Tactics In Practice: The Data Behind Humane Education

Author: Andrea Polanco | Published: January 28, 2026

Estimated Reading Time: 22 minutes

This deep dive explores the research on humane education — programs that teach the consequences of animal agriculture and/or respect for animals — examining how these initiatives influence dietary choices, shape attitudes toward animals, and inspire lasting compassionate action.

Welcome to another installment of Tactics In Practice, a series where we dig into the effectiveness and strategies of different interventions. Grab your notebook (or tablet) and take a seat in the virtual classroom as we explore the world of humane education, to better understand how teaching empathy for animals can transform hearts, minds, and — ultimately — behaviors.

Teaching Compassion 101: A Brief History Of Humane Education

Let’s contextualize this intervention first, as understanding what it is and how it’s developed across time will help explain its theory of change and hence, how people measure its impact.

The concept of humane education, at least in the United States, can be linked back to the philosophical writings of John Locke in the late 1690s, where he linked animal cruelty in childhood to the development of cruelty towards humans later in life. To break this link, kindness towards animals was then commonly featured in children’s books in the 18th and 19th centuries (e.g., Black Beauty being a famous example). Humane societies, such as Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA), also emerged in the late 1800s and became key hubs for humane education and social reform, with twenty U.S. states mandating humane education in schools. However, humane education declined afterwards in the mid-20th century, overshadowed by animal shelter work and the rise of professionalized science education, in addition to a lack of humane education being formally part of teacher training programs. By the 1960s, humane education in the U.S. was revived by humane societies, and taught by animal shelters and SPCAs, which tended to focus on teaching kindness and responsible pet care to children, up until the early 2000s.

In its current form, humane education in the farmed animal protection movement involves teaching people (typically children, high-school, and university students) about the impact of animal agriculture on farmed animals, human health, and the environment, which can also include education on animal ethics, helping people develop respect, empathy, anti-speciesist values, and critical thinking skills. Humane education is now typically delivered as classroom lessons or workshops (usually as part of a curriculum) that include reading materials, video presentations, and/or group discussions.

In our discussions with humane educators, the theory of change centers on the principle that gaining knowledge leads to awareness, which ultimately inspires ethical action and systemic change. This approach is built on developing empathy, critical thinking skills, and an awareness of interconnected issues like animal protection, human rights, and environmental sustainability across all age groups. By educating students and empowering them with tools for both individual and structural change, the goal is to cultivate a generation of compassionate and confident advocates who can apply their skills and passions to influence systems within their communities, campuses, and future professional roles.

However, translating this model into formal education systems has proven challenging. The barriers humane education faces in becoming institutionalized within schools are both a cause and a consequence of speciesist narratives that remain embedded in the everyday curriculum. Scholars argue that a fundamental shift in values, not just legal or policy reforms, is needed to transform how animals are treated. One theory behind why humane education works, particularly when directed toward children, is that it can help shape pro-animal values, as children naturally identify with animals and have not yet learned to prioritize humans over other species. At the high-school or college level, humane education may be effective because it engages both logic and emotion, and is reinforced by social influence from instructors and peers.

Regardless of the mechanism behind humane education, there is a consensus on its value outside the movement. For example, raising education and awareness on environmental and animal issues was frequently cited as a solution towards protecting the environment and animals among Gen Z individuals, particularly in Indonesia, thereby suggesting a need for humane education. In the U.S., our Animal Tracker asked approximately 1,000 adults every three years from 2008 to 2017 about the extent to which they think it’s important that schools (kindergarten-12 and college level) incorporate humane education, including animal welfare topics, into their lessons. As shown in the graph below, the percentage never fell below 65%, indicating that most people in the U.S. support humane education.

Likewise, 87% of Portuguese teachers agreed that diet should be addressed in environmental education, 79% agreed that schools should teach about the impact of factory farming on animals, and 54% agreed that meat reduction should be encouraged in schools (versus 14% agreeing that schools should encourage meat-eating) — although just 49% agreed that plant-based diets should be encouraged in school. Indeed, this suggests, at least in Portugal, that teachers are supportive of promoting humane education within the national curriculum.

Overall, the history and development of humane education show a consistent goal: helping people build empathy and make more informed, compassionate choices toward animals. While the approach has evolved — from focusing on kindness to individual animals to addressing broader systems like animal agriculture — the core intent remains the same. At the same time, ongoing challenges, such as the dominance of speciesist perspectives in education, highlight how complex it can be to create meaningful change. Understanding these factors is key to evaluating how humane education works in practice and how its impact can be effectively measured.

