% of pastures and rangeland have deteriorated on a global scale (Steinfeld et al., 2006). Thus, the cumulative impacts of forest eradication and land degradation have resulted in the loss of a beneficial carbon sink, reducing the global capacity for natural uptake of CO2 (Steinfeld et al., 2006). In the United Kingdom, a more centrally focused study found that inclusion of consumption-induced land-use change increased the environmental footprint of the entire food system by 50 %. Moreover, roughly 75 % of land-use change emissions in the UK were attributable to livestock alone (Audsley et al., 2009). The world has entered into a land-system change planetary boundary of uncertainty, with substantial reductions in original forest cover (Steffen et al., 2015). Consequently, industrial livestock agriculture must be reduced to limit further land-system change and degradation, and provide an opportunity for regrowth of a former naturally occurring CO2 sink. Likewise, a reduction in livestock agriculture is necessary to achieve the aforementioned targets set forth at COP21 this past year. iii. Water Depletion is an integral part of the planet; it forms the basis of social and economic activity, ecosystems, and life itself. Without water, we cannot survive. Though global freshwater use is still within its planetary limits (Steffen et al., 2015), there is worry that exponential population growth coupled with anthropogenic reliance on water, will push the freshwater resource past its boundary in many regions. Globally, agriculture consumes 70% of anthropogenic freshwater withdrawals (WWAP, 2012). However, water requirements vary substantially for differing foods, forage crops for
iv. Cognitive Dissonance Cognitive dissonance describes having contradictory and inconsistent thoughts and actions, as relating to behavioural decisions (Festinger, 1957). Three Categories contribute to the theme of cognitive dissonance (Appendix 2; Figure 27), as a barrier to adopting plant-based diets: anthropocentric views, intentional ignorance, and moral disengagement. Despite recognition of the environmental impacts of animal agriculture, in addition to animal ethics, and health, individuals lack motivation to commit to a plant-based diet; behaviour is often not representative of individual concerns (Bilewicz et al., 2011; Graça et al., 2014). Consumers often resort to moral disengagement strategies when asked to consider the impacts of their consumption practices (Bastian et al., 2012; Rothgerber, 2013; Graça et al., 2014), resulting in a barrier to behavioural change. Graça et al. (2014) note four prominent moral disengagement strategies including reconstrual of harmful conduct (“yes, but…”), obscuring personal responsibility, disregard for the negative consequences associated with current meat production and consumption, and active avoidance and dissociation. By engaging in these psychological justifications, consumers morally dissociate from the harmful effects of the industrial agricultural sector. Through suppressions of moral concern, people reduce the unpleasantness associated with meat consumption in an effort to reduce dissonance of their ambivalent and contrasting attitudes (Rothgerber, 2013; Graça et al., 2014). The literature on cognitive dissonance is more prevalent with respect to moral concern for animals, in an attempt to deny their capacity to suffer (Bilewicz et al., 2011; Bratanova et al., 2011; Bastian et al., 2012; Rothgerber, 2013; Loughnan et al., 2010). Moreover, Rothgerber (2014) suggests that
Table 2. Summary of policy instruments and recommendations to combat each of the five barriers to adopting a plant-based diet, and effect change. Barrier Information-Based Market-Based Regulatory Autonomy campaigns (e.g. NGO-led campaigns; meatless Mondays) framework (e.g. greater proportion of plant-based sales; hybrid products; increased availability of plant-based products, promotions, manipulation of products on shelves) likely to respond to instruments to respond well to regulatory instruments Cognitive Dissonance framework (e.g. greater proportion of plant-based sales; hybrid products; increased availability of plant-based products, promotions, manipulation of products on shelves) exposure to negative consequences (e.g. introduce carbon labelling) foods with higher emissions (e.g. meat tax) tax on animal product imports procurement regulations and policies (e.g. meatless procurement for schools, hospitals, prisons) as a form of command and control Information Asymmetry campaigns (e.g. NGO-led campaigns; meatless Mondays) to the Canadian Food Guide initiatives (e.g. urban gardening) Initiatives (e.g. Food demonstrations of plant-based protein, greater proportion of sales; carbon-labelling) framework (e.g. greater proportion of plant-based sales; hybrid products; increased availability of plant-based products, promotions, manipulation of products on shelves) meat alternatives; support brands and increase availability discounts for products foods with higher emissions (e.g. meat tax) tax on animal product imports procurement regulations and policies (e.g. meatless procurement for schools, hospitals, prisons) of advertisement of unhealthy, and unsustainable products as a form of command and control