Farms.com Home   News

Taxing Animal Production To Reduce Animal Density In Agriculture

Taxing Animal Production To Reduce Animal Density In Agriculture

A huge proportion of the world's population is vegetarian, eating no meat for a range of reasons, including lack of availability and poverty, ethical and religious reasons, personal health and environmental health reasons. Among that number are many who are vegan, eating no animal products. However, the environmental impact of raising livestock remains incredibly high; natural ecosystems are removed to create grazing land and to grow crops to feed cattle, for instance. From rearing and farming to slaughter, butchery and processing, the meat industry has an enormous carbon hoofprint, as it were.

There is increasing awareness of the problems facing the world if we continue to eat  at the rate many people do. There is a powerful movement to urge people to become demi-vegetarian or wholly vegetarian and a parallel movement promoting veganism. However, many people enjoy meat and while they may recognize the issues, many are unwilling to change their habits. A radical approach to tackling the issues from another direction is discussed in the International Journal of Sustainable Economy.

Stefan Mann of Swiss agricultural research establishment, Agroscope in Ettenhausen, puts forward the argument that animal production itself should be taxed. This would put pressure on those who rear livestock to switch to other sources of income or else face being priced out of the food market when vegetarian options become the more affordable option, and perhaps only option, for consumers. The approach would, Mann suggests, ultimately reduce animal density in agriculture globally.

Of course, there have been many efforts of the last few decades to avoid the huge surpluses of milk, grain, and beef that we saw in the "butter mountains" and other problems of the late 1970s and early 1980s where supply massively exceeded demand. The intellectual drive for Mann's argument, which does not see a "right" or a "wrong" perception to , comes from three sources and draws on and interprets arguments from the research literature.

Click here to see more...

Trending Video

Assessing Welfare Resources During Late Finish - Dr. Anna Johnson & Emma Coursey

Video: Assessing Welfare Resources During Late Finish - Dr. Anna Johnson & Emma Coursey


In this episode of The Swine Nutrition Blackbelt Podcast, Dr. Anna Johnson from Iowa State University and Emma Coursey from the University of Illinois discuss research evaluating welfare resources during the late finishing stage on commercial swine farms. They explain how feeder management, water use, space allocation, and pig health influence welfare outcomes and practical on-farm management. Listen now on all major platforms!

"Small resource issues can become larger welfare problems when multiple stressors interact across finishing barns."

Meet the guests: Dr. Anna Johnson / anna-johnson-05028a14 is the Morrill Professor of Animal Behavior and Welfare at Iowa State University. She earned her Ph.D. in Animal Sciences from Texas Tech University and completed her master's degree in Applied Animal Behaviour and Welfare at the University of Edinburgh. Her research focuses on practical solutions that improve farm animal welfare, including sow productive lifetime, animal-human interaction, environmental enrichment, and Precision Livestock Farming.

Emma Coursey / emma-coursey-183810241 is pursuing a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine degree at the University of Illinois College of Veterinary Medicine after earning a bachelor's degree in Animal Science from Iowa State University. Her academic interests include swine health, production, and animal welfare, with research experience evaluating welfare resources in commercial finishing pigs.