages. Appetite, v. 150, p. 104644, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.APPET.2020.104644

KUNST, J.R.; HAUGESTAD, C.A.P. The effects of dissociation on willingness to eat meat are moderated by exposure to unprocessed meat: A cross-cultural demonstration. Appetite, v. 120, p. 356-366, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.09.016

KWASNY, T.; DOBERNIG, K.; RIEFLER, P. Towards reduced meat consumption: A systematic literature review of intervention effectiveness, 2001–2019. Appetite, v. 168, p. 105739, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.APPET.2021.105739

LITRE, G.; TOURRAND, J.; MORALES, H.; ARBELETCHE, P. Ganaderos Familiares Gauchos: ¿Una opción hacia la producción sustentable? Asian Journal of Latin American Studies, v.20, p. 105-147, 2007.

LOUGHNAN, S.; HASLAM, N.; BASTIAN, B. The role of meat consumption in the denial of moral status and mind to meat animals. Appetite, v. 55, n. 1, p. 156–159, 2010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2010.05.043

MINAS, A. M.; TIPPING, C. “But we’re a meat-eating family”: Engaging environmentally concerned but politically distrustful groups on reducing meat and dairy. CAST Briefing 27. 2024. Available at: https://cast.ac.uk/resources/briefings/. Access at: 05 oct. 2024.

MINGAY, E. et al. Why We Eat the Way We Do: A Call to Consider Food Culture in Public Health Initiatives. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. v. 18, n. 22, p. 11967, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/IJERPH182211967

NEWTON, P. et al. Price above all else: an analysis of expert opinion on the priority actions to scale up production and consumption of plant-based meat in Brazil. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, v. 8, p. 1303448, 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1303448

NGUYEN, A.; PLATOW, M.J. I'll eat meat because that's what we do: the role of national norms and national social identification on meat eating. Appetite, v. 164, p. 105287, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105287.

O’DRISCOLL, K. K. M.; BUTLER, F.; ARNOTT, G. Editorial: Animal welfare science: Rising to the challenges of a changing world. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, v. 10, p. 1151773, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/FVETS.2023.1151773/BIBTEX

ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC COOPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT. (2021). Meat consumption, Agricultural output, 2021. Dataset. OECD. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1787/44db9980-en. Access at: 05 oct. 2024.

PABIAN, S. et al. (2020). Ninety Minutes to Reduce One’s Intention to Eat Meat: A Preliminary Experimental Investigation on the Effect of Watching the Cowspiracy Documentary on Intention to Reduce Meat Consumption. Frontiers in Communication, v. 5, n. 69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/FCOMM.2020.00069

PARLASCA, M. C.; QAIM, M. Ninety Minutes to Reduce One's Intention to Eat Meat: A Preliminary Experimental Investigation on the Effect of Watching the Cowspiracy Documentary on Intention to Reduce Meat Consumption. Front. Commun., v. 14, p. 17-48, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-111820-032340

PIAZZA, J. et al. Rationalizing meat consumption. The 4Ns. Appetite, v. 91, p. 114–128, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2015.04.011

PICA-CIAMARRA, U.; OTTE, J. The ‘Livestock Revolution’: rhetoric and reality. Outlook on AGRICULTURE, v. 40, n. 1, p. 7–19, 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5367/oa.2011.0030

RAMMOHAN, A.; AWOFESO, N.; ROBITAILLE, M. C. Addressing Female Iron-Deficiency Anaemia in India: Is Vegetarianism the Major Obstacle? ISRN Public Health, p. 765478, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5402/2012/765476

RITCHIE, H.; REAY, D. S.; HIGGINS, P. Potential of Meat Substitutes for Climate Change Mitigation and Improved Human Health in High-Income Markets. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, v. 2, n. 16, p. 1-11, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2018.00016

ROSENFELD, D.L.; BURROW, A. Vegetarian on purpose: Understanding the motivations of plant-based dieters. Appetite, v. 116, p. 456-463, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.05.039

RUBY, M. B. Vegetarianism. A blossoming field of study. Appetite, v. 58, n. 1, p. 141-150, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2011.09.019

SANS, P.; COMBRIS, P. World meat consumption patterns: An overview of the last fifty years (1961-2011). Meat Science, v. 109, p. 106–111, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2015.05.012

SCHWARTZ, S.H. Cultural Value Orientations: Nature and Implications of National Differences. Moscow, RU: State University Higher School of Economics Press, 2008.

