For us animal advocates, I think it can be pretty easy to slip into thinking about animal welfare and rights in our countries of origin (usually developed, western countries). Today is your reminder that the greatest opportunity to reduce animal cruelty may be in non-developed, non-western countries. While developed countries consume the most meat, it is projected that their increase in meat consumption will be relatively little. By contrast, countries in developing areas such as East and South Asia, the Middle East and North Africa, and Latin America are projected to have relatively big increases in meat consumption over the next few decades (see Figure 1 of this article)
On the consumer side, there are a few categories of factors which drive increasing meat consumption: economic factors, natural endowment factors, social factors, and globalisation factors. As consumers in developing countries get richer, they are more able to purchase the foods they wish to, including oils, sugars, and animal products. This positive correlation between purchasing power and meat consumption doesn’t plateau until per-capita income reaches just above 36,000 USD/year. Most countries are also naturally endowed with enough resources to be largely self-sufficient in (livestock) meat production. Developing countries tend to urbanise, which brings social changes such as increased consumption of convenience foods and more exposure to advertisements. I personally also suspect that increased urbanisation may make it easier for countries to transition to more intensive, factory-farm-like methods of animal exploitation. Small farmers might be pulled into the cities by promises of opportunity, leaving little resistance to large meat-production corporations as well as few people to witness the mistreatment of animals in their facilities.
Animal producers in developing countries also tend to intensify their agricultural operations. Raising and slaughtering of animals is increasingly done in factory-farming settings. Figure 1 of this article shows that “landless” (i.e., highly intensive) livestock farming is overwhelmingly done in relatively wealthy, densely populated regions of the world (such as North America and Western Europe). Gains in technology and economies of scale may further reduce the price of meat. Of course, these developments not only increase the number of animals being exploited, but also tend to drive down their welfare conditions.
Finally, relatively few resources are invested in animal welfare outside of North America and Europe. According to Animal Advocacy Careers, out of an estimated 165 million USD spent annually on animal welfare, 141 million USD (about 85%) goes to North America and Europe. Of course, the situation requires a more complicated solution than just throwing more money at the problem, but this shows how relatively little effort is being invested in animal welfare in developing and underdeveloped countries.
While money is important, it’s impotent if there’s no one who can spend it in an effort to create change. It’s important that communities and organisations are there on the ground to fight for the interests of animals, spread awareness, and push for policy change in their respective countries. The Open Wing Alliance (OWA) is a coalition of nearly 100 animal advocacy organisations from across the world which do just that. While they all have different philosophies and priorities, they are united by their aim to reduce animal suffering and specifically to free egg-laying hens from cages. OWA includes member organisations in large key countries such as China, India, Indonesia, Nigeria, and Brazil.
One thing I did note when doing research for this article was that it might be a good mindset to aim to get countries to just not interfere with meat production. Many countries substantially subsidise meat production, making it appear much less costly to the consumer than it actually is. Notably, some countries also provide greater subsidies for foodstuffs in general (compare the U.S., E.U., China, and India to other countries). Looking at the results (see section 5) of this study, the price of meat had the second-strongest effect on meat consumption, with higher meat prices being associated with lower meat consumption. Price of vegetables also had a substantial effect on meat consumption in the opposite direction. It would probably be easier to sell policy-makers on the idea of just not subsidising meat as compared to the idea of actively implementing a tax on it. And there is one indicator that reducing/eliminating subsidies could be effective in practice. According to this article, the Slovakian government “stopped generously subsidizing not only the production of meat, but also its consumption” (p. 239). This potentially explains the decline of overall meat consumption in Slovakia between 1990 and 2015, despite rising per-capita income (see Figure 5). While exact details on the relevant policies are lacking, and while this is only one country, it nevertheless is a data point which suggests that preventing the implementation of subsidies of meat production and consumption could be an effective endeavor.
Though all of this work from the policy and production side is highly important, the advocacy side of animal advocacy should not be forgotten. According to the FAO, in areas such as Asia and the Near East, “production will remain largely insufficient to meet demand” (p. 164). This suggests that—barring the success of large-scale alternative protein production—the success of animal-friendly policies to limit meat production would benefit from or even depend on a reduction in consumers’ demand for meat. I suspect that a large and unmet demand for meat among the population would tend to be too tempting for policy-makers to resist. Therefore, building communities and organisations which work to shift the culture of their countries to be more animal-friendly should not be overlooked.
Worldwide meat consumption has increased drastically over the last 50 years, and current forecasts predict a continued increase over the next decades. Much of this increase will occur in the underdeveloped and developing world, as meat consumption in developed countries plateaus and (hopefully) even begins to fall. So donate to the OWA, and if you have strong interest or expertise in some country out there, hold on to it, because it could really, really come in handy.