Evaluations by multiple research organizations suggest that corporate welfare campaigns have been highly cost-effective methods of reducing animal suffering over short timeframes.[2|2] Some advocates are concerned that such interventions increase complacency about the current food system, such as through a “humanewashing” effect; the available evidence suggests that welfare reforms will generate more momentum than complacency — meaning they tend to increase the amount of future progress made for animals, though perhaps not enough to make corporate welfare campaigns the most cost-effective interventions available to the farmed animal movement on longer timeframes.[3|3]
- View Highlight
- humanewashing, animal advocacy strategy, corporate welfare campaigns,

(highlight:: Organizations conducting corporate outreach or campaigns on animal welfare include:
• Albert Schweitzer Foundation,
• Anima International,
• Animal Equality,
• Compassion In World Farming,
• Global Food Partners,
• Mercy For Animals,
• The Humane League,
• The Humane Society of the United States and Humane Society International,
• The many organizations affiliated with the Open Wing Alliance.)
- View Highlight
-

(highlight:: Numerous organizations devote substantial effort towards convincing corporations to prioritize the production, development, and sale of animal-free foods over animal products.[4|4] The effects of these interventions have been less thoroughly evaluated, though they may be promising.
Organizations using these tactics include:
• Anima International,
• The Humane Society of the United States,
• Mercy For Animals,
• ProVeg International,
• Veganuary.)
- View Highlight
-

(highlight:: Organizations supporting the development of these technologies include:
• Companies working on plant-based foods like Impossible Foods, Beyond Meat, and Rebellyous Foods,
• Companies working on cultured meat like Memphis Meats, Mosa Meat, and JUST,
• Universities with researchers working on cultured meat, like Maastricht University, the University of Bath, and Tel Aviv University,
• Nonprofits like the Good Food Institute, Modern Agriculture Foundation, and New Harvest.)
- View Highlight
- 1resource/organization, alternative proteins,

(highlight:: Organizations supporting the successful marketization of these technologies include:
• Nonprofits like the Good Food Instituteand the Plant-Based Food Association that lobby legislators,
• Impact investors like Stray Dog Capital and profit-oriented investors like Softbank,
• Universities with researchers working on consumer acceptance research, like Yale University and the University of Bath,
• Sentience Institute.
A fuller list of organizations focusing on this topic is available in the alternative food landscapes by The Global Alternative Food Awards.)
- View Highlight
- alternative proteins, 1resource/organization, food systems,

Reforms to production practices could vary from small but relatively tractable reforms such as bans on cages for laying hens through to radical reforms that would cripple the animal agriculture industry, like banning factory farming. Alternatively, advocates could seek bans on whole product categories, comparable to the bans of production or sales of fur. Pushing directly for the rights of animals, such as to secure their legal personhood, could make animal farming more difficult.
- View Highlight
-

Subsidies affect the production costs of animal products and animal-free foods, though requiring animal agriculture to pay for its own negative externalities may be a more effective method of encouraging a transition to an animal-free food system because subsidies actually seem to account for only a very small portion of the price of animal products. Open-access research and development for animal-free food technologies could be funded by governments. Legislation could support the development of animal-free foods through other means, comparable to the Renewable Fuel Standard in the US which supported the development of biofuels by requiring standard fuels to be blended with renewable fuels. Governments could even be encouraged to implement large-scale industrial reforms, comparable to the 1974 Messmer plan that led to France’s shift from fossil fuels to nuclear power.
- View Highlight
- negative externalities, subsidies, animal-free food system, animal advocacy strategy, animal advocay policy,

Consumer behavior could likely be influenced by a meat tax or other legislative manipulations of the relative price of conventional animal products and animal-free foods.[11|11] Legislators could also enforce behavioral “nudges” such as new labelling requirements.[12|12]
- View Highlight
-

(highlight:: Organizations seeking to influence legislation or legislators include:
• Animal Rebellion and Association against Animal Factories, who use public demonstrations to influence legislators,
• Sentience Politics, who work on ballot initiatives,[13|13]
• International nonprofits doing lobbying work, such as Compassion in World Farming, Eurogroup For Animals, Mercy For Animals, The Good Food Institute, and The Humane Society of the United States,
• Various state-level and local organizations with “Humane Voters” or similar phrases in their title, such as the Humane Voters of Washington and Voters for Animal Rights,
• Several national animal advocacy political parties, like The Party for the Animals (Netherlands), The Animal Justice Party, and The Party for the Animals USA.)
- View Highlight
-

US Supreme Court rulings that are favorable to social movements’ goals can encourage positive changes in public attitudes, behavior, and policy, though they can also encourage substantial backlash. Advocates can use litigation to push for radical legal changes, draw attention to particular issues, or enforce the implementation of legislation. Judicial change may be particularly important on issues where there is historical precedent, such as legal personhood.
- View Highlight
-

(highlight:: Organizations using litigation include:
• Advocates for Animals,
• Animal Justice,
• The Nonhuman Rights Project.)
- View Highlight
-

Educational institutions can be encouraged to promote moral circle expansion through their curriculum.[14|14] It may be more cost-effective for advocates to seek to institutionalize this sort of education than to provide it directly themselves. Advocates could also seek to encourage the creation of new institutions, such as new branches of government or research bodies.[15|15]
- View Highlight
-

(highlight:: Organizations influencing or creating other institutions include:
• Nonprofits like ACTAsia that promote humane education,
• Animal Rebellion, who are demanding a new Citizens’ Assembly.)
- View Highlight
-

Where individual tactics are employed, institutional messages can still be centered, such as encouraging individuals to contribute to the “end of animal farming,” rather than asking them to “go vegan.”[18|18]
- View Highlight
-

