This is part of our special feature on Food, Food
Systems, and Agriculture: https://www.europenowjournal.org/2018/09/04/agriculture-and-food-systems/
In recent years,
a remarkable rise of veganism within mainstream society, certainly evident
across Western Europe, continues to gather momentum. The numbers of
individuals who now consider themselves “vegan,” and the rapid rate at which
this has happened is certainly striking. In the UK alone, a 2016 IPSOS Moray poll
conducted for The Vegan Society (2018) found that:
There are
600,000 vegans in Great Britain in 2018, or 1.16% of the population. The number
of vegans doubled from up to 150,000 (0.25%) in 2014 to 276,000 (0.46%) in
2016, and – incredibly – doubled again from the 276,000 (0.46%) in 2016 to
600,000 (1.16%) in 2018.
That veganism is becoming ever more publically popular, visible, and
acceptable can be interpreted on one level through the number of articles
featured in the media. Significantly, in addition to the BBC News (Lowbridge,
2017), positive appraisals of veganism have transgressed traditional political
“right” or “left” orientations of both broadsheet – The Guardian (Hancox, 2018), Independent (Petter, 2018) Daily Telegraph (Quinn, 2016) – and tabloid – Daily
Mirror (Jarvis, 2018), The Sun (Sheen,
2018) and Daily Star (Buchanan, 2017)
newspapers. Here, many reports cite a diverse range of motivations to account
for this current “food” phenomenon, of which “health,” “environmental
sustainability,” and broader “ethical reasons” are key. This favorable climate,
in which veganism is marketed and packaged by the mainstream media, is of
course key to informing a public imaginary. As Jasmijn De Boo, CEO of The Vegan
Society acknowledges (in this quote frequently cited in media articles):
The positive
portrayal in the media has contributed to its changing image; documentaries on
the shocking realities and consequences of animal agriculture have gained
prominence; delicious-looking vegan recipes have multiplied online and on
social media as society becomes more health-conscious; and top vegan athletes
keep proving that you can be fit and healthy on a plant-based diet. (cited in
Moss, 2017)
For many who
come to “be vegan” predominantly on ethical grounds, the relative abundance of
vegan foods and drinks, the absence of pejorative vegan stereotypes, and
positive endorsement surrounding veganism is embraced wholeheartedly. However,
a critical appraisal about what veganism actually entails, and will possible
achieve, at this moment of unprecedented mainstream popularity is conspicuous
by its absence. In particular, it is timely to pose the question “What…”, if
anything, “has been compromised or lost as a consequence of veganism’s shift
from a rather peripheral position at the fringes of society to this more
central role?”
Problematizing Veganism: Articulating a Critical “Yes, but!”
Position
Focusing on this question, the main argument here is that the way in which veganism is being promoted and embraced by mainstream society comes at a significant cost. More specifically, viewed as a profitable vehicle for corporate profit, contemporary “lifestyle or foodist” approaches to veganism is bereft of the ability to usher in a more ethical, peaceable, and non-violent world into being. In contrast, if veganism is understood and embraced on a deeper, and altogether more critical and holistic level, it had the potential to help realize these. In short, set against the rise of veganism, the essay proposes a critical “Yes…” (that people engaging with veganism is welcome), “But…” (we urgently need to re-couple veganism back to its radical origins as strategy of resistance, one which promises to advance social and spatial inter-species justice and environmental sustainability) stance. To understand why this might be a logical and persuasive reading, I invite you to consider two things. First, the way in which the demand for vegan food and other products is influencing “meat” and dairy food production and, secondly, the truth-claim that going vegan is equivalent to living “cruelty-free.”
A decade ago,
Erika Calvo (2008, 32-33) wrote that:
The largest
animal populations in the West, [are] those used for “food”…From conception
until death, the lives of these animals are shaped by their location as
potential food, and billions of animals are transformed into a multiplicity of
“meat products” each year. ”
In the intervening
years, given the extraordinary rise of veganism in Western Europe and beyond,
and with it the relative abundance of, and appetite for “vegan” foods, surely
we might be confident to assume that there has been tangible reduction in
“meat” and dairy-based products. Yet this has not happened. As Nibert (2017,
xi) notes:
The oppression
of other animals as food is [still] unquestionably the deadliest practice [of
human exploitation]; globally, more than 65 billion land-based beings are
killed to be consumed as food every year, while the water-based other animals
killed for food number in the hundreds of billions. The physical and emotional
suffering from such horrific treatment experienced by each individual being,
multiplied by the billions of individual animals who undergo it, results in a
degree of severe distress and pain—every second—that defies comprehension.
