The cultural impact of cultured meat


Producing and commercializing cultured meat — meat produced by in-vitro cultivation of animal cells — is one of today’s most hyped scientific and technological challenges.

Dozens of startups around the world, generously backed by VC funding, are competing to hit the market with the Holy Grail of the food industry: meat produced without slaughtering animals.

But the quest to actualize lab-grown meat isn’t just opening up unprecedented technological possibilities. It’s also posing new moral conundrums and cultural challenges.

Should vegans embrace cultured meat? Will meat grown in the lab alienate us from nature even more? Is it cannibalism if we eat lab-grown human meat? And could lab-grown meat at one point become something entirely different from traditional meat?

To address these issues, I reached out to Dr. Cor van der Weele, who is a professor of humanistic philosophy at the University of Wageningen, sort of the Oxford of food innovation.

I asked Professor van der Weele — who also spoke at our event on the Future of Meat we organized at TQ  — to help me untangle a few of the possible moral and cultural implications of cultured meat.

New moral identities

First off, Professor van der Weele highlights how several studies found that many meat eaters share concerns about meat and factory farming with vegetarians and vegans.

Despite their shared concerns, however, meat eaters have different ways to cope with these moral qualms. According to Professor van der Weele, many studies, for example in the field of consumer research, associate lack of behavior change with indifference while she thinks that this attitude would often be better described as “strategic ignorance”.

In a paper she co-authored with social psychologist Marleen C. Onwezen, Dr. Cor van der Weele argues that many consumers who were previously labeled as “indifferent” to the moral implications of eating meat do care about the issue but decide, consciously or unconsciously, to strategically ignore it in order to avoid conflicting moral tensions.

For them, cultured meat might represent a new moral opportunity and the possibility to form a new moral identity.

A renewed relationship with nature 

Unnaturalness is a theme that often comes up when people start to think about cultured meat. For some critics, it is an important objection.

Author and micro-farmer Simon Fairlie, for example, argues in his 2010 book “Meat: A Benign Extravagance” for organic food and a reduction of meat consumption but writes off cultured meat as a continuation of factory-produced protein that, converging with genetic engineering, will lead to further estrangement from nature for humans.

However, Professor van der Weele suggests that growing meat in a lab might actually improve our relationship with animals and nature. After all, what’s more unnatural and alienating than intensive animal farming?

In a study conducted with Clemens Driessen, one scenario that emerged from one of the focus groups was called “the pig in the yard.” In this scenario, cultured meat is made in small local factories using cells from animals kept in small yards. This speculative production process, which combines cutting-edge technologies and old traditions, led to enthusiasm among the participants in the focus group, also among the ones who previously were ambivalent about cultured meat and expressed doubts about its unnaturalness.

Significantly, they also often deemed this scenario “too good to be true.” And, as Professor van der Weele notes, they might well be right.

After all, it’s easy to imagine that, if meat grown in a lab is ever to become successful, it will most likely be thanks to large companies able to scale the technology and disrupt the meat industry.

But is that the only option? What can be the role of farmers and their cultural heritage in this new meat industry 2.0?

Far from leaving them to their destiny, Professor van der Weele is undertaking a new research endeavor to try and understand their experience as they see their industry being disrupted. Might it perhaps be an opportunity for them, instead of merely a threat?

And that’s why, on a side note, van der Weele doesn’t particularly like the term “clean meat”, used by large institutions like The Good Food Institute to describe cultured meat. “It’s unnecessarily insulting towards farmers,” she explains.

The meat of Theseus

The Ship of Theseus” is an ancient thought-experiment that goes like this: “Suppose that the famous ship sailed by the hero Theseus in battle has been kept in a harbor as a museum piece. As the years go by, some parts are replaced because they begin to rot. After a century, all the parts have been replaced. Is the restored ship still the same object as the original?”

I was reminded of this paradox when Professor van der Weele highlighted that “the assumption that meat alternatives need to resemble meat has an uncertain future.”

At first, I was a bit skeptical: isn’t the main point of meat alternatives (both plant-based and lab-grown) to be just like meat, the same way the ship of Theseus’ custodians wanted to preserve its identity?

But in one of her papers, Professor van der Weele raises some relevant points: “When meat-like products are no longer associated with raising and slaughtering animals,” she writes, “will they continue to be compared to meat? May resemblance to meat become a weakness for people who don’t want to be reminded of their old meat-eating habits?”

We started replacing parts of the meat industry because they were rotting with the aim of preserving “the original object”, meat. But maybe, one day, we’ll realize that with them we can create something entirely new, not yet imaginable. As if the custodians of the ship of Theseus found out how to make a plane out of the ship.

