liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Stakeholders on meat production, meat consumption and mitigation of climate change: Sweden as a case
Institutionen för husdjurens miljö och hälsa, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet.
Institutionen för husjdurens miljö och hälsa, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet.
Institutionen för husdjurens miljö och hälsa, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet.
Linköping University, Department of Culture and Communication, Centre for Applied Ethics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
2013 (English)In: Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, ISSN 1187-7863, E-ISSN 1573-322X, Vol. 26, no 3, 663-678 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In this paper we analyse and discuss the views of Swedish stakeholders on how to mitigate climate change to the extent it is caused by meat production. The stakeholders include meat producer organisations, governmental agencies with direct influence on meat production, political parties as well as non-governmental organisations. Representatives of twelve organisations were interviewed. Several organisations argued against the mitigation option of reducing beef production despite the higher greenhouse gas intensity of beef compared to pork and chicken meat (according to life cycle analysis). Regarding feed production some organisations proposed use of the best available industrial fertilizers, others were against all use of such fertilizers. Several organizations suggested domestic production of more protein-rich fodder and use of manure for biogas production. Regarding meat consumption the focus was on throwing away less food as waste and on eating less meat but the best (most climate friendly) meat, which was considered to be Swedish meat in contrast to imported meat. There was agreement on many issues. Most disagreement was found regarding political steering. We find many of the stakeholders' mitigation proposals regarding meat production and consumption acceptable. However, we are to some extent critical to their defence of Swedish beef production. We also point out certain problems with the suggestion to reduce consumption of imported meat but not of domestically produced meat.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer, 2013. Vol. 26, no 3, 663-678 p.
Keyword [en]
Climate change – Mitigation – Meat production – Meat consumption – Stakeholders – Sweden
National Category
Humanities
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-80754DOI: 10.1007/s10806-012-9420-0ISI: 000319887800009OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-80754DiVA: diva2:548139
Available from: 2012-08-29 Created: 2012-08-29 Last updated: 2017-12-07

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records BETA

Nordgren, Anders

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Nordgren, Anders
By organisation
Centre for Applied EthicsFaculty of Arts and Sciences
In the same journal
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics
Humanities

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 157 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf