The paradox in animal welfare

According to representative surveys, almost all consumers disapprove of the way farm animals are kept. However, the market is not responding to this sentiment: supermarkets continue to sell meat from animals that have suffered – and consumers continue to eat large quantities of meat, and fish as well.

Widespread practices involving cruelty to chickens, cows, and pigs are deemed ’unacceptable’ by between 74% and 96% of British people surveyed. Does this attitude translate into action? Not really: more than 70% of those surveyed admit that they are committed meat-eaters. [1]

How can people sense that something is terribly wrong in the livestock industry, yet still continue to eat meat? One answer to this puzzle may lie in a survey conducted in the USA, in which 65% of respondents felt at least some ‘discomfort with the way animals are used in the food industry’, but 71% tended to believe that ‘the meat, dairy, and eggs I purchase usually come from animals treated humanely’ [2]. It’s the others who are doing the wrong, not me, so to speak. At least, it’s not what I intended…

The problem lies in the range of products on offer – and in the price. Supermarkets and the food industry invent labels to give consumers a quiet conscience at a low price; one need only think of the famous example of ‘La vache qui rit’ (the laughing cow), a French dairy product considered the forerunner of many current, industry-promoted, supposedly animal-friendly claims. Where products from genuine organic and free-range schemes, offering verifiable improvements for farm animals, are available on the shelves, the price is significantly higher; consequently, these products are bought less frequently and are therefore offered in smaller quantities. As food retailers respond to organised consumer demand, they will not change their production programmes unless they are forced to do so.


But what about fish?

Another representative survey conducted in 2024 on behalf of Compassion in World Farming (CIWF) and the Eurogroup for Animals has shown that 9 out of 10 Europeans want to see a change in current fish farming practices and the associated suffering of fish. [3] In a parallel survey, 8 out of 10 Americans expressed the same view [4]. But among European fish consumers, only 23% are willing to pay significantly more for fish from more humane farming practices, 45% would pay only a small premium, and 32% cannot or will not pay a higher price [5].

I’d like to subscribe to the think.fish newsletter

However, the problem lies not only in consumer willingness, but above all in supply. It is simply not possible to farm all fish in a way that takes their natural needs and behavioural patterns into account. Even the few species with the highest potential welfare scores in captivity have recently been downgraded in the fair-fish database: Nile tilapia [7] [8] from 8 to 4 points and African catfish [6] [8] from 6 to 2 points, with 10 being the maximum score. It therefore appears that of the 89 fish species assessed so far in the fair-fish database, not a single one is able to feel well even under the best farming conditions.

So should you only buy wild-caught fish? Unfortunately, most fishing methods do little to alleviate the animals’ suffering [9]. Consuming fish on average once a week is, in fact, far from being covered in a respectful way. As a fish consumer, the best thing you can do is to limit your fish consumption to max once a month [10].


References:
[1] https://ourworldindata.org/most-people-care-about-farm-animals-our-food-system-doesnt-reflect-that[
2] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/survey-animal-pain-sentience
[3] https://www.ciwf.org/media-news/opinions/unregulated-fish-farming-causes-mass-animal-suffering-and-9-out-of-10-europeans-want-change/
[4] https://www.ciwf.com/media-and-news/news/people-in-the-united-states-want-better-protection-for-farmed-fish/
[5] https://www.ciwf.org/media/7458798/2024-eu-aquatic-animals-survey_ciwf_efa_sapience_results-slides_v3.pdf
[6] https://fair-fish-database.net/db/species/clarias-gariepinus/farm/welfarecheck/
[7] https://fair-fish-database.net/db/species/oreochromis-niloticus/farm/welfarecheck/
[8] http://www.ign-nutztierhaltung.ch/sites/default/files/PDF/IGN_FOKUS_20_Aquakultur_en.pdf (page 5)
[9] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOFeNu1lvwc (as of 8’25”)
[10] https://think.fish/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/fish-facts_33_Edible-Fish.pdf (page 18-19)

Stichwörter in diesem Artikel · Keywords in this article


Möchtest du über neue Artikel in diesem Blog informiert werden? Schick die Nachricht «1x pro Monat» an mail@think.fish
Would you like to be informed about new articles on this blog? Send the message ‘once a month‘ to mail@think.fish


Kommentare? · Comments?

Comment option for members only

Schreibe einen Kommentar

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


Sie müssen als Mitglied registriert sein, um direkt kommentieren zu können.
Andernfalls senden Sie uns bitte Ihren Kommentar oder Ihre Frage per E-Mail, samt der Angabe, ob wir den Kommentar hier unter Ihrem Namen veröffentlichen dürfen.

You must be registered as a member to comment directly.
Otherwise please send us your comment or question by email, letting us know whether we may publish your comment here under your name.


Es sind keine Kommentare vorhanden.
Suche:

Übersetzen · Translate

Alle Themen · All topics:


Artikelarchiv · Articles by date