From The Classroom To The Kitchen: Humane Education’s Impact On Animal Product Consumption

Like most animal advocacy interventions, one goal of humane education is to get people to go vegan or vegetarian (veg*n), or to reduce their animal product consumption. In this section, we look at the available data that tracks the impact of humane education on people’s diet across the short-term (changes observed less than three months after exposure) and long-term (changes observed three months or longer after exposure).

Changes in diet are typically measured as:

Intentions (e.g., asking if people will reduce their meat intake);
Self-report (e.g., asking people how much meat they ate recently or if they’re veg*n);
Meal choice (e.g., giving people a meat or veg*n voucher and seeing what they choose); or
Actual meal purchases (e.g., tracking what people eat through their dining card purchases at college canteens).

The strongest evidence are meal purchases, as they give the most direct insight into someone’s actual behavior. In contrast, the other methods suffer from social desirability, i.e., people may want to appear “better” than they actually are, so they may underestimate how much meat they consume, or they may be more inclined to say they’re veg*n when they’re not. This is also known as the “intention-behavior gap,” where people don’t behave in the way they intend to. In the case of reducing one’s animal product consumption, the gap could be the result of many different factors, including people changing their intention, forgetting about it, lacking motivation, or a host of other challenges people face when transitioning to a veg*n diet. As well, asking people to self-report how much meat they’ve recently eaten runs the risk of limited memory recall and therefore subject to some error. Thus, in the two infographics below, we present data from weakest to strongest.

Short-Term Changes

The findings below primarily draw on studies based on high-school and college students in the U.S., U.K., or Canada who were exposed to: a single educational video presentation; classes focused on the ethics of meat consumption; a one-off lecture focused on the consequences of meat consumption on climate change and health; a mix of one-off humane educational videos and reading materials; or educational programs that involved a mix of seminars, discussions, and mentorship.

As shown in the graphs below, students who participated in humane education were far more likely to say they intended to reduce or stop eating animal products, and a higher number actually reported trying out a veg*n diet shortly afterward. However, when researchers looked at their actual purchases, the difference between the treated group and the control group was much smaller. This suggests that humane education can change intentions, but such changes don’t necessarily translate into a major shift in behavior, such as going veg, over a short-term period. This is also supported by research finding no changes from documentaries using educational appeals on people’s animal product consumption, despite having a positive impact on intentions. An additional study also found no significant difference in students’ animal product consumption before and after taking an animal ethics class compared to the control class.

Figure 2. The Impact Of Humane Education On Short-Term Diet Change

It’s worth noting that the studies covered in this graph are based on high-school and college students who were tracked over a short period of time (most of these over the course of several weeks or right after the intervention). Therefore, our conclusions are limited to this demographic and timeline. This is notable because the theory of change behind humane education implies more of a longer-term strategy: exposing students to a curriculum of knowledge with the goal of equipping them with critical thinking skills and developing empathy first, before the person feels empowered to make a change. Unfortunately, as we see in the next section, longitudinal research on humane education delivered as a curriculum versus a one-off program is lacking.

Long-Term Changes

Similar to the short-term studies above, the findings below primarily draw on studies based on high-school and college students in the U.S. or Canada who were exposed to a single educational video presentation or a one-off lecture focused on the consequences of meat consumption on climate change and health. Additionally, we include one study that surveyed U.S. adults who participated in classroom education about the harms of animal farming and/or eating meat within the last five years.

The two studies that asked individuals if receiving humane education caused them to reduce their animal product consumption report much higher reductions (52–58% saying they reduced) compared to studies that report actual reductions as measured by meal purchases in a dining hall (8–9% actually reducing). This again suggests that people may likely overestimate the impact of an advocacy tactic when asked about it, and that actual behavioral measurements are more accurate.

As to what it means for diet change in the long term, the fact that a single lecture on the environmental and health aspects of meat-eating reduced people’s meat consumption by 8–9% up to three years later is still impressive given the deeply ingrained nature of dietary habits. Nonetheless, there appears to be no research on the long-term impact of humane education (focused on animal welfare or empathy and taught through repetitive lectures or workshops) on dietary changes in various populations, particularly children. While the dining hall studies by Jalil et al. (2020, 2023) are informative, they don’t quite match humane education as it’s delivered in the movement, or how advocates in the movement view the theory of change behind humane education (particularly when it starts in childhood).

Figure 3. The Impact Of Humane Education On Long-Term Diet Change

Impact Beyond Our Plates: How Humane Education Shapes Values, Attitudes, Knowledge, & Other Types Of Behavior

Considering humane education’s theory of change and origins, diet change is just one of several expected outcomes. Humane education interventions often involve larger goals, such as instilling values of kindness, teaching the impact of animal agriculture on animals, the environment, and humans, and even launching students into lifetimes of advocacy. Here we review the evidence for these goals. While humane education also demonstrates benefits beyond animal advocacy, such as improving reading and cognitive skills in children, these specific benefits will not be discussed further here, as they’re not directly relevant to the scope of this resource.