Evaluations by multiple research organizations suggest that corporate welfare campaigns have been highly cost-effective methods of reducing animal suffering over short timeframes.[2|2] Some advocates are concerned that such interventions increase complacency about the current food system, such as through a “humanewashing” effect; the available evidence suggests that welfare reforms will generate more momentum than complacency — meaning they tend to increase the amount of future progress made for animals, though perhaps not enough to make corporate welfare campaigns the most cost-effective interventions available to the farmed animal movement on longer timeframes.[3|3]
- View Highlight
- humanewashing, animal advocacy strategy, corporate welfare campaigns,

(highlight:: Organizations conducting corporate outreach or campaigns on animal welfare include:
• Albert Schweitzer Foundation,
• Anima International,
• Animal Equality,
• Compassion In World Farming,
• Global Food Partners,
• Mercy For Animals,
• The Humane League,
• The Humane Society of the United States and Humane Society International,
• The many organizations affiliated with the Open Wing Alliance.)
- View Highlight
-

(highlight:: Numerous organizations devote substantial effort towards convincing corporations to prioritize the production, development, and sale of animal-free foods over animal products.[4|4] The effects of these interventions have been less thoroughly evaluated, though they may be promising.
Organizations using these tactics include:
• Anima International,
• The Humane Society of the United States,
• Mercy For Animals,
• ProVeg International,
• Veganuary.)
- View Highlight
-

(highlight:: Organizations supporting the development of these technologies include:
• Companies working on plant-based foods like Impossible Foods, Beyond Meat, and Rebellyous Foods,
• Companies working on cultured meat like Memphis Meats, Mosa Meat, and JUST,
• Universities with researchers working on cultured meat, like Maastricht University, the University of Bath, and Tel Aviv University,
• Nonprofits like the Good Food Institute, Modern Agriculture Foundation, and New Harvest.)
- View Highlight
- 1resource/organization, alternative proteins,

(highlight:: Organizations supporting the successful marketization of these technologies include:
• Nonprofits like the Good Food Instituteand the Plant-Based Food Association that lobby legislators,
• Impact investors like Stray Dog Capital and profit-oriented investors like Softbank,
• Universities with researchers working on consumer acceptance research, like Yale University and the University of Bath,
• Sentience Institute.
A fuller list of organizations focusing on this topic is available in the alternative food landscapes by The Global Alternative Food Awards.)
- View Highlight
- alternative proteins, 1resource/organization, food systems,

Reforms to production practices could vary from small but relatively tractable reforms such as bans on cages for laying hens through to radical reforms that would cripple the animal agriculture industry, like banning factory farming. Alternatively, advocates could seek bans on whole product categories, comparable to the bans of production or sales of fur. Pushing directly for the rights of animals, such as to secure their legal personhood, could make animal farming more difficult.
- View Highlight
-

Subsidies affect the production costs of animal products and animal-free foods, though requiring animal agriculture to pay for its own negative externalities may be a more effective method of encouraging a transition to an animal-free food system because subsidies actually seem to account for only a very small portion of the price of animal products. Open-access research and development for animal-free food technologies could be funded by governments. Legislation could support the development of animal-free foods through other means, comparable to the Renewable Fuel Standard in the US which supported the development of biofuels by requiring standard fuels to be blended with renewable fuels. Governments could even be encouraged to implement large-scale industrial reforms, comparable to the 1974 Messmer plan that led to France’s shift from fossil fuels to nuclear power.
- View Highlight
- negative externalities, subsidies, animal-free food system, animal advocacy strategy, animal advocay policy,

Consumer behavior could likely be influenced by a meat tax or other legislative manipulations of the relative price of conventional animal products and animal-free foods.[11|11] Legislators could also enforce behavioral “nudges” such as new labelling requirements.[12|12]
- View Highlight
-

(highlight:: Organizations seeking to influence legislation or legislators include:
• Animal Rebellion and Association against Animal Factories, who use public demonstrations to influence legislators,
• Sentience Politics, who work on ballot initiatives,[13|13]
• International nonprofits doing lobbying work, such as Compassion in World Farming, Eurogroup For Animals, Mercy For Animals, The Good Food Institute, and The Humane Society of the United States,
• Various state-level and local organizations with “Humane Voters” or similar phrases in their title, such as the Humane Voters of Washington and Voters for Animal Rights,
• Several national animal advocacy political parties, like The Party for the Animals (Netherlands), The Animal Justice Party, and The Party for the Animals USA.)
- View Highlight
-

US Supreme Court rulings that are favorable to social movements’ goals can encourage positive changes in public attitudes, behavior, and policy, though they can also encourage substantial backlash. Advocates can use litigation to push for radical legal changes, draw attention to particular issues, or enforce the implementation of legislation. Judicial change may be particularly important on issues where there is historical precedent, such as legal personhood.
- View Highlight
-

(highlight:: Organizations using litigation include:
• Advocates for Animals,
• Animal Justice,
• The Nonhuman Rights Project.)
- View Highlight
-

Educational institutions can be encouraged to promote moral circle expansion through their curriculum.[14|14] It may be more cost-effective for advocates to seek to institutionalize this sort of education than to provide it directly themselves. Advocates could also seek to encourage the creation of new institutions, such as new branches of government or research bodies.[15|15]
- View Highlight
-

(highlight:: Organizations influencing or creating other institutions include:
• Nonprofits like ACTAsia that promote humane education,
• Animal Rebellion, who are demanding a new Citizens’ Assembly.)
- View Highlight
-

Where individual tactics are employed, institutional messages can still be centered, such as encouraging individuals to contribute to the “end of animal farming,” rather than asking them to “go vegan.”[18|18]
- View Highlight
-