Indeed, though
uneven, future trends all suggest that demand for meat and dairy will continue
to increase. Globally, “Worldwide meat production has tripled over the last
four decades and expanded by 20% in the past decade” (Stoll-Kleemann and
O’Riordan, 2017, 35), and within the European Union projections are confidently
predicting further increases. As the European Commission (2017, n.p.) notes,
“The quantity of EU fresh dairy products in net trade (the difference between
exports and imports) is projected to reach just over 1.08mt in 2030, compared
to 1.05mt in 2017.”
Second, the idea
that being vegan equates to being “cruelty-free,” which is a popular rhetoric
employed by animal advocacy campaigners and vegan advocates, is highly
problematic. Consider fruit and vegetables for example—which are surely
unequivocally vegan and “cruelty-free?” Adopting a more critical vegan approach
would involve investigating the wider (hidden) networks of production,
exchange, and consumption that underpin these foods, and evaluating these on
ethical grounds. By doing so, many inconvenient and ugly truths come to light:
deeply undermining the “cruelty-free” pro-vegan propaganda. Harrowing stories
of the UK and European agricultural workers involved in the fruit and vegetable
industry surface with an alarming regularity. Two of many recent examples to
consider would be the research by Letizia Palumbo and Alessandra Sciurba
(2015), who drew attention toward the labor and sexual exploitation faced by
Romanian females in the agricultural sector in Sicily (Italy), and Kennedy’s
(2015) report on the (120,000) migrant workers in El Ejido, Spain, who help
produce “nearly three million tons of fruit and veg every year for export to
Britain and across northern Europe,” and who experienced misery, suffering, and
exploitation. Such uncomfortable truths about contemporary veganism surely begs
the question: if veganism is not having a positive impact on human or nonhuman
animals, and indeed is contributing to greater levels of suffering and
exploration, then what, or indeed for whom, is twenty-first century veganism of
the greatest value and use for?
Looking Backwards: Differentiating “Activist” from “Lifestyle” Veganism
One way to approach this question involves identifying and teasing apart two rather crude-but-important approaches of veganism. One is rooted in the “original” definition for veganism, which emerged in the UK in the 1940s. I will refer to this as “activist” veganism, one which inspires a more radical vision for veganism, encouraging greater critical reflection, awareness, and commitment to social justice issues than “the other” type of veganism, namely “lifestyle,” or “corporate” veganism. It is lifestyle veganism that is very much in the ascendancy across mainstream society, being focused almost exclusively around questions of food, but which, crucially, is uncoupled and detached from related actions relevant to inter-species social justice. Deprived of any ability to challenge capitalism, lifestyle veganism is very much endorsed and promoted by corporate interests and investment. It has, almost exclusively, been the type of veganism that has been introduced and commented on in these opening reflections. Additional reflections on the problematic geographies of lifestyle veganism will be made later, before then the critical geographies associated with “activist” veganism are considered.
Defining “Activist” Veganism: Looking Backwards
While there is an undoubtedly tremendously rich history relating to people and communities across the world who have taken deliberate decisions to neither eat the flesh of other animals, nor drink their milk, it wasn’t until 1944 that the word “vegan” was officially coined (The Vegan Society, n.d). When the UK Vegan Society became a registered charity in 1979, the Memorandum and Articles of Association defined “veganism” as:
[…] a philosophy
and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and
practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food,
clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and
use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of humans, animals and the
environment. (The Vegan Society, n.d.)
Thus, in this
earliest conception and understanding about what veganism stands for, we can
clearly appreciate its intent to capture practical “as far as possible and
practical,” but still critical, emancipatory and visionary spirit. Of
particular interest here is its appeal to intersectionality, namely “for the
benefit of humans, animals and the environment.” Another excellent early
example of an intersectional framing of veganism and a commitment to
non-violence, was articulated by Eva Batt. For Batt (1964):
“Veganism… is an everyday, fundamental way of life concerned with living without hurting others… There are several roads
to veganism and many individual views of it, but veganism is one thing and one
thing only – a way of living which avoids exploitation whether it be of our
fellow [hu]man, the animal population, or the soil upon which we all rely for
our very existence.”