Wanna help the field of meat alternatives grow? Consider donating 3 or more to ProVeg Nederland, is the Dutch branch of one of the largest and most impactful organizations working in this space 👇

More Stories

  • How could citizens’ assemblies be used to tackle climate change?


    In one mad sunny week over the Easter weekend, Extinction Rebellion brought public attention to the problem of climate change in a way that had rarely been achieved before. The group’s most ambitious demand - to cut greenhouse gas emissions completely by 2025 - is unlikely to be met. But another - for governments to be led by the decisions of citizens’ assemblies on climate and ecological justice - has a successful history in many parts of the world.

    Not to be confused with people’s assemblies (a more informal gathering, often of existing activists) citizens’ assemblies are a way of exploring public views on a particular topic and coming up with concrete solutions. They sit under the umbrella term ‘mini-publics’ as an example of deliberative democracy, alongside citizens’ juries, planning cells and consensus conferences.

    Sarah Allen, engagement lead at public participation charity Involve, is a big advocate of citizens’ assemblies as a tool for resolving complicated policy problems. She recently designed and ran assemblies on adult social care for a couple of House of Commons committees and on Brexit for a research project, and is now working on one for the National Assembly for Wales which will consider the main challenges facing the principality over the next 20 years.

    Citizens’ assemblies are a bit like focus groups, but usually larger and longer; they can take up a single weekend or up to a year in some cases. Allen explains on the phone that participants are chosen at random to represent the broader population and are paid for their time so that everyone can afford to take part.

    All citizens’ assemblies have three stages. The first involves learning about the problem, when everyone is given a primer in the subject and hears from people advocating different solutions. Then there is a period of consideration and discussion, often in small groups. The assembly as a whole then has to decide about what it would do to solve the problem at hand.

    Allen says the learning phase is particularly important. “The discussions are designed to give participants a better understanding of why people might hold a different view of the subject and encourage people to critically reflect on their own opinions.”

    Oliver Escobar, senior lecturer in public policy at the University of Edinburgh, says in an interview that research into mini-publics shows that they are good at taking a balanced view. “When citizens are given the right opportunity, space and support, they can consider an impressive range of evidence, perspectives and testimonies and then on balance make an informed recommendation.”

    The idea of citizens’ assemblies has been around for well over a decade. It was pioneered in British Columbia, Canada, in 2004 to consider the thorny issue of electoral reform, and later played a key part in assessing public feeling about abortion and same-sex marriage in Ireland, which paved the way for a successful referendum in favour of repealing the eighth amendment to the Irish constitution.

    Linda Doyle, coordinator of the citizens’ assembly working group for Extinction Rebellion, became interested in the idea of citizens’ assemblies when a friend took part in one in her native Ireland. “Citizens’ assemblies are well known there now,” she tells me in an interview, “They’ve played a big role on the political scene.”

    Although they’re not yet well known in the UK, the idea of using a citizen’s assembly to unravel environmental problems isn’t new.

    In the early 1990s, Texas installed a huge amount of renewable energy after deliberative polls conducted by utility companies found that the public were in support of the idea.

    Ireland also held a citizens’ assembly on climate change in 2017, which concluded that the state must take a lead role on mitigation. It recommended that government prioritise public transport spending over new roads, tax greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture and stop subsidising peat extraction. Strikingly, 80% of participants said they would be willing to pay higher taxes on carbon-intensive activities.

    “When people hear it from their peers who say ‘we’re fucked’, that will be really powerful.”

    In 2009, the World Wide Views on Global Warming project gave thousands of people from across the world the chance to discuss climate change. The project, led by the Danish Board of Technology, is one of the largest experiments in deliberative democracy to date.

    Escobar says it was a problematic process (”they all are”), but the results eventually fed into the Paris Agreement on climate change in 2015. “Climate change is a global problem and what we have is a very nationalistic world setup,” he said. “Mini publics have been one of the few participatory models that have been thought of as adaptable to deal with global threats.”

    Escobar says citizens’ assemblies reorganise how voices in a debate are given space and heard. They would not exclude the views of climate change activists or conservationists or people who contest aspects of climate policy, he says, but they can help to filter out full-on climate denial. “With most issues in public policy you have a spectrum of debate, but in climate change naturally there is a scientific consensus and if you are to try and represent sceptical views it will be problematic because it cannot be proportional to the other side.”

    Those arguments still have to make their way into the assembly so they can be scrutinised and refuted, but “it could be one of the mechanisms that helps to displace the current state of affairs in terms of current actors and policy priorities and power plays, and create a space where people need to justify their positions more clearly.”