In children, humane education has been shown to foster empathy, prosociality (in the U.S. and China, for example), and positive attitudes towards animals and the environment, while also reducing aggression or anti-social behavior. For example, researchers examined the impact of ACTAsia’s Caring for Life on 5- to 6-year-old children in China. The program is designed to foster critical thinking, compassion, and a sense of responsibility toward animals, people, and the environment.

Children who participated in Caring for Life had higher affective empathy (e.g., being able to feel others’ emotions) scores by the end of the program compared to children who didn’t participate. Additionally, while scores of cognitive empathy (e.g., being able to identify and understand others’ emotions) declined among children who didn’t participate, these remained stable throughout the study for the humane education participants. In other words, teaching first-graders about a sense of responsibility toward all living beings can help foster and maintain empathy in young children.

Other studies conducted in China also report positive effects of the Caring for Life Program among first- and second-grade students, including increased environmental behaviors (such as helping wild animals by putting up bird feeders) and more positive attitudes towards animals. Studies such as these demonstrate how humane education can be an effective tool across different cultures.

Studies of other humane education programs also point to increases in knowledge about animals and plant-based proteins. For instance, a single workshop on farmed animals significantly increased children’s knowledge about animals and their beliefs about animal minds. This increase was observed one day and six weeks after the workshop. Similarly, teaching children about alternative proteins (plant-based, cultivated, and insect) increases their knowledge about all types of alternative proteins immediately after the intervention. However, this increased knowledge was only sustained for cultivated meat and insect protein four weeks later. The same study also found increases in children’s willingness-to-try cultivated meat right after the intervention. But, willingness-to-try didn’t extend to plant-based meat or insect protein, and it was not sustained four weeks later.

In adults, our retrospective study (see chart below) noted increased empathy towards farmed animals, increased attention to welfare labels on animal products, and increased information-seeking in those who participated in humane education. Further, students who participated in a humane education program reported a high understanding of the harms of factory farming and low levels of anti-animal beliefs, while experimental studies show increased knowledge about farmed animals, lower justifications for meat-eating, and reduced speciesist attitudes in those who received humane education compared to a control group.

Figure 4. The Impact Of Humane Education On Animal Welfare Attitudes And Actions

Humane education also increases adults’ sense of responsibility and advocacy. For example, one study examined a small group of undergraduate students enrolled in a critical animal studies course, all of whom were training to become teachers. The study revealed an increase in their reported sense of responsibility for advocating for animals, jumping from 20% before the course to 74% afterward. Additionally, the pre-service teachers demonstrated a statistically significant increase in their support for animal rights by the end of the course. Similarly, students who had participated in a humane education program for one semester showed increased identification with animal, environmental, and social justice advocacy (see graph below), while 40% reported feeling more empowered by the knowledge and skills acquired through the program, which helped improve their advocacy.

Figure 5. The Impact Of Humane Education On Students’ Advocacy

Finally, humane education has also been found to influence career development. In one study, the humane education program introduced 58% of surveyed alumni to new career possibilities, especially within the movement. In another study, 84% of pre-service teachers reported that they would now move forward in a different way and showed a greater openness to new ways of thinking about and teaching animal-focused curriculum.

Overall, these findings suggest that humane and food-related educational interventions can meaningfully enhance children’s empathy, knowledge, and openness toward animals and alternative proteins, though the durability and scope of these effects may vary across topics and time. In adults, these findings indicate that humane education can shape adults’ attitudes, behaviors, and values by fostering greater empathy toward animals, increasing awareness of animal welfare issues, strengthening advocacy and social responsibility, and even inspiring meaningful shifts in career paths and long-term engagement within the movement.

Challenges In Implementing Humane Education

A qualitative study based on eight interviews with teachers who taught humane education in the U.S. revealed that some parents complained about the topic of veganism being discussed with their children. Similarly, another qualitative study that interviewed ten stakeholders, ranging from animal advocates to industry representatives, also revealed fears about negative receptions from parents when it comes to teaching their children about animal agriculture. However, in our discussions with humane educators, negative feedback from parents was rare. Nonetheless, it should be noted that institutional meat-free challenges, like getting a school to adopt vegan meals for one month, can result in negative backlash from students. To avoid such backlash, advocates should consider pairing school-based meat-free challenges with humane education so that students have the opportunity to learn about the benefits of plant-based eating and be able to discuss their opinions and feelings on it — factors that are the crux of humane education.

