Skip to main content
Log in

Moral Steaks? Ethical Discourses of In Vitro Meat in Academia and Australia

  • Articles
  • Published:
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The profile and possibilities of in vitro meat are rapidly expanding, creating new ethical conundrums about how to approach this nascent biotechnology. The outcomes of these ethical debates will shape the future viability of this technology and its acceptability for potential consumers. In this paper we focus on how in vitro meat is being ethically constructed in academic literatures and contrast this with discourses evident in the mainstream print media. The academic literature is analysed to identify a typology of ethical discourses, ordered from the most common to least expressed. We then apply this typology to investigate the frames present in Australian print media reportage on the topic. In the academic literature, discourses relating to in vitro meat’s promised environmental, animal welfare and food security benefits are most prominent. In contrast, ontological struggles over its ‘nature’ have emerged as the dominant feature in the Australian print media. Although these spaces of engagement evidence decidedly different discursive trends, ethical discourses critical of in vitro meat’s wider socio-cultural ramifications are currently under-represented in both. This paper therefore calls for critical scholars to move beyond the narrow, presumptive framings of in vitro meat as a technological remedy for our consumptive ills, to more seriously engage with the ethical consequences of this new form of food.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Term coined by Hopkins and Dacey (2008) to refer to the production of meat in parallel to the production of plant food through ‘agriculture’.

References

  • Adams, C. (2010). The sexual politics of meat: A feminist-vegetarian critical theory (Revised ed.). New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, R. (2011). In vitro meat: A vehicle for the ethical rescaling of the factory farming industry and in Vivo testing or an intractable enterprise? Intersect, 4(1), 42–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alkon, A. H. (2013). The socio-nature of local organic food. Antipode, 45(3), 663–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anonymous. (2011). Your Say. Herald Sun, Sep 6, 23.

  • Anonymous. (2012). Menu options may extend from grassfed or grainfed to test-tube. The North Queensland Register, Aug 30, 6.

  • Anonymous. (2012). Something to chew on. The Canberra Times, Feb 22, 7.

  • Anonymous. (2013). On a supermarket shelf, the 140 gram hamburger pattie. The Land, Aug 22, 19.

  • Anonymous. (2013). Somewhat akin to the ‘I Can’t Believe it’s not Butter’. The Land, Aug 08, 11.

  • Atwood, M. (2003). Oryx and crake. New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, C. (2010). Measuring Food insecurity. Science, 327, 825–828.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bettles, C. (2014). MP’s Meaty Message. Farm Online, 24 Mar. <http://www.farmonline.com.au/news/agriculture/general/news/mps-meaty-message/2692507.aspx>. Accessed 16 May 2014.

  • Bhat, Z., & Bhat, H. (2011a). Tissue engineered meat-future meat. Journal of Stored Products and Postharvest Research, 2(1), 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhat, Z., & Bhat, H. (2011b). Animal-free meat biofabrication. American Journal of Food Technology, 6(6), 441–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhat, Z., & Fayaz, Hina. (2011). Prospectus of cultured meat—advancing meat alternatives. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 48(2), 125–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billig, M. (1995). Banal nationalism. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blythman, J. (2013). Replacing true food with technology is hard to swallow. The Advertiser, Aug 7, 23.

  • Castree, N. (2005). Nature. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Catts, O., & Zurr, I. (2007). Semi-living art. In E. Kac (Ed.), Signs of life: Bioart and beyond. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Catts, O., & Zurr, I. (2013). Disembodied livestock: The promise of a semi-living Utopia. Parallax, 19(1), 101–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, P. (2014). Carno-nationalism and cultural lambnesia. The Drum Online. Accessed 12 July 2014. <http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-14/chen-carno-nationalism-and-cultural-lambnesia/5197830>.

  • Cheng, M. (2010). Bringing home the bacon. The Mercury, Jan 22, 45.

  • Chiles, R. M. (2013a). If they come, we will build it: in vitro meat and the discursive struggle over future agrofood expectations. Agriculture and Human Values, 30(4), 511–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiles, R. M. (2013b). Intertwined ambiguities: Meat, in vitro meat, and the ideological construction of the marketplace. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 12, 472–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Churchill, W. (1932). Fifty years hence. In W. Churchill (Ed.), Thoughts and adventures. London: Thornton Butterworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, M., & Morgan, K. (2013). Engineering freedom? A critique of biotechnological routes to animal liberation. Configurations, 21(2), 201–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, K. (2011). Throw a pseudo snag on the BBQ. Herald Sun, Sep 01, 7.