    Allen is also optimistic: “I think it’s possibly the one thing that can happen now that would make the most difference in pushing forward the climate agenda.”

    She says a citizens’ assembly would give politicians much better information about what people’s actual preferences are and what tradeoffs they’d make. “One of the reasons that politicians aren’t moving forward is because they’re worried about public backlash on, for example, wind farms. But if you can get people in the room and ask how you think targets should be met and here are your realistic options, they have got to choose one. Participants can’t say ‘we’d like more, higher quality services but we’re not prepared to pay for them.’”

    They are invaluable for getting the public on board too and securing more consensus. “With climate change, we have to sacrifice some aspects of our current lifestyles,” Doyle says, “and nobody wants to hear politicians telling them because we’ve had it before; it’s not as if austerity was applied across all echelons of society equally. We really believe that to get the public on board with this it would be useful to have a citizens’ assembly, because when people hear it from their peers, from someone like a single mother, a farmer, who says ‘we’re fucked, we’re really afraid’, that will be really powerful.”

    Participants also benefit. Escobar says that people who have taken part nearly always find it satisfying and come out of the process both exhausted and delighted. “They have a strong sense of having done a civic duty on behalf of others and they’re exhausted because very rarely people get to get exposed so systematically to evidence and arguments - it’s very intense.”

    But there is a flip side: some people, particularly those who haven’t taken part in public processes before, suddenly discover how simplistic public and media discourse actually is. “There is a long debate about whether this means people are more likely to participate and become more active citizens,” says Escobar. “The theory is that the more people participate the more we develop our civic muscle and democracy enters this virtuous cycle. But that assumes that these opportunities are readily available when these are still instances of extraordinary rather than ordinary democracy. So when these citizens’ go back to their realities…expecting some carefully crafted engagement they are disappointed.”

    He warns that mini-publics have to be seen as part of the wider democratic system, “otherwise they’re quite problematic because they’re exclusive to those that have been selected.” “We shouldn’t think of them as isolated bodies, we should think of them as a stage in a broader process which might also include referendums, more standard policymaking, [and] further committee action.”

    “This is democracy: people come out of it feeling invigorated, feeling great and quite empowered by the process and the fact that they’re really having a say."

    Allen describes citizen’s assemblies as plugging a democratic gap. “When an issue is complicated like climate change and has become politically stuck, the best way to unblock it and make a decision on the future of the country is a citizens’ assembly because it’s a representative sample of the population; people get to learn about the issue first and discuss it with one another and get to a detailed and nuanced position. You can’t do that with the other democratic tools we have,” so they.

    They can also be used to kick-start wider participation. In Canada for example, citizens’ assemblies supported participants to go back to their communities and run town hall meetings to engage more people about the issues. “They are not party-political events,” says Escobar, “not dominated by power or money or partisan logic. It is about reason, evidence, arguments, perspectives and different forms of knowledge - local, technical, scientific, even emotional.” He notes that the results of the Irish abortion referendum showed that the citizens’ assembly was more reflective of actual public views than parliament itself.

    The idea is gaining traction in the UK. In April, Oxford City Council became the first local authority to promise a citizens’ assembly on climate change, three months after formally declaring a climate emergency. More recently Extinction Rebellion representatives met with Mayor of London Sadiq Khan and environmental secretary Michael Gove, who promised to follow up on the idea.

    Doyle is cautiously optimistic and stresses how citizens’ assemblies can shift power back to the public. “This is democracy: people come out of it feeling invigorated, feeling great and quite empowered by the process and the fact that they’re really having a say. This really brings the human element to political discussion.”

    This article was originally published on Open Democracy and was written by Isabella Kaminski. You can read the original article here.

    Read more
  • India’s cyclone Fani recovery offers the world lessons in disaster preparedness


    Fani, a rare summer cyclone in the Bay of Bengal, hit eastern India on May 3. It is one of the strongest cyclones to have hit India in the last 20 years, according to the Indian government’s meteorological department. Storm surges and powerful winds reaching 125mph blew off roofs, damaged power lines and uprooted countless trees.

    But the worst-affected state, Odisha, has been successful in keeping the loss of life and numbers of affected people to a minimum. This is the result of a very effective strategy of disaster preparation and quick responding.

    The United Nations office for Disaster Risk Deduction (UNISDR) and other organisations have hailed government and volunteer efforts that have ensured the levels of destruction have been kept to a minimum. According to official estimates, 64 people lost their lives due to the devastating cyclone Fani. But considering the power of the cyclone, it is remarkable that more lives have not been lost.

