Climate change is a polarizing issue among the left-right political spectrum in industrialized countries. Belief in climate change and support for mitigation efforts are increasingly associated with left-leaning political identities, impeding efforts to engage right-leaning individuals. 

Political and ideological polarization have interfered with government efforts to promote climate-friendly agriculture and diets, such as the Farm-to-Fork strategies adopted by countries in the European Union (E.U.). Part of the Farm-to-Fork policy is promotion of diets with less red and processed meat due to evidence that producing these foods is harmful to the environment. Meat reduction efforts have led to backlash from right-leaning individuals who accuse the E.U. of pushing “anti-meat agendas.” 

This study examines E.U. citizens’ responses to the 2020 Eurobarometer survey to see whether support for climate-friendly agriculture and diets seem polarized along left-right divides. The Eurobarometer survey includes responses from over 27,000 E.U. citizens aged 15 years or older from all 27 E.U. countries. The authors of this study examined the survey questions that were specifically related to the role of diet and agriculture in climate change. They analyzed data separately for Northwestern European (NWE) countries and Eastern and Southern European (E&SE) countries to account for historical and regional differences within the E.U. based on performance indicators related to the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations. 

Results showed a weak negative correlation between support for climate-friendly agriculture and right-leaning political affiliation in NWE countries, but no significant correlation in E&SE countries. In both NWE and E&SE countries, respondents with higher education levels showed slightly higher support for climate-friendly agriculture. However, in NWE countries, this correlation between higher education levels and higher support for climate-friendly agriculture was only found in respondents with left-leaning political identities.

Support for climate-friendly diets, which involve eating less meat, was positively correlated with support for climate-friendly agriculture and with education level. Once again, in NWE countries in particular, the correlation between higher education levels and higher support for climate-friendly agriculture was stronger for respondents with left-leaning political identities. However, unlike in the case of eating less red meat, the correlation in NWE countries between support for climate-friendly agriculture and support for climate-friendly diets was still present (only slightly reduced) among right-leaning respondents. 

Comparing the results from this most recent survey (from 2020) to a previous administration of this survey (from 2009) gives additional insights. Agreement with the statement “Agriculture is one of the major causes of climate change” increased from 27% to 44% in NWE countries. Likewise, agreement with the statement “E.U. farmers need to change the way they work in order to fight climate change even if that means that E.U. agriculture will be less competitive” increased from 67% to 70%. Finally, respondents who said they were willing “to pay 10% more for agricultural products that are produced in a more climate-friendly way” increased from 63% to 73%. 

Of particular interest to animal advocates, respondents had the option to check off as many items as they wanted from a list of fifteen “dietary thinking patterns” that they considered relevant to eating a healthy and sustainable diet. The items “eating a variety of different foods,” “having a balanced diet,” and “eating more fruits and vegetables” were included in respondents’ selections the most often, with over half of respondents in both NWE and E&SE countries checking off these items. By contrast, “eating meat less often” was not as popular (selection included by 38% of respondents in NWE countries and 27% in E&SE countries). “Eating vegetarian or vegan” was least popular of all, chosen by 13% of respondents in NWE countries and 10% in E&SE countries. 

In sum, the study agrees with recent findings from other studies that traditional correlations between education level and pro-environmental opinions have become less common among right-leaning citizens in NWE countries, likely due to increases in political polarization. This study goes further than past studies by analyzing climate-friendly diet changes and opinions on the effect of agriculture on the environment — two topics that are relevant to animal advocates fighting against animal farming. A key takeaway from this study is that, among NWE countries, support for climate-friendly diet changes (which includes meat reduction) appear to be more polarized compared to support for climate-friendly agriculture. 

Additionally, this study shows that overcoming people’s political or ideological aversion to supporting policies that are associated with “the other side” may be particularly hard with certain polarizing issues. Other studies suggest that certain pro-environmental causes do appeal to right-wing citizens, such as animal biodiversity and landscape deterioration. Animal advocates may wish to frame issues through these lenses when addressing right-wing audiences. Anti-elite and anti-establishment feelings among right-wing audiences could also align with the fight against powerful corporate factory farms. 

Even outside of polarization, eating less meat and eating vegan or vegetarian are not seen as important as other “healthy and sustainable” diet choices. Presenting these diets in elitist terms may turn populist-leaning, right-wing audiences away. Therefore, activists may want to focus on providing practical information like plant-based guidelines and recipes to make these diets more accessible, rather than making technical arguments about their superiority over other diets. Animal advocates must carefully consider the role of culture and identity in how their message may be perceived by different audiences. Advocates can tailor their messaging to each audience while also building bridges within audiences of diverse identities and cultures through focus on less-polarized stances. Such stances include the desire for more climate-friendly agriculture practices, which could mobilize broader support for the fight against industrialized factory farming.