STEENSON, S.; BUTTRISS, J. L. Healthier and more sustainable diets: What changes are needed in high-income countries? Nutrition Bulletin, v. 46, n. 3, p. 279–309, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/NBU.12518

STURGES, J. E.; HANRAHAN, K. J. Comparing telephone and face-to-face qualitative interviewing: a research note. Qualitative research, v. 4, n. 1, p. 107-118, 2004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794104041110

TERRY, G. et al. (2017). Thematic Analysis. In: WILLIG, C.; STAINTON, W. R. (ed.). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Studies in Psychology. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore: Sage, 2017. p.17-37.

TILMAN, D.; CLARK, M. Global diets link environmental sustainability and human health. Nature, v. 515, n. 7528, p. 518–522, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13959

UK DEPARTMENT FOR ENVIRONMENT, FOOD & RURAL AFFAIRS. Family food FYE 2022. 2023 Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-food-fye-2022/family-food-fye-2022. Access at: 05 oct. 2024.

VAN BUSSEL, L. M. et al. Consumers’ perceptions on food-related sustainability: A systematic review. Journal of Cleaner Production, v. 341, p. 130904, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2022.130904

WELLESLEY, L.; HAPPER, C.; FROGGATT, A. (2015). Changing Climate, Changing Diets Pathways to Lower Meat Consumption. Chatham House report. 2015. Available at: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2015/11/changing-climate-changing-diets-pathways-lower-meat-consumption. Access at: 05 oct. 2024.

XU, X. et al. (2021). Global greenhouse gas emissions from animal-based foods are twice those of plant-based foods. Nature Food, v. 2, n. 9, p. 724–732. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00358-x

Downloads

Published

2024-12-21

Issue

Vol. 15 No. 3 (2024): Sustainability in Debate / Sustentabilidade em Debate

Section

Articles - Varia

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Sustainability in Debate

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

SUSTAINABILITY IN DEBATE – Copyright Statement

The submission of original scientific work(s) by the authors, as the copyright holders of the text(s) sent to the journal, under the terms of Law 9.610/98, implies in the concession of copyrights of printed and/or digital publication to the Sustainability in Debate Journal of the article(s) approved for publication purposes, in a single issue of the journal. Furthermore, approved scientific work(s) will be released without any charge, or any kind of copyright reimbursement, through the journal’s website, for reading, printing and/or downloading of the text file, from the date of acceptance for publication purposes. Therefore, the authors, when submitting the article (s) to the journal, and gratuitous assignment of copyrights related to the submitted scientific work, are fully aware that they will not be remunerated for the publication of the article(s) in the journal.
The Sustainability in Debate Journal is licensed under Creative Commons License – Non-Commercial-No-Derivation Attribution (Derivative Work Ban) 3.0 Brazil, aiming at dissemination of scientific knowledge, as indicated on the journal's website, which allows the text to be shared, and be recognized in regards to its authorship and original publication in this journal.
Authors are allowed to sign additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the works published in the Sustainability in Debate Journal (for example, in a book chapter), provided that it is expressed the texts were originally published in this journal. Authors are allowed and encouraged to publish and distribute their text online, following publication in Sustainability in Debate (e.g. in institutional repositories or their personal pages). The authors expressly agree to the terms of this Copyright Statement, which will be applied following the submission and publishing by this journal.

 

How to Cite

Food and sustainability: meat consumption and vegetarianism in Brazil and the United Kingdom. (2024). Sustainability in Debate, 15(3), 131-146. https://doi.org/10.18472/SustDeb.v15n3.2024.55739

Similar Articles

11-20 of 218

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.