    To put the death toll in perspective, the 1999 Odisha cyclone (which had 155mph winds) killed 9,658 people and caused US$2.5 billion in damages in the state. It was this super cyclone in 1999 that led the state to become better prepared for future cyclones.

    The government’s “zero casualty” policy for natural disasters and the near accuracy of the India meteorological department’s early warning system have helped reduce the possibility of deaths from cyclone Fani. A record 1.2m people (equal to the population of Mauritius) were evacuated in less than 48 hours, and almost 7,000 kitchens, catering to 9,000 shelters, were made functional overnight. This mammoth exercise involved more than 45,000 volunteers.

    The statistics are striking when compared to the impact of recent big weather events around the world. When Hurricane Maria hit Puerto Rico in 2017 with wind speeds of 175mph, it caused a death toll of 2,975. The same year, Hurricane Harvey struck Texas with winds of 130mph and caused devastating flooding. There was US$125 billion in damage and at least 68 direct storm-related deaths reported in Texas. Most recently, cyclone Idai hit Mozambique on March 14 and ripped through Madagascar, Malawi and Zimbabwe, with more than 1,000 people feared dead.

    So the Indian state of Odisha’s ability to put such an effective disaster management plan in place and save thousands of lives is a template that the world can learn from. This, after all, is a state where the average income is less than US$5 a day. We identify four key takeaways from Odisha.

    1. Build a relief infrastructure

    Until 1999, Odisha didn’t have a well laid out plan for disaster management. Two months after the cyclone hit, the Odisha State Disaster Management Authority was set up and plans put in place. Around 900 cyclone shelters have been built in vulnerable pockets of the state, with systems in place for the evacuation of hundreds of thousands of people. By 2001, Odisha Disaster Rapid Action Force was also set up to conduct rescue operations and distribute relief.

    There is a clear command and control structure for disaster relief and there are clear protocols in place for carrying out relief operations. These were successfully used in managing cyclone Phailin in 2013 (a storm five times the size of hurricane Katrina), cyclone Hudhud in 2014 and cyclone Fani.

    2. Accuracy of early warning systems

    The India Meteorological Department has built an effective service to predict accurate timings of cyclone formation in the Bay of Bengal and when it will make landfall along India’s coastline. This early warning system enables the state to be disaster ready and minimise loss of lives. It’s then crucial that people follow the protocols in place when the warnings come in.

    3. Clear communication plan

    Roughly 2.6m text messages were sent to locals in clear language before cyclone Fani hit, keeping those potentially affected alert. Regular press briefings were made by officials to update people of the approaching cyclone. People were repeatedly advised over all forms of media not to panic and given clear “do and don’ts”. This helped in the record evacuation of 1.2m people to safe buildings.

    4. Effective co-ordination of groups

    Preparations to fight the onslaught of Fani involved a number of government agencies, as well as local community groups and volunteers working together. The government’s disaster response forces were pre-positioned in vulnerable locations, food packets for air-dropping were made ready for air force helicopters to drop to people. Senior state officials and police officers were sent to the affected districts to co-ordinate efforts of various agencies.

    Cyclone Fani has, however, left a fury of damage to properties and public infrastructure. The post-cyclone recovery will be a daunting challenge to the administration in Odisha, demanding a lot of resources. In the aftermath of the 1999 super cyclone, the state relied on a number of community-based groups and volunteers to help rebuild communities. The same goes for today, but they are in a much better position thanks to the disaster preparedness and risk mitigation followed before the storm hit.

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. It's written by Manoj Dora, Reader in Operations & Supply Chain Management at Brunel University London and Arabinda Kumar Padhee, Director of Country Relations and Business Affairs at New Delhi, ICRISAT, CGIAR System Organization. You can read the original article here.

    Read more
  • Young activists assemble to discuss the state of the world and how to save it


    When policy consultant Vandita Morarka co-founded a social reform initiative to work around marginalized communities including slum-dwellers and street children in India six years ago, she was stunned at the lack of youth leadership to address crucial developmental issues in Asia's third-largest economy, India.

    Now, six-years-later, Morarka runs a feminist youth leadership organization 'One Future Collective' from India's financial capital, Mumbai and mentors other youth leaders to run programs around South Asian feminist literature, a queer resource center and a mental health awareness initiative.

    "OFC is based on the idea that there is transformative power in each person that can lead to larger societal transformation. We zeroed in on a couple of thematic areas which was gender, mental health, legal reform, and policy and we felt that many issues were not addressed by other organisations," 24-year-old Morarka, a policy consultant and lawyer said.

