Reducing Meat Consumption: Ethical arguments in the context of today’s consumer society

If Western diets containing a lot of animal proteins spread over the globe during the next forty years, the consequences will be catastrophic, particularly for poorer countries. The ethical and political discussions about (reducing) meat consumption are characterised by a paradox: contrary to the importance of moral responsibility is the widespread assumption that modern consumers are not equipped to take such responsibility. This results in a pessimistic view on the possibilities for change on the demand side that will increase sustainable consumption patterns. A broader perspective can be opened by assuming that no clear boundaries exist between 'citizens' and 'consumers' as can be learned from consumption sociological studies. This could encourage practical policy strategies on the demand side for reducing our meat consumption that escapes the rigid contrast of responsibility versus irresponsibility. We conclude with three routes of transition as an example of how modern consumers can be approached as allies instead of opponents. In fact, these routes embody different ambitions and expectations about consumers, taking into account the surrounding socio-economic, political and cultural environment. The perspective we unfold seems to be aligned with pragmatic ethics in which virtues are seen in a wider context.