Key Findings

1. International organizations’ chief concerns are nutrition and food security. The driving force behind most industrial animal agriculture projects in LMICs is concern about nutrition and food security, rather than animal welfare or environmental concerns. Large animal agriculture companies have successfully positioned their products as the solution to these core needs, enabling their global expansion. International organizations also often consider the potential of interventions like animal agriculture to drive economic development.

2. Trust and relationships are essential for change. Numerous international organization insiders we spoke with emphasized that trust and personal relationships are critical to their work. For example, major investors repeatedly work with the same clients, and development organizations partially evaluate the potential success of projects based on trust built through relationships. For animal advocates aiming to make plant-based food more accessible in LMICs, building long-term, trust-based relationships with key decision-makers at international organizations is likely the most vital step.

3. Support for factory farming is often hidden. While some organizations, like the International Finance Corporation, directly invest tens of millions of pounds in individual factory farming projects, many types of support offered by international organizations and development finance institutions are harder to spot. These “hidden supports” include:

4. ○ Favorable terms on loans

5. ○ Investments in infrastructure (e.g., roads, electricity) necessary for the distribution of animal products

6. ○ Technical advice that favors industrial agriculture

7. ○ Laws requiring the import of low-welfare animal products

8. ○ Ownership stakes in meat companies.

Recommendations

● Connect with nutrition, food security, development, and international trade experts. The proliferation of factory farming around the world is driven by a number of complex factors ranging from the micronutrient profile of beef and soybeans to the legal distinction between cage-free and battery cage eggs. These niche topics can require particular expertise to identify opportunities to stop the expansion of industrial animal agriculture while also ensuring nutritious, affordable food is accessible to all. Whether they are already in the movement or are academics and sympathetic employees of international organizations, experts in a number of areas can provide key insights to help animal advocates be better informed and more effective.

● Network with the staffers of international organizations. In our interviews with international organization insiders, personal relationships were repeatedly identified as a key way of establishing the trust necessary to form partnerships. These relationships can lead to opportunities for plant-based foods to meet needs rather than animal products. When approaching international organizations, food security and nutrition will likely be the most effective points to emphasize rather than animal welfare and environmental factors.

● Funds should support conference attendance for animal advocates focused on food systems in LMICs. The insiders we interviewed identified conferences as an excellent way to build relationships in this space, but attendance can often be cost-prohibitive for employees of animal advocacy organizations. Funders have an opportunity to help knowledgeable advocates attend conferences where influential actors make decisions. Industrial animal agriculture representatives have attended these events for years, creating a critical vacuum where animal advocacy voices should be heard.

● Advocates and researchers should familiarize themselves with tools used by development organizations and NGOs that work in this space to identify places where plant-based products can be equal or superior to animal products based on nutrition and affordability. Using tools like the “Cost of the Diet” analysis, “Fill the Nutrient Gap” analysis, and the forthcoming ENHANCE tool, nutrition and affordability comparisons could be made and plant-based ‘wins’ spotlighted.

Comparison with my work

• Argues for working with DFIs whereas I focus on pressure campaigns against them. The relationship building might be better for getting them to fund plant-based solutions
• I argue that climate framing risks The small body problem, they argue the climate angle is growing among DFIs and might be a wedge, e.g. "climate resilient crops".
• This report argues that DFI insiders are sceptical of alt proteins along health grounds. alt protein companies can be too small to absorb the large grants DFIs prefer.
• Our report argues for diverting funds to small-scale horiculture, this report argues that key agencies like the FAO do not view smallholder self-sufficiency as the "ideal outcome". It states that the FAO's focus is often on economic "livelihoods" and employment rather than production models, and that they are comfortable with "high exports" and industrialization if it meets those economic metrics.