High Support And High Barriers For Farmed Animal Protection In Kuwait

Industrial animal agriculture causes serious harm to farmed animals, the environment, public health, and agricultural workers. Understanding where the public stands on these issues is a crucial step toward building effective advocacy strategies. Yet comparable, locally grounded research has been nearly absent from the West Asia and North Africa region, where Kuwait presents a context shaped by ecology and dependence. As a hyper-arid desert country with scarce arable land and limited water resources, it’s heavily reliant on imports to meet its food needs. Rising population levels and growing disposable incomes have translated into strong demand for animal products. At the same time, the region’s market for plant-based alternatives is projected to expand rapidly, placing Kuwait within a Gulf-wide transition even as conventional meat demand remains strong.

This study, conducted by Animetrics and the Middle East Vegan Society, aimed to fill this research gap by mapping public views on farmed animals and potential routes to reducing harm in the food system, including dietary change, policy reform, technological innovation, and advocacy.

The researchers adapted a preexisting international survey instrument to reflect the social and cultural context of the region, translating it into Arabic and reviewing it with native speakers and regional experts for clarity and appropriateness. Data were collected in September 2025 through the survey company Ipsos, using an online questionnaire completed by 435 adults between the ages of 18 and 65 living in Kuwait. Quota sampling by gender, age, and region helped ensure the sample broadly reflected these national demographics.

The survey examined three main dimensions:

1. Pathways to change such as dietary shifts and support for policies, technological innovation, and advocacy efforts;
2. Barriers to change such as meat attachment, entitlement beliefs, and speciesist views; and
3. Facilitators of change such as recognizing animal sentience and awareness of the broader harms of industrial animal agriculture.

Policy support is near universal. Nearly nine in 10 respondents (88.5%) agreed that farmed animals should have legal protections setting minimum standards for space, veterinary care, and access to food and water. Support for animal advocacy organizations is also strong, with 58% saying they would back an organization working to protect farmed animals and promote plant-based eating.

Current diets remain predominantly animal-based: only around 9% of respondents identified as reducetarian, pescatarian, vegetarian, or vegan. Yet attitudes toward plant-based eating are encouraging. About 71% held positive overall views of plant-based diets, with the strongest agreement around their healthfulness (68%). Perceptions about their practicality (61%), affordability (61%), social acceptability (61%), and protein adequacy (61%) show a broader positive profile than was found for other countries in the region. Around 61% were interested in learning more about plant-based proteins, and 50% said they’d be willing to substitute plant-based for animal protein. Support for cultivated meat is moderate at 37%, suggesting meaningful openness in Kuwait to emerging protein alternatives.

Still, the barriers to change are substantial. Positive attitudes toward meat are nearly universal (96%), with large majorities agreeing that eating meat is delicious (92%), natural (90%), normal (89%), necessary for health (85%), and part of valuable family traditions (78%). Entitlement beliefs and religious justifications are also widespread. Most respondents agreed that eating meat is an unquestionable right (80%) and said their religion teaches that farmed animals were created for human use (79%). Several speciesist views appear at notably high levels: 59% felt that too much attention is paid to farmed animals relative to human concerns, and 45% agreed that humans should be allowed to use farmed animals as they wish.

A specific and policy-relevant barrier stands out as well: 38% agreed that low meat prices are more important than farmed animal treatment, and this belief is significantly associated with lower support for farmed animal welfare legislation.

On the facilitator side, about 64% of respondents believed farmed animals can feel positive emotions like excitement, happiness, and calmness, but only 53% agreed they can experience negative states like pain, fear, or boredom. This gap — higher acknowledgment of positive feelings than negative ones — may reflect the psychological discomfort of acknowledging animal suffering in a context where eating animals is culturally central. Awareness of the broader harms of industrial animal agriculture, such as climate change, antibiotic resistance, pandemic risk, biodiversity loss, and worker exploitation, is relatively high, with about 59% recognizing these links overall.

Belief in animal sentience (and their positive emotional capacities in particular) and awareness of systemic harms emerge as strong predictors of more positive attitudes toward plant-based diets, greater willingness to substitute plant-based for animal protein, and higher levels of support for cultivated meat and animal advocacy organizations. Interestingly, older adults (ages 50 to 65) show more openness than younger groups, including much higher willingness to substitute plant-based protein and stronger support for cultivated meat, legal protections, and advocacy organizations. This pattern is distinct from other countries like Lebanon, where older adults tend to be less open.

Among those willing to support an advocacy organization, intentions in Kuwait are relatively high. About 81% would follow or like an organization on social media, 74% would share its content, and 71.5% would sign a petition. Around two-thirds said they’d volunteer (67.5%) or donate (65%).

The sample size is modest, which means results for smaller demographic subgroups — particularly individual regions — should be interpreted with caution. As a self-reported survey, responses may be shaped by social desirability, and the cross-sectional design identifies associations rather than causes. The study also focused specifically on farmed land animals, so findings may not extend to aquatic animals used for food.

For advocates working in the West Asia and North Africa region, this report reveals Kuwait’s complexity as a country with both considerable barriers to overcome and promising pathways for change. The public’s strong support for cultivated meat and willingness to substitute plant-based protein suggest a readiness to engage with emerging alternatives — a real opportunity worth pursuing through consumer education and institutional engagement with foodservice providers to increase their availability and uptake.

The policy pathway is clearly the strongest foundation, and the near-universal support for legal protections gives advocates credible ground to engage policymakers, regulators, and certification bodies. The specific link between prioritizing low meat prices and reduced support for animal welfare legislation is a nuance worth taking seriously: affordability concerns may need to be directly addressed in policy messaging, perhaps by emphasizing that baseline care standards need not come at the expense of food access.

The consistent link between belief in animal sentience and awareness of systemic harms with greater openness to change suggests that public education on these two fronts may be especially productive here. Communicating that farmed animals have rich emotional lives and that industrial animal agriculture connects to shared human concerns about climate, health, and community is likely to find receptive audiences.

Advocates who have questions, comments, or would like help applying these findings are welcome to fill out this short feedback form from Animetrics. Animetrics offers support with understanding the results, adapting them to local contexts, and identifying relevant next steps.

This summary was drafted by a large language model (LLM) and closely edited by our Research Library Manager for clarity and accuracy. As per our AI policy, Faunalytics only uses LLMs to summarize very long reports (~50+ pages) that are not appropriate to assign to volunteers, studies that contain graphic descriptions of animal cruelty or animal industries, and research on niche topics. We remain committed to bringing you reliable data, which is why any AI-generated work will always be reviewed by a human.