So veganism, in its earliest conception, was never just about food choices:
it was a radical activist praxis (both theory and action) of a manifest desire
to act in a way that prefigures an inter-species politics of justice and total
liberation. It is this critical vision for what
it is “to be” vegan that is in danger of being entirely lost to the lifestyle
veganism embraced by contemporary (Western) society.
While embracing these original visions identified for veganism, the
“activist” vegan praxis (i.e. theory and action)
considered here also draws inspiration from a critical animal scholarship, one
rooted in activism and animated by a socio-spatial politics of total liberation
(see, for example Cudworth and Hobden, 2018; Gillespie and Collard, 2015; Nocella
et al. 2014, Nocella et al, 2015; Pellow, 2014). If this is to displace
lifestyle activism, and re-assert veganism as a potentially radical
emancipatory praxis then, fundamentally, the popular imaginary around veganism
must recognize that:
…veganism is more
than ‘just a diet‘ and is better seen and practised as a systemic and
intersectional mode of critical analysis and a useful lived philosophy counter
to anthropocentrism, hierarchy and violence (Twine, 2012, 19)
Or, as Harper
(2010, 5-6) argues we must be mindful of the fact that:
Veganism is not
is just about the abstinence of animal consumption; it is about the ongoing
struggle to produce socio-spatial epistemologies of consumption that lead to
cultural and spatial change.
Two fundamental
commitments consistent within a critical vegan praxis to note are (a) its
appeal to intersectionality, in recognition of the fact that “the oppression of
humans and other animals has been deeply entangled” (Nibert, ix, 2014), and;
(b) its deep commitment to building spaces of peace and inter-species justice
through non-violence.
Conscious of this original definition of veganism, it becomes striking to
observe how veganism in the mainstream media and populist culture repackages
veganism in ways that strip out all the radical inter-species claims for
justice and nonviolence. Instead, we have a light veganism, one which is
invariably framed as: “one of Britain’s fastest growing lifestyle movements”
(Moss, 2018) or a “diet trend” (Jarvis, 2016). In this way, eliminating “meat”
and dairy products becomes less a profound statement of brining social justice
through action in the world (vegan-as -activist),
but packaged as one choice among many (vegan-as-consumer).
The latter is illustrated in the following reflection:
European consumer interest in
alternative protein sources is on the rise, with a growing number of shopper
mindfully working to reduce their meat consumption.” (Askew, 2017 italic added)
Importantly,
this “new” commodified version of veganism is consciously aware about what
(activist) veganism had sought to represent. A toxic combination of a deeply
speciesist culture, and the false truths perpetuated by the propaganda of the
meat and dairy industry, meant that Western vegans were traditionally
marginalized, vilified, and demonized by mainstream society. Vegans were
caricatured as anything from weird, irrational, “extreme” in their attitudes
and belief, to individuals who loathed society, were misanthropic, and intent
on pursuing violent forms of direct action and liberation. Now uncoupled from
its radical heart, articles promoting “lifestyle” veganism emphasize that
veganism is no longer “extreme.” The focus consequently shifts toward promoting
the health and lifestyle benefits of “going vegan!” and either neglecting or
diminishing ethical motivations, (framed exclusively as animal welfare issue,
never animal rights). Indeed, rather than re-brand and “sell” “veganism,”
“vegan” is often dropped in favor of the euphemism with “plant-based-diet.” In
doing so, the removal of any semblance of “activism” through veganism is
complete. Zarling (2018) captures this well here:
More than 80% of
those surveyed by California-based food consultant Mattson say they prefer the
term “plant-based” to “vegan” when describing a diet that avoids meat, dairy or
any animal products, according to Food Navigator. Respondents said the term
“100% plant-based” is more flexible and offers more for the consumer, and
describes food that tastes better and is healthier than those labeled “vegan.”
