Is the Dublin Declaration Really Balanced? A Closer Look at Its Claims on Meat and Sustainability

A recent critical review titled “The Dublin Declaration: Gain for the Meat Industry, Loss for Science, “ co-authored by Dr. Edel Sanders, has garnered significant attention, with over 1,500 downloads on SSRN and recognition as a “Recent Top Paper.”  The authors argue that the Declaration overlooks key concerns, such as excessive meat consumption in wealthy countries and the environmental impacts of industrial livestock production, making it overly favorable to the meat industry.

They also raise concerns about questionable academic practices, including omitting conflicts of interest, self-citation, and excluding dissenting voices.​

The team conducted a reader perception survey in response to critiques from the Declaration’s original authors. The results? Most participants felt the Declaration promotes the idea that eating meat is essential for health, not harmful to the environment, and a core part of human tradition. Only one of thirteen tested claims favored the Declaration’s defenders.​

The study highlights the importance of more transparent and balanced scientific communication, particularly in the fields of food, health, and sustainability.​