Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

The Dublin Declaration of Scientists on the Societal Role of Livestock

Nature Food volume 4, pages 438–439 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

An Author Correction to this article was published on 12 December 2024

This article has been updated

Access through your institution
Buy or subscribe

The practice of science in livestock-related disciplines is often confronted with paralysing references to a scientific consensus that presents animal agriculture as a global problem that needs to be downsized rather than optimized — a claim amplified by some prominent voices in media, policy and academia. This is a regrettable situation because science generally does not advance by consolidation into consensus but by inquiry, dialogue and attempts at falsification. In the context of the role of animals in the twenty-first-century food system, we do not believe that any scientific consensus exists to begin with and certainly not with respect to considering certain foods such as red meat and dairy as inherently problematic. We cannot identify firm agreement among scientists, neither on the place of animal-sourced foods in human nutrition, the role of animal agriculture in achieving ecological balance, the contributions of livestock to livelihoods and societal prosperity, nor on the ethical aspects of animal production. In each of these fields, there are still huge benefits to be gained from sustained and vigorous discovery of more scientific evidence. Meat is neither good nor bad; its societal impact is a net effect of praxis-dependent benefits and harms through mechanisms that need to be better understood.

In current global food systems discussions, livestock and the multiple foods derived thereof are the constituents leading to contentious debates. This is likely not only due to the degree of both positive and negative effects imposed on individual health and the environment, but also because of their historical key role in human foodscapes, their symbolism, their cultural and economic capital, and the ethical reality that the animal needs to give its life in favour of the human species. Moreover, there is a widening gap between the often hyperbolic arguments displayed in contemporary discourse, including mass media and some high-level reports, and what the evidence is showing or not showing. Given the potential unintended yet dramatic consequences a decimation of livestock and animal-source foods could have on society, in parallel with a shift towards an untested food system based on meat ‘alternatives’ and emerging high-tech options, a group of scientists — of which both authors were part — decided that a comprehensive and interdisciplinary evaluation of the current state-of-the-art evidence on the matter was needed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: A non-exhaustive overview of key messages to rebalance contemporary debates on the role of meat and livestock in a context of food systems change.

Change history

References

  1. Anim. Front. 13, 10 (2023).

  2. Ederer, P. & Leroy, F. Anim. Front. 13, 3–8 (2023).

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Johnston, B., De Smet, S., Leroy, F., Mente, A. & Stanton, A. Anim. Front. 13, 19–27 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Leroy, F. et al. Anim. Front. 13, 11–18 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Manzano, P. et al. Anim. Front. 13, 35–44 (2023).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Thompson, L. et al. Anim. Front. 13, 28–34 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Ederer, P., Baltenweck, I., Blignaut, J. N., Moretti, C. & Tarawali, S. Anim. Front. 13, 45–60 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Croney, C. & Swanson, J. Anim. Front. 13, 61–67 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Wood, P., Thorrez, L., Hocquette, J.-F., Troy, D. & Gagaoua, M. Anim. Front. 13, 68–74 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Polkinghorne, R., Koohmaraie, M., Kaster, C., Troy, D. & Rosati, A. Anim. Front. 13, 75–81 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank E. Maree for her valuable contributions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Industrial Microbiology and Food Biotechnology (IMDO), Faculty of Sciences and Bioengineering Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium

    Frédéric Leroy

  2. GOALSciences at Global Food and Agriculture Network, Rapperswil, Switzerland

    Peer Ederer

Authors
  1. Frédéric Leroy
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peer Ederer
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Frédéric Leroy.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

F.L. is a non-remunerated board member of various academic non-profit organizations including the Belgian Association for Meat Science and Technology (president), the Belgian Society for Food Microbiology (president) and the Belgian Nutrition Society. P.E. is the director and founder of Goal Sciences. On a non-remunerated basis, F.L. and P.E. serve on the Scientific Board of World Farmers’ Organization (WFO); on a non-remunerated basis, F.L. serves on the Scientific Advisory Committee of the FAO/COAG Sub-Committee on Livestock.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Leroy, F., Ederer, P. The Dublin Declaration of Scientists on the Societal Role of Livestock. Nat Food 4, 438–439 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-023-00784-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-023-00784-z

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing Anthropocene

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Anthropocene