Barb Stuckey,
Mattson president and chief innovation officer, told Food Navigator this is
because consumers see “plant-based” as a positive food choice, but consider
“vegan” a lifestyle including deprivation, allegiance to a self-defining cause
— animal rights or environmentalism — and serious commitment, said. Changing
the conversation can change make food taste better in the eyes of consumers,
she suggested.
Given how the
branding of “veganism-as-lifestyle” is being rolled out across mainstream
audiences, it is of little wonder to understand how veganism is also complicit
in the ongoing exploitations of human (as workers) and other animals. It is
here that we might ask: “what” or “who” then stands to benefit from this
“unstoppable” rise of sanitized veganism. In short, the answer is capitalism
and capitalists: the growth of “the western vegan consumer” presents a huge
financial opportunities and competitive advantage to exploit. For example,
there are numerous business columns focused explicitly around questions about
“How can retailers capitalize on the growing vegan trend, as illustrated in the
following:
In 2014, only 1%
of the population classified themselves as vegan, rising to 3% in 2017,
according to a report by GlobalData. With over one million more consumers
demanding vegan products, this offers retailers a prime opportunity to
capitalise on a trend that continues to gain popularity. However, while there
is an established market for vegan products in food, there is also a growing
opportunity in categories such as clothing and beauty. (GlobalData Retail).
The following
quotes perfectly illustrate the excitement and sense of (future) opportunity:
“The global meat substitute market size is expected to be valued at $7.5
billion by 2025, registering a CAGR of 7.7% during the forecast period (2018‐2025)”
(Prasannan, 2018). It is abundantly clear that a corporate-endorsed veganism
can never begin to challenge or subvert the powerful intersectional systems of
exploitation, dominant and violence that both human and nonhuman animals suffer
through the production, exchange and consumption of vegan products. As Dominick
(2015, 27) argues:
[Lifestyle]
Veganism is not a counter-power movement. It involves at most a hint of
strategy and lacks even the pretence of an institutional alternative to
decrease human impact on nonhuman animals!
More ethically problematic still is the fact that significant profits of
“the vegan industry” directly benefit corporations who (traditionally) invest
in animal exploitative industries. For example, focusing on just vegetarian and
vegan burgers and sausages, Ethical Consumer (reported
that:
Hain Celestial
(Linda McCartney’s), Nestle (Tivall), Dr A. Stoffel Holding AG (Granovita),
Monde Nissin (Quorn and Cauldron), and all the supermarkets, sell meat in
addition to vegetarian and/or vegan options.
Following up
this report, The Independent interviewed Mackenzie Dentaer, a research at
Ethical Consumer. Tellingly in the context here, Dentaer was quoted as saying:
We’re sure that
many vegans will be horrified that they are unwittingly supporting the milk and
dairy industries. The good news is that there are many vegan brands on the
shelves that have no links to animal exploitation and have been championing
vegan lifestyles for many years.
The bad news is
that as the vegan revolution rolls on we can expect many more companies who
have no interest in ending animal exploitation scramble to get a slice of the
vegan market. (Butcher, 2018)
Given this
complex and complicated relationship with “lifestyle,” or corporate-endorsed
veganism, what possibilities exit for veganism to (re)claim a radical
emancipatory praxis? Focused explicitly on food production, it is this final
question that we now consider.
Moving Forward: Sketches of Post-Capitalist Adventures in Veganic
Agriculture
Is it possible to produce anything, let alone vegan food, in industrialized capitalist systems, with all the repertoires of violence and exploitation that are intrinsic to it (Springer, 2016, Nibert, 2017)? Adopting an unequivocal “no!” response to this question, necessitates looking for alternative economic models to embed a veganic food systems within. Such a challenge though, happily, is not a utopian one. When invited to look carefully, there are many diverse examples of vegan food production that are rooted in social and spatial justice. We should not overlook the fact that many individuals and communities already engage in forms of direct action to grow their own food. This is particularly evident through self-provisioning (from simple acts as growing pots of herbs, or vegetables in the house or garden), or through more community-based gardening initiatives (see Perry, 2015 for several UK, European and USA initiatives). The desire to grow local food for reasons of sustainability, as well as personal and community empowerment is certainly increasing with demand in places vastly outstripping supply. For example, The National Allotment Society drew on figures to suggest that “there are approximately 330,000 allotment plots in the UK, but to meet the current demand we need in the region of at least a further 90,000 plots.” Moving forward, there is certainly the need to exchange knowledge and good practice, and draw on innovative and creative ways to secure access to (public) land, and tackles barriers to participation that local communities face. Some excellent resources are available here.
