Send message to Author

Short abstract:

Meat production and consumption practices have been criticised, leading to a call for a 'protein transition' The presentation examines three distinct ontologies: culinary, ecological and nutritional materiality. A dominance of nutritional materiality characterises the protein transition.

Long abstract:

Meat production and consumption practices have been criticised, leading to a call for a 'protein transition'. This study analyses the discursive practices of vegan/vegetarian NGOs, lobby groups, and companies in the field of meat alternatives. It discusses the 'ontological politics' (Annemarie Mol) involved in the production of meat alternatives.

On a broader level, the presentation examines three distinct materialities: The first is culinary materiality, which is based on flavour, consistency, texture, and appearance. The second is ecological materiality, which places food in a broader spatial and temporal context, focusing on the relationship between food and its production history, as well as the future implications of its production and consumption. And third, nutritional materiality is closely linked to nutritional science. Food is broken down into individual biochemical components, resulting in quantifiable objects of knowledge.

Regarding the protein transition, the findings suggest a change: meat substitutes are marketed to 'flexitarians', who reduce their meat intake without completely abstaining from meat. Therefore, these alternatives are primarily promoted as sources of protein, enacting it as a nutritional materiality. Meat and its substitutes are often considered interchangeable sources of protein associated with physical strength and traditional masculinity. This finding raises concerns about the promotion of a more sustainable diet and its potential reproduction of societal power dynamics.