You might have seen this headline. Ahold Delhaize announces protein split target of 50% by 2030 for European food retail brands. Great thing for animals right? Let's dig deeper.

The Meat Reduction Commitment

Ahold Delhaize, a top 20 European supermarket has committed 50% of their protein sales to come from plant based sources by 2030. Reading the entire press release one does not see a single mention of animal welfare in the copy. References to animals, rather look like this.

By rebalancing protein sales and advancing the development of lower carbon emission animal products, Ahold Delhaize is addressing emissions in line with its climate ambition.

While supporting the shift to more plant-based proteins, we also work closely with our animal protein producers and suppliers to help reduce the environmental impact of their products

Actively promoting plant-based product ranges and offering lower-carbon animal protein assortments.

Working together with farmers and partners to reduce emissions of animal protein products.

Perhaps the reason we don't see animal welfare mentioned is highlighted here

Ahold Delhaize’s commitment highlights its efforts to drive the transition to a healthier and more sustainable food system. Approximately 95% of the company’s emissions are outside of its own operations, within the value chain. This includes the footprint of all products sold in the stores of the local brands. Products that contain animal-based proteins represent the highest emissions due to land use, feed, and processing activities.

It appears that the driving force behind this change is Ahold Delhaize's Climate Plan to Net Zero. (Note: There potentially were advocacy groups also working with Ahold Delhaize on this, I'm just not aware of them and am grateful for their work if this is indeed the case. And also still see this commitment being driven by their net zero pledge) 

The Animal Welfare Legal Action

At the same time we see Ahold Delhaize's Czech brand Albert, taking legal against Czech Animal Protection Organisation, Obránci zvířat, in regard to their campaign to improve the lives of chickens raised for meat.

Google translated quotes from Czech news article

According to him, the criticism in the campaign is not based on the truth and is conducted only against Albert, even though chickens and other chains are taken from the same breeds

Two things from here:

1. Welfare Footprint Project has compelling research showing the suffering of broiler chickens in standard production, that the Czech organisation used.
2. In the Netherlands, where Ahold Delhaize is headquartered, they have already committed and met exceeded the standard that the Czech organisation is advocating for

This legal action is happening in Czechia in response to a campaign, in other European countries where Ahold Delhaize has not made similar commitments, targeted campaigns are not currently taking place and we do not see signs that Ahold Delhaize would be making these animal welfare commitments of their own accord.

The Tension

The small animal replacement problem is probably what some of you already are thinking about. And Bryant Research does a great job at explaining this concept if it is new to you. 

Then in a subsequent post proposes a number of solutions. Where I think they rightly state.

The small body problem is even harder than you think. Animal advocates often rely on 3 key types of argument to convince people to reduce animal product consumption: environment, health and animal welfare. Arguments around the environmental and health impacts tend to favour chicken and fish over red meat, exacerbating the SBP. But animal welfare appeals are also a hard sell. 

It appears that Ahold Delhaize is prioritising climate above animal welfare.

The vast majority of Supermarkets in Europe have scope 3 emission targets. Madre Brava wrote a fantastic report, that looked at the largest 15 retailers in Europe scope 3 commitments and aligning with plant protein commitments.  What they find is that 93% of emissions are from scope 3, and meat and dairy emissions make up about half of this. Therefore, in order for a supermarket to meet their scope 3 emission reduction targets it is practically impossible to achieve this without a reduction of animal products sold or more specifically a reduction of animal products sold with large carbon footprints. Which creates a strong motivator for increased production and consumption of small bodied animals.

I think many of have wrestled with how to prevent and/or mitigate the small body problem as chicken consumption in particular continues to rise alongside the fall of most other animal products. Right now I think might be a moment to realign and acknowledge that in Europe it is probably going to accelerate.

The Solution

You tell me :-) 

My humble take is the scope 3 carbon commitments are going to force supermarkets to get creative with non animal proteins and use the significant power they have to shape consumer decisions to head in that direction over next 5-10 years. There are even bolder scope 3 emission targets for 2040-50 and the next couple of years can give us an insight into what these might look like, and their effect on animals.

It appears that in the next 5-10 years in Europe we might see unprecedented meat consumption happen, from a seemingly unrelated campaign, systematic carbon reduction. This is potentially a lesson for other parts of the world to invest in corporate carbon reduction campaigns to impact meat consumption.

Continue work on welfare improvements of small body/low carbon animals farmed at scale; such as laying hens, broilers, shrimps and other aquatic animals as it is likely that their numbers could still increase at worst and at best minimally be reduced. Welfare Footprint Project has conducted great studies to show the magnitude of some of these improvements. 

What did I miss? 

Ultimately, I think there is no one solution and way out of this. More European food companies making plant protein commitments in the coming months and years as companies work to meet their scope 3 carbon reduction pledges is a good thing. Progress is never perfect and it is fantastic to see Ahold Delhaize make this commitment. It highlights to me the areas where one can make a significant difference. Billions of farmed animals in Europe will be unaffected by these commitments and there is potential for their numbers to grow. It gives me more motivation to 'do my piece of the puzzle' alongside many others; see through the end of cages in Europe, the continued adoption of the better chicken commitment and the many other welfare improvements advocates are tirelessly working on across Europe.

I think EA aligned animal welfare work in Europe is focussed on the right things. But I've been wrong many times before, what else am I missing?