Vegan nutrition – a win-win situation
Opting for a plant-based diet has many positive aspects. Not only individuals but society as a whole could benefit from such a change. For personal health, vegan nutrition offers considerable advantages. Studies have shown a lower risk of cardiovascular diseases, type 2 diabetes and certain types of cancer. The high proportion of fibre, antioxidants and phytochemicals supports intestinal health and strengthens the immune system. The environment benefits greatly from a vegan diet. The production of plant-based foods consumes significantly fewer resources. Water consumption, for example, is up to 90 per cent lower than in meat production. Greenhouse gas emissions are reduced considerably because farm animals' methane production is eliminated. From an economic point of view, vegan nutrition enables more efficient land use. Where feed is grown today, food for humans could be produced directly. This would improve global food security and stabilise food prices. Animal suffering would be avoided altogether with a vegan diet. Millions of farm animals would no longer be kept under often questionable conditions. This corresponds to an essential ethical attitude of compassion and respect for all life.
Likewise, the sometimes questionable practice of spreading liquid manure (a collection of liquid excrement, urine and possibly diluted faeces) on fields would be scaled back. This would also make a significant contribution to water protection. Society benefits from a vegan diet through reduced health costs, lower environmental pollution and more sustainable use of resources. Innovative plant-based products create new economic opportunities and jobs. Farmers can benefit from more stable incomes by switching to plant-based production. Cultivating legumes, cereals, and vegetables promises long-term prospects in the growing market for plant-based foods. The vegan movement promotes culinary creativity and diversity. New taste experiences are created, and traditional cuisines are reinterpreted. This enriches food culture and creates exciting gastronomic possibilities. In summary, it can be seen that a vegan diet offers solutions to some of the key challenges of our time – from health and climate protection to feeding the world. Thus, a vegan diet is an individual lifestyle choice and an essential building block for a sustainable future.
The subsidies for meat and animal products in Switzerland and Germany are complex because they often flow indirectly through general agricultural subsidies.
Amount of subsidies
Switzerland supports its agriculture with around three and a half to four billion Swiss francs annually (as of 2023). A large portion of this goes to animal husbandry since a large part of the agricultural area is used as grassland (for fodder). Direct payments (over two and a half billion Swiss francs per year) are linked to ecological conditions but apply across the board to farms, regardless of whether they produce animal or plant products. There are no explicit subsidies for meat production, but the production of animal feed, export subsidies, and infrastructure funding favours animal husbandry.
Who pays? Subsidies are financed by the federal government (state budget) through tax revenues. Consumers indirectly contribute to their support through high food prices (protectionist tariffs).
In addition to national funds, Germany receives over six billion euros annually from the EU Agricultural Fund (CAP). A large proportion of the direct payments (around seventy per cent of CAP funds) are paid out per hectare, regardless of the production method. Indirect subsidies arise for animal products through the cultivation of animal feed. This means that over fifty per cent of arable land is used to produce animal feed, supported by EU funds. The reduced VAT rate (seven per cent) on staple foods favours consumption. There are operating bonuses and investment aids for stables or slaughterhouses (partly financed nationally or by the EU).
Who pays? Primarily the EU (via the CAP budget) and the German state (Federal Ministry of Agriculture). The funds come from EU taxes (including membership fees) and national taxes.
Criticism and context
Indirect funding: In both countries, animal husbandry is subsidised primarily through area payments and infrastructure measures, not meat subsidies’.
Environmental debate: NGOs such as Greenpeace and WWF criticise these systems for promoting the overproduction of cheap animal products while disadvantaging sustainable alternatives.
Transparency: Exact figures for animal products are difficult to determine because most subsidies are paid to farms as a lump sum.
Sources: Federal Office for Agriculture (Switzerland), BMEL (Germany), EU Commission (CAP reports), NGO analyses (e.g. the ‘Meat Atlas’ published by the Heinrich Böll Foundation).