Other obstacles faced by humane education initiatives, as revealed in a survey of U.K. animal welfare educators, include lack of evidence on its effectiveness, lack of animal welfare education being included in the standard school curriculum, and controversies with using phrases such as “cruelty.” Similarly, a qualitative study on U.K. stakeholders revealed the biggest barriers to humane education in the U.K. as prioritization of other subjects in the national curriculum (such that topics like farmed animal welfare get deprioritized); lack of funding (especially for trips outside the classroom); and lack of training and education for teachers to teach on animal welfare.

Overall, the obstacles confronting humane education — ranging from institutional limitations to sensitive educational topics — underscore the complexity of bringing discussions about animal ethics into classrooms. Strengthening its foundation through teacher training, curricular inclusion, and supportive dialogue will be crucial for realizing its long-term impact, as we discuss below.

Tips For Effective Humane Education

All of these recommendations were shared with us from humane educators and experts themselves. As mentioned throughout, there is an absence of longitudinal research, especially research outside the Global North, on the impact of humane education delivered as a series of lectures/workshops on outcomes that go beyond just the outcome of diet change. Keeping these limitations in mind, our recommendations include the following.

Strengthen Learning With A Scaffolded Curriculum

While the existing research suggests that a one-off lecture can result in a 9% reduction in meat three years later, there is value in assessing the impact of humane education taught as a series of lectures, discussions, and workshops over time. Researchers have also noted that continued education versus one-off programs may be essential for long-term impact. The advocates we spoke to said that programs that unfold over several weeks (ideally four to 10 weeks) give students the space to reflect, ask questions, and explore new ideas with trusted adults. This kind of scaffolded curriculum allows concepts to build on each other, supporting deeper understanding and genuine shifts in worldview. An expert informed us that the century-long success of youth pro-animal agriculture programs like 4H and Future Farmers of America (FFA) in the U.S. is partly due to creating culture, building relationships, and fostering multi-generational participation.

This long-term relationship-building is seen as crucial for tackling the challenging subjects of humane education and creating a safe, trusting environment for exploration of beliefs. Indeed, Leaders for Ethics, Animals, and the Planet (LEAP) is an alternative program to these hands-on animal agriculture programs. This organization models its education programs after the successful strategies employed by Big Ag programs, but with a focus on ethics, animals, and the planet.

Lead With Intersectional And Comprehensive Messaging

All of the experts I spoke to agreed that the movement’s messaging opens far more doors when it connects the dots between animal issues, social justice, and climate change. Students today care deeply about the world around them: their families, their communities, and the planet they’ll inherit. An intersectional approach speaks to those values, showing how compassion and sustainability are interconnected. It also helps reduce resistance. When lessons aren’t framed as being “just about animals,” but instead about shared challenges and collective solutions, people are less likely to react defensively. Schools are often juggling multiple priorities, from addressing bullying and building empathy to tackling environmental goals, so a comprehensive curriculum that naturally weaves in animal issues alongside other forms of care and justice feels both relevant and inclusive.

Researchers agree with this too, arguing that holistic approaches, such as “One Health” or “One Welfare,” will make it easier to convince institutions that humane education should be incorporated into formal education. While there is a vast literature on messaging tactics for animal product reduction per se (e.g., animal welfare, health, and environment), humane education is not just about diet change; it’s about creating lifelong advocates.

Don’t Be An Activist In The Classroom

Educators shared with us that giving students agency and letting them reach their own conclusions is one of the most powerful ways to inspire lasting change. When students feel empowered rather than instructed, they’re more likely to internalize lessons and carry those values forward. For humane educators, the goal isn’t to tell students what’s right or wrong, but to create space for curiosity, reflection, and growth. All of the organizations we spoke with shared the goal to meet learners where they are and guide them along a spectrum of actions, from small personal choices to broader efforts that drive systemic change. A range of options allows each person to engage at their own pace and comfort level. By avoiding shame and staying non-pushy, educators create space for genuine transformation. When students feel supported, not judged, they’re far more likely to take the next step.

Stop Calling It “Humane Education”

While the intention behind it might be good, the experts we spoke with say “humane education” often carries a negative connotation or feels vague. Even though it has a long history in animal protection work, a lot of people either don’t know what it means or assume it’s only about animal welfare. That narrow interpretation can make it harder for schools to see how it connects to their broader goals.

