Report: Meat Industry Lobbying Keeps Emissions Off Climate Agenda

According to a report by the Changing Markets Foundation, powerful industry actors are working behind the scenes to shape political narratives and policy decisions, allowing livestock emissions to remain largely absent from international climate commitments.

Agriculture’s Significant Climate Impact

Worldwide, food production and agriculture are responsible for roughly one-third of greenhouse gas emissions, making the sector the second-largest contributor to climate change after fossil fuels. Within the European Union, animal-based foods account for an estimated 81–86 percent of emissions linked to food production, even though they provide only about 21 percent of global calories and roughly 64 percent of protein intake.

Researchers have repeatedly warned that dietary shifts are necessary to lower emissions and improve public health. The latest report from the EAT-Lancet Commission, which involved 70 experts from 35 countries, suggests that transitioning mostly to plant-based diets could prevent up to 15 million premature deaths annually and reduce agricultural emissions by approximately 15 percent.

However, emissions from animal agriculture continue to grow due to expanding livestock populations and industrial farming practices. Environmental organization Greenpeace reports that about 60 percent of all mammals on Earth by biomass are livestock, while wild mammals represent only around four percent and humans about 36 percent.

Despite this environmental footprint, just four percent of national climate strategies include measurable targets for reducing agricultural methane emissions, and even fewer address dietary changes.

Allegations of Industry Influence

The report, titled Dangerous Distractions, claims that certain departments within the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) show a tendency to support the livestock industry.

The organization highlights remarks made by Thanawat Tiensin, director of the FAO’s Animal Production and Health Division, during the World Meat Congress held in Brazil’s agricultural region of Mato Grosso. The event is organized by the International Meat Secretariat, a group representing the global meat industry.

Speakers at the conference included industry advocates such as Eric Mittenthal from the Meat Institute and Frédéric Leroy of Vrije Universiteit Brussel. Critics accuse some of these figures of promoting narratives that minimize livestock’s role in climate change.

During his speech, Tiensin emphasized the importance of animal protein for food security and portrayed the FAO as a partner to the livestock sector. While he acknowledged environmental challenges linked to greenhouse gas emissions, the report claims that he provided no concrete roadmap for achieving sustainability improvements.

Criticism of the EAT-Lancet Findings

The investigation also notes that the EAT-Lancet Commission report has been strongly criticized by industry representatives and allied researchers.

At the same conference, nutrition consultant Carrie Ruxton questioned the credibility of the commission, suggesting that farmers should have greater influence in shaping sustainability policies.

Some critics have also argued that the commission’s recommendations are biased because several of its members follow vegetarian diets. Meanwhile, Leroy has publicly challenged the report’s conclusions, claiming that humans require 20–30 percent of their calories from animal products — a claim disputed by scientists. The planetary health diet proposed by the commission recommends reducing that share to around 12 percent.

Industry Messaging at Climate Talks

The debate also extended to global climate discussions. The COP30 climate summit reportedly hosted more than 300 lobbyists connected to industrial agriculture.

According to the report, screenings of the documentary World Without Cows were organized within official UN conference zones. The film was produced by the animal nutrition company Alltech and promotes the idea that livestock production can contribute to climate solutions.

Critics argue that the film understates the environmental impact of cattle farming and highlights technological fixes such as improved feed efficiency and converting manure into biogas. However, discussions about reducing meat consumption or shifting diets were relatively rare during the event.

Growing Public Relations Efforts

Investigations by DeSmog have also suggested that agribusiness companies are investing heavily in public relations campaigns. These efforts reportedly include hiring media personalities, medical professionals, and influencers to promote the health benefits of meat and strengthen the industry’s public image.

Despite these concerns, the report acknowledges that some countries are beginning to address food systems more directly. For example, Denmark introduced a national plant-based food action plan in 2023 designed to encourage reduced meat consumption and expand plant-rich diets.

The FAO declined to comment on the allegations presented in the report.