  • Cornish, R. (2010). The future is up. The Age, Mar 16, 4.

  • Crabb, A. (2013). The Last Word. Sunday Age, Aug 11, 24.

  • Datar, I., & Betti, M. (2010). Possibilities for an in vitro meat production system. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies, 11, 13–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delgado, C. (2003). Rising consumption of meat and milk in developing countries has created a new food revolution. Journal of Nutrition, 133(11), 3907S–3910S.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dibden, J., Gibbs, D., & Cocklin, C. (2013). Framing GM crops as a food security solution. Journal of Rural Studies, 29, 59–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driessen, C., & Korthals, M. (2012). Pig towers and in vitro meat: Disclosing moral worlds by design. Social Studies of Science, 42(6), 797–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edelman, P. D., McFarland, D. C., Mironov, V. A., & Matheny, J. G. (2005). In vitro-cultured meat production. Tissue Engineering, 11, 659–662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, C. (2010). Factory-fresh flesh. Engineering and Technology, 5(3), 30–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, B. J. (2010). Culturing meat for the future: Anti-death versus Anti-life. In C. Tandy (Ed.), Death and anti-death- (Vol. 7). Palo Alto: Ria University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford, B. J. (2011). Impact of cultured meat on global agriculture. World Agriculture, 2(2), 43–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, J. L. (2009). Test tube meat on the menu? Nature Biotechnology, 27(10), 873.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, S. (2004). Stem cells R us. In A. Ong & S. Collier (Eds.), Global assemblages. London: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gadd, G. (2011). Prime cuts in a tube? The Weekly Times, Sep 14, 3.

  • Galusky, W. (2010). Playing chicken: Technologies of domestication, food, and self. Science as Culture, 19(1), 15–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galusky, W. (2014). Technology as responsibility: Failure, food animals, and lab-grown meat. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics,. doi:10.1007/s10806-014-9508-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gannon, E. (2013). Shmeat argument is very hard to swallow. Herald Sun, Aug 16, 38.

  • Goodland, R. (2011). Living greenfully, eating greenfully. In L. Westra, K. Bosselmann, & C. Soskolne (Eds.), Globalisation and ecological integrity in science and international law. Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, J. N., & Shoulders, C. W. (2013). The future of meat: A qualitative analysis of cultured meat media coverage. Meat Science, 95, 445–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hajer, M. (1995). The politics of environmental discourse: Ecological modernisation and the policy process. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, D. (2008). Chicken. In J. Castricano (Ed.), Animal subjects: An ethical reader in a posthuman world. Ontario: Wilfred Laurier University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, R. (1964). Animal machines: The new factory farming industry. London: Vincent Stuart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins, P. D., & Dacey, A. (2008). Vegetarian meat: Could technology save animals and satisfy meat eaters? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 21(6), 579–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, J. (2008). Counter-hegemony or bourgeois piggery? Food politics and the Case of foodshare. In W. Wright & G. Middendorf (Eds.), The fight over food: producers, consumers, and activists challenge the global food system. Pennsylvania: Penn State Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kass, L. (1997). The wisdom of repugnance. The New Republic, 2 June, 17-26.

  • Konkes, C. (2009). Ewe-tube steaks a claim. Tasmanian Country, Apr 17, 6.

  • Leopold, A. (1949). A sand county almanac. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald Glenn, L., & D’Agostino, L. (2012). The moveable feast: Legal, social and ethical implications of converging technologies on our dinner tables. Northeastern University Law Journal, 4(1), 111–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macintyre, B. (2007). Test-tube meat science’s next leap. Weekend Australian, Jan 20, 29.

  • Mathiesen, K. (2013). Meat thy maker: it’s the Frankenburger. The Canberra Times, Aug 7, 9.

  • Mattick, C.S., & Allenby, B.R. (2012). Cultured meat: The systemic implications of an emerging technology. In IEEE International Symposium on Sustainable Systems and Technology Conference publications (pp. 1–6).