There is also in increasing interest and momentum gathering around veganic
agriculture initiatives at much broader scales. In North America, for example,
there is the San-Francisco based group: Seed the Commons, “a
grassroots organization that works to create sustainable and just food systems
that are independent of animal exploitation” (See https://seedthecommons.org.) Promoting veganic farming as a means of resisting and moving beyond
industrial farming that exploits humans and nonhuman animals, Seed the Commons focuses on how food sovereignty
and empowerment can be achieved when communities reclaim control of (their)
food systems.
In this context, reflecting the intersectionality of vegan praxis, brings
to the fore question of access to food as well: who gets to eat? There are some
inspiring organizations who share vegan meals to those who find themselves
socially and economically marginalized. Food not Bombs, founded
in the United States in the 1980s, offers some superb examples (see Giraud,
2015). Speaking to a truly global vegan politics of activism, the Food Not
Bombs website:
Our website
lists over 500 chapters, but we believe there are many groups that have not
asked to be listed. We think there are over 1,000 chapters of Food Not Bombs
active in over 60 countries in Europe, the Middle East, Africa, the Americas,
Asia, Australia and New Zealand. We are active in nearly 500 cities in the
United States and have groups in another 500 cities outside the United States.
We have been told that there are over 60 groups in Russia but only have 15
listed. The same is true for many other countries.
It is also important to reflect on other hidden connections between
veganism and animal abuse, and one which informs that action of the UK based
Vegan Organic Network (VON http://veganorganic.net/ ). Over the last twenty years VON has strived to promote, Vegan
organic (also known as stockfree organic) methods of agriculture and
horticulture throughout the world so that green, clean and cruelty-free food
becomes widely available.
Here, the
emphasis on “stockfree organic” also brings forward another troubling
connection with industrial vegan agricultural systems. It is an uncomfortable
truth to recognize that the cultivation of apparently “vegan” food is likely to
have been facilitated by the use of manure from industrialized farmed animals,
animal remains from abattoirs, or fishmeal. This scenario alone should cause us
to question if, in any meaningful sense, eating food grown with “fish, blood
and bone” animal-origin fertilizers is consistent with a vegan politics?
Final Reflections: Looking Backward/ Moving Forward
To summarize, at the time of writing, the growth of veganism and the availability of vegan foods across Europe appears to be on an ever-upward trajectory. However, when focusing on how veganism is being promoted and endorsed, viewed from an ethical perspective, and focused mainly on the question of food production, many deeply problematic concerns are brought into view. In response to this, it is instructive to distinguish between two specific types of vegan approaches. In this essay, a more “lifestyle” or corporate veganism has been juxtaposed against more critical “activist” forms of veganism, and it is the latter which carries forward the radical praxis that “being vegan” promises.
However, it is
lifestyle veganism that is firmly ascendant at this moment, driven by corporate
interests, and supported by largely industrial agricultural systems. This
certainly brings with it some apparent advantages—which only decade ago would
be unthinkable—such as the variety of vegan foods and dairy-free drinks readily
available in supermarkets and restaurants, which in turn should make the
opportunity to “go vegan” more accessible to more people. Hence, the response
of the “Yes (this is welcome) but” position adopted here. Indeed, the “but”
position is of such a fierce objection, that it should be written in CAPITAL
LETTERS, and followed by an exclamation mark! The failure of lifestyle veganism
to make a discernible difference to the known (and hidden) repertoires of violence
suffering of human and other animals enmeshed in the capitalist agricultural
systems that produce food, let alone begin to tackle broader repertoires of
oppression and subjugation that exist in the world at large, are deeply
problematic.
