(highlight:: The Power of Research in Informing Animal Advocacy Strategy: % of Veg People Who Abandon Diet
Summary:
The biggest finding was that 84% of vegans and vegetarians abandon their diet within two years, but follow-up studies found a lower overall number of around 46%.
However, the overall number hides a more complicated reality depending on the demographic position of the person. Among certain demographics, the number is much higher, while among others, it's much lower.
The study challenged the animal advocacy movement to reconsider strategy and sparked discussion and reflection on their approach.
Transcript:
Speaker 1
Yeah, so the sort of biggest finding, the one that gets quoted the most and the one that got us like all of the media attention was that 84% of vegans and vegetarians abandon their diet Within, I believe it was within two years. I didn't remember seeing that.
Speaker 2
I didn't know it was Fonnalitix. Yeah.
Speaker 1
And we've done follow-up studies that sort of, we actually released a series of follow-up studies over the course of late last year and early this year that did a much more sort of like Robust analysis of a follow-up survey and a much more robust analysis of the data that found considerably lower like overall numbers. So the more like current estimate that we have is around like, I believe it's 46% which is still high.
Speaker 2
It's still not great. It's still 46% of people who are vegetarian or no longer vegetarian after two years.
Speaker 1
Yeah, yeah. Cool. And that is still really high. That's almost one and two. But part of the reason that I mean, we learned a lot from that first study, right? We learned the power of what a particularly punchy data point, how quickly that can travel around the world and around the movement. Because the reality is it's much more complicated, right? Like in this current set of follow-up studies, we found a lower overall number in the 40 to 50% range. But the reality is that it totally depends. Like that overall number actually hides a much more complicated reality depending on the demographic position of the person, right? So among certain demographics, the number is like much higher. Among other demographics, it's like a lot lower. It's when we put out like an overall number or when you see an overall number on any study, it's usually hiding something that's like a lot more complicated once you start to break it down. Yeah, of course. But I just, you know, that project remains a favor for me because it really did challenge the animal advocacy movement to sort of take a look at what it was doing and reconsider strategy Or try and think of strategy in a different way. People were mad, but that's okay. They should, you know, in a lot of ways it means you're doing something right.)
- Time 0:06:50
- snipdpost-queue,

(highlight:: The diversity of research provided in the Faunalytics Library
Transcript:
Speaker 1
So I think the thing that goes into it for me when I'm like curating the library and trying to to figure out like what is going to go in is a mix between, you know, very like actionable stuff On an organizational level. So things looking at, you know, let's say like default, veg menus, for example, or things looking at, you know, anything to do with animal advocacy campaigns, like evaluations of campaigns, Things like that, like that stuff is a no brainer to include because it directly relates to what we're talking about. Then there are things that I find are like useful on an advocacy level, but also can almost apply on an individual level. So for example, like recently, this was like of personal interest to me because I have a dog, he's a real sweet guy. And you know, we covered a study that looked at the best enrichment for dogs who have separation anxiety, or what is the most used enrichment when dogs are left alone. And that's something that, of course, like animal shelters, for anyone listening who wants a spoiler, it's chew toys that really dogs with separation anxiety really gravitate towards Chew toys and we'll spend the most time with them. And that's something that can be used on a shelter, you know, shelters can use that information. But also individual advocates can use that information. And there are certain studies like that that kind of almost drill down to like the day to day, like I just want to make the lives of the animals in my life better kind of thing, which I find Really heartwarming. And so, you know, we, I kind of consider our library from from the full range of like thinking about large animal advocacy groups using them down to like the individual advocate, using Things in their day to day life. And then sitting somewhere in the midst of that is also research related to anthology animal behavior, things that are not immediately applicable to advocacy, like things about animal Minds or things about how animals perceive the world that are not necessarily going to inform strategy, but help to add evidence to the advocacy toolbox of this is information that May be able to persuade people that exploiting animals is wrong, you know, yeah.)
- Time 0:30:52
-

(highlight:: The Balance Between Quantifiable and Unquantifiable Strategies in Animal Advocacy
Summary:
The concentration on effectiveness in animal advocacy can sometimes hinder a broader range of advocacy and tactics.
While it is important to measure impact and evaluate if something is working, relying too heavily on numbers and analytics can overlook the more nuanced aspects of behavior change. There is no one-size-fits-all solution in advocacy, as the effectiveness of strategies depends on the individual.
One-to-one advocacy moments, such as conversations with family and friends, can have a significant impact that may be underestimated.
Transcript:
Speaker 1
I mean, this is going to sound funny. But one of my biggest pet peeves is that sometimes I really feel like the concentration on effectiveness is like a holding us back from a broader range of advocacy and tactics. We have really like moved towards effectiveness as a real measure of the movement. The movement has gotten a lot more savvy about effectiveness and about measuring impact, right? Like we are so much more aware now of when we're doing something, we should probably be evaluating whether it's working or not. And that's good. It's a good perspective to have. Like it's good to know if you're putting a bunch of resources in a particular direction, you want to know that it's doing something. But sometimes we can't, there are so many aspects of effectiveness and of the way that people change their behavior that are really ephemeral and hard to grasp and hard to put our hands On. And so I think sometimes the pet peeve of mine is that we can be too focused on numbers and too focused on, I think the movement spent so long in this very emotional, angry space. And now it's like swinging back in the other direction, going into like really high level like analytics and data. And I'm looking forward to the pendulum swinging back just a little, all the way back, but like just a little bit back towards the more kind of one-to-one advocacy theory of change stuff That is more nuanced. And that's something that I think actually the data bears out really well is that one of the questions that we get the most of anything is like, what's the most effective way to make someone Vegan? It's like, wow, if only we knew the answer to that question, that would be amazing. But the answer that I give to people and the answer that I know that they don't want to hear is like, it really depends on who you're talking to. It doesn't. There is no one-size-fits-all advocacy solution for anything. And those one-to-one advocacy moments, the moments that you might share with like a family member or a friend or someone else that you interact with on a one-to-one level, those things Have so much more of an impact than maybe we think that they do.)
- Time 0:51:57
- snipdpost-queue,

(highlight:: Successful Adoption of a Vegan Diet is Highly Dependent on Individual Factors
Summary:
Successful adoption of a vegan diet is highly dependent on individual factors.
People who feel unhealthy on their vegan or vegetarian diet are three times more likely to abandon it in the first six months, while those who feel healthy on it are only 8% likely to abandon it. Additionally, individuals who do not see veganism as part of their personal identity are twice as likely to abandon it compared to those who do.
People who believe that society perceives veganism or vegetarianism negatively are also more likely to abandon it.
These demographic and personal factors significantly impact the likelihood of individuals continuing with a vegan diet.
Transcript:
Speaker 1
We find as we drill down into the data that things are always like much more complex than we think. So again, in our like follow up to that 2014 study, we found 43% of people who were vegan or vegetarian, a band in their diet, when you drill down into the, into the findings, it gets much More complicated. So people who felt unhealthy on their vegan or vegetarian diet were three times more likely to abandon it in the first six months. So if you felt unhealthy on your diet, you were 30% likely to abandon it in the first six months. If you felt healthy on it, only 8%. People who didn't see veganism as like part of their personal identity were twice as likely to abandon it than people who did. People who thought society perceives veganism or vegetarianism negatively were one and a half times as likely. So like there's all of these different like demographic factors and personal factors that can really affect, I mean, we're not just talking like 1% here and there, we're talking about Like 2x or 3x likelihood of stopping. So yeah, it's just, the overall number is there, but the reality underneath is like so much more complicated on an individual level.)
- Time 0:57:30
- snipdpost-queue,