  • McHugh, S. (2010). Real artificial: Tissue-cultured meat, genetically Modified farm animals, and fictions. Configurations, 18(1–2), 181–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metcalf, J. (2013). Meet shmeat: Food system ethics. Biotechnology and Re-Worlding Technoscience. Parallax, 19(1), 74–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, S. B., Mamerow, L., Henderson, J., Taylor, A. W., Coveney, J., & Ward, P. R. (2013). The importance of food issues in society: Results from a national survey in Australia. Nutrition & Dietetics,. doi:10.1111/1747-0080.12076.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J. (2012). In vitro meat: Power, authenticity and vegetarianism. Journal for Critical Animal Studies, 10(4), 41–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norat, T., Lukanova, A., Ferrari, P., & Riboli, E. (2001). Meat consumption and colorectal cancer risk: dose response meta analysis of epidemiological studies. International Journal of Cancer, 98(2), 241–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panahi, R. (2013). This Livestock Trade is an Issue of Morals not Economics. Herald Sun Online, December 23. Accessed 16 May 2014. <http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/this-livestock-trade-is-an-issue-of-morals-not-economics/story-fni0fhh1-1226788401447>.

  • Parry, J. (2009). Oryx and crake and the new nostalgia for meat. Society and Animals, 17, 241–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pluhar, E. B. (2010). Meat and morality: Alternatives to factory farming. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 23, 455–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plumwood, V. (2012). Animals and ecology: Towards a better integration. In L. Shaonnon (Ed.), The Eye of the Crocodile. Canberra: ANU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Post, M. J. (2012). Cultured meat from stem cells: Challenges and prospects. Meat Science, 92, 297–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Post, M. J. (2013). Cultured beef: medical technology to produce food. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 96, 1039–1041.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sage, C. (2014). Making and Un-making meat: Cultural boundaries, environmental thresholds and dietary transgressions. In M. Goodman & C. Sage (Eds.), Food transgressions: Making sense of contemporary food politics. United Kingdom: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, Z. (2013). In vitro meat: Space travel, cannibalism and federal regulation. Houston Law Review, 5, 991–1025.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharp, L., & Richardson, T. (2001). Reflections on foucauldian discourse analysis in planning and environmental research. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 3(3), 193–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shiva, V. (2000). Stolen harvest: The hijacking of the global food supply. Boston: South End Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. (1995). Animal liberation (2nd ed.). London: Pimlico.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanescu, V., & Twine, R. (2012). Post-animal studies: The future(s) of critical animal studies. Journal for Critical Animal Studies, 10, 4–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinfeld, H., Gerber, P., Wassenaar, T., Castel, V., Rosales, M., & de Haan, C. (2006). Livestock’s long shadow. Rome: FAO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephens, N. (2010). In vitro meat: Zombies on the menu? Scripted, 7(2), 394–401.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephens, N. (2013). Growing meat in laboratories: The promise, ontology, and ethical boundary-work of using muscle cells to make food. Configurations, 21(2), 159–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strachan, J. (2012). From a petrie dish to your plate. The Canberra Times, Jun 03, 6.

  • Tuomisto, H. L., & Teixeira de Mattos, M. J. (2011). Environmental impacts of cultured meat production. Environmental Science and Technology, 45(14), 6117–6123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Twine, R., & Stephens, N. (2013). Introduction to special issue on animal biotechnology: do animal biotechnologies have a latent liberatory imaginary? Configurations, 21(2), 125–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ursin, L. (2013). Gnawing doubt: eating animals and the promise of cultured meat. In H. Röcklinsberg & P. Sandin (Eds.), The ethics of consumption: The citizen, the market and the law. Wageningen Academic Publishers: Wageningen.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Weele, C. (2013). Meat and the benefits of ambivalence. In H. Röcklinsberg & P. Sandin (Eds.), The ethics of consumption: The citizen, the market and the law. Wageningen Academic Publishers: Wageningen.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Weele, C., & Driessen, C. (2012). Emerging profiles for cultured meat; Ethics through and as design. Animals, 3, 647–662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, P., Rhubart-Berg, P., McKenzie, S., Kelling, K., & Lawrence, R. S. (2005). Public health implications of meat production and consumption. Public Health Nutrition, 8(4), 348–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, R. A., & McMichael, A. J. (2004). Social and environmental risk factors in the emergence of infectious diseases. Nature Medicine Supplement, 10(12), 570–576.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welin, S. (2013). Introducing the new meat. Problems and prospects. Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics, 7(1), 24–37.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Donna Houston and Sandie Suchet-Pearson for their many useful and constructive comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tasmin Dilworth.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dilworth, T., McGregor, A. Moral Steaks? Ethical Discourses of In Vitro Meat in Academia and Australia. J Agric Environ Ethics 28, 85–107 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-014-9522-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-014-9522-y

Keywords

Navigation