It is then the
greater question of “how” a radical liberatory promise for both human and
nonhuman animals envisaged through veganism, can come to the ascendency and
drive twenty-first century vegan geographies that is most urgent. This essay
has focused on just a few examples to illustrate how veganism as a
counter-power strategy is being taken forward and harnessed in the UK, Western
Europe, and the US. The hope is that these will continue to develop momentum
and prominence when it comes to making critical vegan “food choices,” and
encourage further exit points away from the corporate-driven exploitative food
production systems. Though we live in troubling and challenging times, there
are many grounds for optimism and confidence that an activist vegan praxis can
be harnessed in ways that directly tackle the profound intersectional crises
that human and more-than-human communities face in the Anthropocene. Approached
in this way, the paper should be taken as a starting point, one that has
hopefully raised consciousness around issues of veganism and agriculture, in
ways that encourage greater levels of critical self-reflection in the reader,
while also empowering them to make links with many other critical connections
not addressed here, and raising the consciousness of others toward these.
Richard J. White is a Reader in
Human Geography at Sheffield Hallam University, UK. Greatly influenced by
anarchist praxis, Richard’s research explores a range of critical
geographies focused on intersectional social justice and total liberation
movements. He recently co-edited The Radicalization of Pedagogy, Theories of Resistance, The Practice of Freedom (all
2016, Rowman & Littlefield) and Anarchism and Animal
Liberation (2015, McFarland Press).
Photo: Syda
Productions, Shutterstock
References:
Askew, K. (2017) Europe leads in innovation as
meat-free demand grows.https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2017/08/24/Europe-leads-in-innovation-as-meat-free-demand-grows?utm_source=copyright&utm_medium=OnSite&utm_campaign=copyright
Batt, E. (1964) Why Veganism?”
Available at Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/text/why-veganism-by-eva-batt/
Buchanan, S. (2017) 10 reasons you should go vegan – immediately. The Daily Star. https://www.dailystar.co.uk/diet-fitness/656778/Vegan-food-recipes-diet-plant-based-health-benefits-veganism
Butcher, R. (2018) Vegans warned about choosing products linked to
companies that also trade in ‘animal exploitation’. The Independent.https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/vegan-products-meat-dairy-companies-links-warning-a8163091.html
Cudworth, E. and Hobden, S. (2018) The Emancipatory Project of
Posthumanism. Routledge: London.
Dominick, B. (2015) Anarcho-Veganism Revisited. In A.J. Nocella, RJ White
and E. Cudworth (Ed) Anarchism and Animal
Liberation: Essays on Complementary Elements of Total Liberation.
pg. 23-39.
Ethical Consumer, (no date) Ethical shopping guide to
vegetarian & vegan burgers & sausages, from Ethical Consumer. http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/buyersguides/food/meat-freesausagesburgers.aspx
European Commission (2017) EU agricultural outlook:
European livestock sector to benefit from higher global demand https://ec.europa.eu/info/news/eu-agricultural-outlook-european-livestock-sector-benefit-higher-global-demand_en
Gillespie, K. and Collard, R-C. (ed) (2015) Critical
Animal Geographies: Politics, intersections, and hierarchies in a multispecies
world. Routledge: London.
Giroud, E.
(2015) Practice as theory: Learning from food activism and performative
protest. In Kathryn Gillespie and Rosemary –Claire Collard (ed) Critical Animal
Geographies. (pg. 36-53).
GlobalData Retail (2017) How can retailers capitalise on the growing vegan
trend? Retail Insight Network. https://www.retail-insight-network.com/comment/can-retailers-capitalise-growing-vegan-trend/
Jarvis, D. (2016) One diet trend has taken the UK by storm and is showing
no sign of losing popularity. The Daily Mirror. https://www.mirror.co.uk/lifestyle/dieting/one-diet-trend-taken-uk-7989934
Harper, A-B, (2010) ‘Race as a “feeble matter” in Veganism: Interrogating whiteness,
geopolitical priviledge, and consumption philosophy of “cruelty-free”
products’. Journal for Critical Animal Studies, Vol.
III (3), pp. 5-27.
