Meat and Dairy Get 80,000% the Subsidies of Plant-Based Foods

Most vegetarians and vegans are already aware of the premium they pay at the grocery store and new research can help explain the high prices for plant-based products and suspiciously low prices for meat. Lobbying. According to a new study by Stanford researchers in the journal Cell, the farm animal industry has been receiving $35 billion in subsidies in Europe and the United States, compared to $42 million going to eco-friendly alternatives like plant-based mock meats and cell-cultured meat. That’s approximately 0.01%. This has been illuminated on the back of a recent Oxford study that found that the carbon footprint of vegan diets is 75% lower than a ‘high meat’ or average American diet. Despite this and a large body of similar evidence, the Cell study highlights a trend of governments ignoring the environmental impact of livestock.

As The Guardian stated, “The “gigantic” power of the meat and dairy industries in the EU and US is blocking the development of the greener alternatives needed to tackle the climate crisis.” Plant-based meats and dairy products are going up against big business and government labeling with their hands as is evidenced by the in-depth analysis of livestock versus plant-based subsidies, lobbying, and regulations. The results are shocking with the livestock farmers in the EU receving 1,200 time more government funding than plant-based alternatives and US livestock farmers receiving 800 times.

EU: 1,200x

US: 800x  

It is important to note the connection between lobbying and subsidies. Companies can leverage smaller amount of money through lobbying efforts which can results in much larger sums contributed to their industry. The Cell study investigated lobbying amounts by industry as well and found that the meat industry contributes 190 times more than the plant-based alternative companies do in the US.  The money spent on lobbying the EU government by meat producers was three times more than for the alternatives which highlights the emphasis on lobbying in the US compared to other countries. The researchers also determined that “Governments largely ignore the climate-mitigation potential of animal product analogs.” This is directly in conflict with their general call to reduce fossil fuel consumption in order to decrease climate impact.

The impacts of livestock are highlights by the Cell study,

“A transformation of the food system is required to reduce its impact on climate, deforestation, and biodiversity. Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of the food system, especially livestock production, which is the largest emitter of methane of agricultural origin,1 must be greatly reduced to avoid the most extreme impacts of climate change.2 The high warming potential of methane and its short atmospheric lifetime1 make the reduction of methane emissions an effective climate action with immediate benefits. Livestock production is also the main direct cause of tropical deforestation,3 mainly due to pasture expansion but also feed crop production, with major impacts on carbon emissions and biodiversity.”

Flooded factory pig farms in North Carolina highlight the scale of animal agriculture in the midst of a climate crisis. Photo by Jo-Anne McArthur on Unsplash.

Environmentally friendly food products are driven by consumer demand to lower meat consumption and are primarily consumed by people who do not identify as vegetarian or vegan but that choice is harder with manipulated prices. To change where the subsidies go, citizens need to advocate for similar subsidies for alternative food production and look into what politicians are perpetuating the subsidy disparity and funding climate-dirty livestock products. The increased cost on the shelves of plant-based alternatives lowers sales. To expand and reach a wider audience at an affordable price they too should be subsidized, or at the very least, not stymied by the publicly funded meat and dairy producers.