Instead, phrases like “compassion-based learning” or “food impact education” feel more accessible and objective. Similarly, researchers recommend that humane educators develop a consensus around language and definitions — for example, avoiding saying “cruelty prevention” and instead saying “harm,” as the former implies deliberate malicious behavior done towards animals, when most educators agreed that most harm is done unintentionally due to a lack of awareness. At the end of the day, thoughtful language helps open doors and teachers are far more likely to lean in and explore how these lessons fit naturally into their classrooms when we frame our work around shared values.

Involve Gen Z In Shaping Humane Education

Research shows that Gen Z deeply believes in the transformative power of education. This generation views learning not just as a means to gain knowledge, but as a way to create meaningful change. Building on this insight, we recommend actively involving Gen Z in the design and testing of humane education initiatives. For example, LEAP maintains a youth advisory council, composed of past and present program participants, to help the organization adapt its educational program to better meet the current interests and needs of its audience.

Design Age-Appropriate Humane Education Curriculum

When developing humane education programs, it’s essential to adapt lessons for different age groups while maintaining transparency with the schools about the content and developing an approach that promotes critical thinking.

Addressing Controversial Topics With Transparency And Care

Organizations should communicate openly with schools about curriculum content and goals. By adopting a pedagogical approach that promotes critical thinking rather than prescribing right or wrong answers, educators can foster meaningful dialogue without triggering defensiveness. For sensitive subjects, such as factory farming, using stories and animated videos helps students engage empathetically without feeling overwhelmed. Experts told us that this approach has proven effective in preventing school pushback and ensuring continued access to classrooms.

Curriculum Tailoring For Different Age Groups

Experts recommend tailoring content according to students’ cognitive and emotional development:

Early Elementary (K–3): Focus on storytelling to build empathy for farmed animals by highlighting their unique personalities and relationships. Avoid graphic or distressing content; instead, nurture compassion through relatable narratives.
Upper Elementary (4th Grade And Up): At this stage, students begin to grasp ideas of fairness and justice. Educators can introduce discussions about intensive confinement and consumer choices, encouraging reflection on ethical behavior while maintaining a hopeful, solution-oriented tone.
High School: Adolescents are driven by a search for agency and a deeper understanding of justice. This makes it an ideal time to explore systems thinking, empowering students to analyze interconnected issues and envision change. Activities should align with their developmental need for independence and action, helping them channel empathy into constructive advocacy.

Invest In Longitudinal Evaluations

Some advocates we spoke with mentioned how they would have a stronger case to get humane education as part of standard school curriculum if they had longitudinal research to back up its impact. As mentioned before, humane education is a long-term endeavor that aims to change people’s way of thinking and behavior (particularly starting in childhood), which is expected to have ripple effects, but most of the research on its impact has focused on short-term diet changes at the college level. One group hoping to change this is New Roots Institute — they’re currently tracking alumni careers to better understand whether college students who undergo their program end up working in roles that have an influence on the food system, a long-term outcome that goes beyond immediate dietary shifts. However, this work is still ongoing.

While long-term evaluation is needed, humane educators told us that it’s challenging and expensive to run them, as it would involve tracking changes from childhood to adolescence (or from adolescence to adulthood), which means dealing with ethical considerations unique to studying minors as they are a vulnerable research population. To overcome this, humane education organizations can consider pairing up with universities to help them fill this research gap as academics are better equipped to apply for research funding and have the skills to execute long-term studies.

In the end, closing this research gap will require coordinated effort. If humane education organizations, researchers, and funders can align around the need for longitudinal evidence, the field will be far better positioned to demonstrate its societal value, and ultimately, to secure a spot within the formal education curriculum.

Faunalytics is deeply appreciative of the thoughtful contributions and insights shared by the following advocates: Danielle Hanaosh (LEAP), Zoe Weil (Institute for Humane Education), Lauren Ferrucci (New Roots Institute), Meena Alagappan (HEART), Kristina Hulvershorn (HEART), and two anonymous individuals.

Sources

History & Descriptions Of Humane Education

Studies Evaluating The Short-Term Impact Of Humane Education On Diet Change

Studies Evaluating The Long-Term Impact Of Humane Education On Diet Change

Other Relevant Studies

Challenges With Humane Education Implementation

Meet the Author: Andrea Polanco

Andrea is a social science researcher at Faunalytics with a PhD in animal welfare science from the University of Guelph. With both an academic background and experience in grassroots advocacy, Andrea is passionate about how research can inform and strengthen the animal advocacy movement—from understanding the psychological factors that shape people’s attitudes and behaviors toward animals, to examining equity within the movement itself. She is driven by a belief in collective liberation (the idea that no group can be free while others are oppressed) and seeks to align her research and advocacy with that vision. Andrea also values rest and joy, which for her include birding, discovering new TV shows, and relaxing with her cat companion Zupa/Sopa (‘soup’).

Tags: