Meat Reduction by Force: The Case of “Meatless Monday” in the Norwegian Armed Forces

Abstract

Despite the scientific evidence that more plants and less animal-based food is more sustainable, policy interventions to reduce meat consumption are scarce. However, campaigns for meat free days in school and office canteens have spread globally over the last years. In this paper, we look at the Norwegian Armed Forces’ attempt to introduce the Meatless Monday campaign in their camps, and we evaluate the implementation process as well as the effect of the campaign on soldiers. Qualitative interviews with military staff indicate that lack of conviction about benefits of meat reduction, and the fact that kitchen staff did not feel ownership to the project, partly explain why vegetarian measures were not fully implemented in all the camps. A multivariate regression analysis with survey data from soldiers indicate that those who have experienced meat free days in the military kitchen are more prone to claim that joining the military has given them a more positive view on vegetarian food. Furthermore, the survey gives evidence that stated willingness to eat more vegetarian food is higher among soldiers who believe in the environmental and health benefits of meat reduction.

A structured literature review of the meat paradox

“…Together, these three articles provide alternative explanations to the MP, suggesting that people do not always value behavioural consistency (Panagiotou & Kadianaki, 2019), present logical explanations for meat consumption (Scott et al, 2019) and can be ignorant of meat's negative consequences (Milford & Kildal, 2019). However, behaviours within the three articles can all be equally interpreted as dissonance-reducing strategies, and thus only debate MP indirectly instead of providing direct evidence against MP.…”

“…Finally, Milford and Kildal (2019) suggest purported ignorance of meat's negative environmental and health consequences stems from genuine lack of knowledge, whereby people are genuinely unaware of the negative consequences without feigning ignorance. Consequently, 'ignorance is bliss' as people cannot experience dissonance if they are unaware of their behaviour contradicting their beliefs.…”

“…Secondly, Panagiotou and Kadianaki's (2019) displacement could be used intentionally to portray vegetarianism negatively, providing reasons for not becoming vegetarian. Thirdly, Milford and Kildal's (2019) ignorance could be intentional to avoid knowing about harm caused to animals and thus avoid meat consumption reduction.…”

“…Behaviour presented within one of the articles which explored the MP indirectly (Milford & Kildal, 2019) can also be interpreted as an indirect strategy: Whilst the authors suggest meat consumption arises from genuine ignorance of meat's harmful consequences, this self-proclaimed ignorance could be strategic. 'Strategic ignorance' prevents dissonance indirectly by intentionally disregarding meat's harmful consequen ces, preventing necessary behavioural change.…”

Demand-Side Food Policies for Public and Planetary Health

“…A 2012 US survey showed that 43% of respondents were familiar with Meatless Monday and of those, 36% said they were willing to eat less meat [49] (R49). Another study from Norway found that soldiers exposed to Meatless Monday measures became more positive to vegetarian food [83] (R110).…”