We must pay more for healthy, ethical food
When it comes to feeding ourselves, we are no longer purely price-oriented. The 'cradle-to-grave' analysis is a useful tool to assess the environmental impact of all products, from creation to disposal. But what counts most for food is 'from cradle to dining table'. The carbon and water embedded within our food are things that can be measured. Nonetheless, for animal products, there is something immeasurable, yet far more powerful than mere numbers - the issue of animal welfare.
We will react more strongly to a picture of pregnant pigs held in small cages than the number '4,800' - the global average litres of water required to produce 1 kg of pork. Public perception is a key factor that caused a famous fast-food chain to ask its pork suppliers to phase out the use of such cages. Traditionally, the space allotted to each animal was determined by productivity; now, animal health and behaviour are factored into the recommendations of cage sizes. As customers, we will have to pay more for the improvement of farming conditions and the minimal use of antibiotics. As we demand better animal welfare and health, and not so much the lowest price, producers will switch their methods.