Hancox, D. (2018) The unstoppable rise of veganism: how a fringe movement
went mainstream. The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/apr/01/vegans-are-coming-millennials-health-climate-change-animal-welfare
IGD (2017) IGD: UK food and grocery forecast to grow by 15% by
2022 https://www.igd.com/about-us/media/press-releases/press-release/t/igd-uk-food-and-grocery-forecast-to-grow-by-15-by-2022/i/16927
Kennedy, S. (2015) Exploited to put food on our plates: ‘we live like
animals’. Channel 4 news. https://www.channel4.com/news/salad-supermarkets-exploitation-pay-workers-shanty-camps-el-ejido-spain
Lowbridge, C. (2017) Veganism: How a maligned movement went
mainstream. BBC News.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-40722965
Moss, R. (2017) Number Of Vegans In Britain
Soars In Past Decade, Here’s Why. Huffington Post, https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/number-of-vegans-in-uk-half-million_uk_573c2557e4b0328a838b92a3?guccounter=1&guce_referrer_us=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvLnVrLw&guce_referrer_cs=okNwnUVAenXmnSkFZtO8_w
National Allotment Society. (no date) Brief history of
allotments https://www.nsalg.org.uk/allotment-info/brief-history-of-allotments/
Nibert, D. (2014) Foreword. In A.N. Nocella, J. Sorenson, K. Socha and A.
Matsuoka (ed). Defining Critical Animal Studies. An
intersectional Social Justice Approach for Liberation. Peter Lang,
New York. pp. ix-xii
Nibert, D. (ed) (2017) Animal Oppression and
Capitalism Vol 1 and 2. Praeger: Ca.
Nocella, Sorenson, J., Socha, K. and Matsuoka, A. (ed) (2014) Defining Critical Animal Studies. An intersectional Social Justice
Approach for Liberation. Peter Lang, New York.
Nocella , A.J., White, R. J. and Cudworth, E. (ed) (2015) Anarchism and Animal liberation: essays on Complementay elements
of total liberation. McFarland Press. Jefferson, North
Carolina.
Palumbo, L and Sciurba, A. (2015) Vulnerability to Forced Labour and
Trafficking: The case of Romanian women in the agricultural sector in
Sicily. Anti-Trafficking Review, Issue 5 pp.89–108, www.antitraffickingreview.org
Pellow, D. (2014) Total Liberation: The power and
promise of animal rights and the radical earth movement. Monnesota
Press: Minnesota.
Perry, F. (2015) The Guardian, Urban farmers: community food
growing around the world – in pictures https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/jul/09/urban-farmers-community-food-growing-around-world-in-pictures
Petter, O. (2018) Number of Vegans in UK soars to
3.5 million, survey finds. The Independent. https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/food-and-drink/vegans-uk-rise-popularity-plant-based-diets-veganism-figures-survey-compare-the-market-a8286471.html
Prasannan, A. (2018) Meat Substitute Market by Product Type. Allied Market Research.https://www.alliedmarketresearch.com/meat-substitute-market
Quinn, S. (2018) Number of vegans in Britain rises by 360% in 10
years. The Telegraph.https://www.telegraph.co.uk/food-and-drink/news/number-of-vegans-in-britain-rises-by-360-in-10-years/
Sheen, T. (2018) COWSPIRACY. Veganism a growing trend in football – but
Hector Bellerin, Sergio Aguero and Jermain Defoe could be missing out on vital
nutrition.. The Sun. https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/6073401/veganism-in-football-hector-bellerin-sergio-aguero-jermain-defoe-plant-based-diet/
Springer, S. (2016). The discourse of neoliberalism:
An anatomy of a powerful idea. Pickering & Chatto Publishers.
Stoll-Kleemann, S. & O’Riordan, T. (2015) The Sustainability Challenges
of Our Meat and Dairy Diets, Environment: Science and Policy
for Sustainable Development, 57:3, 34-48.
The Vegan Society, (no date) Vegan Diet in the UK. https://www.vegansociety.com/news/media/statistics
The Vegan Society, (No date) History: We’ve Come a Long Way! https://www.vegansociety.com/about-us/history
The Vegan Society, (no date). Definition of veganism https://www.vegansociety.com/go-vegan/definition-veganism
Twine, R. (2012). Revealing the ‘animal-industrial complex—A concept and
method for critical animal studies. Journal for Critical Animal
Studies, 10(1), 12-39.
Zarling, P. (2018) Consumers prefer the term ‘plant based’ to
‘vegan’. Food Dive. https://www.fooddive.com/news/grocery–consumers-prefer-the-term-plant-based-to-vegan/521807/
