Cette vidéo sera publiée prochainement
Meat alternatives have begun going mainstream
Could a tax on meat fight climate change? One British investor group says it's inevitable. The growing global population and the increasing urbanization and demand in many parts of the world for a Western-type diet means there's a growing demand for ruminant products. Between 2000 and 2017, global meat consumption grew by 40%. And it could increase 75% could increase more by 2050. But what's wrong with meat? Animal farming is a huge climate change contributor: it produces 14% of global greenhouse gas emissions.
That's as much as the entire transportation sector. Countries like Sweden, Denmark and Germany are considering meat taxes to reach their Paris Agreement goals. And they could become more common in 5 to 10 years. The idea: to impose "sin taxes, on products deemed harmful to health or to the environment. 180 countries tax tobacco, 60 tax carbon and 25 tax sugar. The taxes have 2 goals, according to advocates: Reduce meat consumption. Like sugar, red meat has been linked to an increased risk of cancer, heart disease, stroke and diabetes, which Fitch said laid the groundwork for similar taxes. A study by University of Oxford, for example, found introducing the measure could prevent almost 6,000 deaths a year and save nearly $850 million in healthcare costs.
Unlike sugar, however, the justification for restricting people's appetite for meat relates to broader issues than just health, with climate change, deforestation, and ethical concerns all looming large in the minds of consumers. Fund treatment for illnesses linked to overconsumption of meat. A 40% tax According to one study, on beef, a 20% tax on dairy products on chicken would cut down CO2 emissions enough to prevent 500,000 deaths a year. But this measure could also be unfair.
Brut. Nature