    Morarka is not alone. Around 80 youth leaders from across 45 countries and working in civil society spaces including gender-based violence, mental health, inclusivity, and LGBTQ issues joined hands for a two-day 'Youth Assembly' in Serbia's Novi Sad. The sessions involved sharing lived experiences and fighting against abuses in oppressed regimes, and creating a thematic framework to address crucial human rights issues in the global south.

    "[T]here is transformative power in each person that can lead to larger societal transformation."

    The event that preceded the 'International Civil Society Week' held in Belgrade, Serbia in April held engaging discussions on the state of civil society globally. Issues pertaining to human rights violations in India-administered Kashmir, Palestine, and censorship and threats in various parts of the world to activism and journalistic work were highlighted.

    For Renata Thakurdyal from Madagascar, conducting workshops around sexual health for school children and dismantling the country's 'taboo' outlook on sexual health and reproductive rights is crucial.

    Thakurdyal is a program development officer at Madagascar's 'Projet Jenue Leader' that runs sexual health and leadership classes in schools across Madagascar who believes that creating conversations among youngsters is the only way to sensitise them.

    "Educators work in pairs of a male and a female teacher. Male educators talk about the menstrual cycle, showing the entire class how to put on a pad and the importance of menstrual hygiene. The female educator could also do it but the role reversal takes away the stigma and there's a transformation in students," Thakurdyal adds.

    In Madagascar's Malagasy language, menstruation is referred to as 'taboo part of the month’, highlighting how little awareness on menstrual hygiene, access to healthcare or generally on the topic there is.

    "Both boys and girls need to know about sexual health and a culture of open information is very transformative. Talking about sexual health is taboo in Madagascar and teachers often end up inserting their own opinions or ideas," Thakurdyal adds.

    The youth assembly was hosted by Johannesburg-based civil society alliance CIVICUS and brought together more than 850 delegates from around the world including Morarka and Thakurdyal to join the discussions on how to build movements for change.

    Armed with posters and drawing broads, Amanda Segnini, a Brazilian climate justice activist and founder of non-governmental organization Engajamundo holds discussions on how political situations have resulted in the killing of a record number of human rights defenders worldwide.

    "In the Amazon rainforest, we run a project with Brazilian youth and build leadership around climate justice to enable community leaders to protect their local eco-systems. We have around 100 young people as part of the pilot project from different traditional communities," Segnini, co-founder of Engajamundo said.

    Regarding threats faced by activists due to the dangerous political situation in Brazil and elsewhere in Latin America, she adds Brazil has killed the biggest number of human rights defenders and most of the vulnerable communities in the country are under threat due to climate change.

    According to Soledat Kenzhebulatova and other ICSW organizers, Segnini, Morarka, and Thakurdyal represent a growing movement of youth activists fighting for the defense of civil and gender liberties and seeking government action on important issues including climate justice, sustainable development, and gender equality.

    "I can see the transformative power of bringing youths together at this summit as decision-makers. This is no longer lip-service. This is about giving youngsters the power to enable change."

    "We work with young lesbian, gay, intersex, bisexual, queer, gender non-conforming and othered individuals who have shared experiences of systematic discrimination, hate, and violence. Our work focuses on vulnerabilities. It is clear that in the context of citizenship some freedoms are exclusive to certain demographics only," Gatsha, one of CIVICUS 26 accelerator program goalkeepers said.

    Meanwhile, for 39-year-old Nyaradzo Mashayamombe, Zimbabwe's record on women’s rights and gender-based violence against young girls and children led her to establish Tag a Life International Trust (TaLI) after facing persecution growing up in a marginalized community.

    "We engage with leaders locally, nationally and through regional and international platforms to advocate and advance the rights of girls. We have a flagship young women's Leadership Programme designed to raise young women as young leaders in their communities where they are trained about their own self-awareness," Mashayamombe said.

    Speaking about the recent internet shutdowns due to fuel price hikes and reports of sexual assault allegedly carried out by government officials, Mashayamombe said human rights defenders had to play it low-key and as women human rights defenders were forced to protect themselves amid government crackdowns, advocacy spaces shrunk completely.

    "We need to ensure that women have an access to platforms where they can easily report cases of rape without fearing for their lives and that women human rights defenders themselves are able to assist victims without feeling vulnerable and constrained to help," she added.

    Most of the youth leaders, including Gatsha and Morarka, echoed similar sentiments on the need for more spaces for youngsters where they can engage besides the ‘tokenism and symbolism that is not meaningful’ in terms of grassroots impact.

    "I can see the transformative power of bringing youths together at this summit as decision-makers. This is no longer lip-service. This is about giving youngsters the power to enable change," Morarka concludes.

    This article was originally published on Open Democracy and was written by Vishal Manve. You can read the original article here.

    Read more