In a world that often feels deeply polarized, it is rare to find a topic where almost everyone agrees. The treatment of farm animals is one of them. Surveys show that a strong majority of people, regardless of their diet, oppose common practices in animal agriculture.
The chart below shows results from a UK survey on whether several common farming practices are acceptable. For every practice listed, less than 13% of respondents rated it “acceptable”. A small minority approved of procedures such as castrating newborn calves or trimming the tails of newborn piglets, but large majorities judged each practice as “not acceptable”.
Some of the practices mentioned in the survey – such as killing newborn chicks, keeping animals in cages, or amputating body parts – may sound extreme. As a recent US survey suggests, most consumers believe that the meat they buy comes from animals raised in good conditions.
But in modern agriculture, these practices are widespread: most farmed animals globally are raised in factory farms, including around 85% in the UK, and 99% in the US1. For example, in both countries, nearly all male chicks born in the egg industry are killed, including in free-range systems2. In the appendix at the end of this article, we describe these and other practices in more detail, including some estimates of how common they are in the UK.
Other surveys show similarly large opposition to common farming practices. In a recent US survey, at most one in five respondents rated each practice as “acceptable”. The researchers noted that this view was broadly shared across age, gender, income, political affiliation, ethnicity, and region. As the following chart shows, the vast majority rated each practice as either somewhat or very unacceptable.
There is a clear gap between what people want – meat produced without suffering – and what the food system delivers.
In another US survey, around two in five of respondents agreed on banning slaughterhouses and factory farming; and close to a third supported banning animal farming altogether.
These views are not limited to the UK and the US. At the end of this article, we include a list of related surveys showing that concern for animal welfare extends across many other countries.
Given all this, and with more plant-based foods including meat alternatives now on the market, one might expect people in these countries to be shifting away from consuming animal products.
But the data shows a different story.
Meat consumption remains high
At a global level, meat consumption is not only high, but increasing. Each year, hundreds of billions of land animals, fish and crustaceans are farmed and killed to produce food.
In the UK, only a small share of adults identify as vegetarian or vegan, while the share of people who consume meat or fish remains around 90%. In fact, due to a gradual shift from red meat to poultry, the number of animals slaughtered in the UK has actually increased by around 20% in the last decade3.
The same pattern holds for the US: most people continue to eat meat, and more animals are slaughtered now than ever before.
This highlights that the widespread opposition to common farming practices we saw earlier is not limited to vegans and vegetarians: the vast majority of survey respondents regularly consume meat. It would therefore seem that for most people, reducing meat consumption would not be contrary to their values – it would be, in many ways, more consistent with them.
There is a clear gap between what people want – meat produced without suffering – and what the food system delivers. Understanding this gap is the first step to closing it.
Closing the gap
The data suggests we do not need to convince people to care about animals. The majority already do.
But changing behavior at scale is difficult, especially in a food system that makes animal products cheap and convenient while hiding many of the associated welfare costs. If we want to close the gap between our food system and our values, we can’t just rely on changing people’s diets. Several other levers need to move together, including innovation and policy.
We already have products that look and taste similar to meat and fish, but are made from plants. And soon, we will be able to buy cultivated meat4, produced without raising and slaughtering animals. Once these new products reach price parity with conventional foods, consumers may be more willing to adopt them, as a recent US survey suggested. The challenge now is to make alternative proteins cheaper, tastier, and more widely available.
In the meantime, as long as animals are still part of the system, policy can ensure welfare standards improve, phasing out the worst practices that most people oppose.
One of the biggest opportunities of our generation is to build a system where the food we eat reflects the values we already hold.
Appendix 1: common farming practices
Here is an overview of common farming practices used today worldwide in meat, egg, and dairy production that impact animal welfare. They are designed to manage large numbers of animals efficiently and profitably, at the cost of the animals experiencing substantial pain and distress.
There is no comprehensive data on the prevalence of these practices: farmers are often not required to report them, and national statistics are scarce. We therefore include some estimates of how many animals may be affected each year in the UK alone, taken from a separate article by Bryant Research5:
Killing newborn male chicks using gas or mechanical maceration. Male chicks cannot lay eggs and are not profitable to raise for meat, so they are typically killed on the day they hatch, either using gas or using a machine with fast-rotating blades. This practice, commonly known as “chick culling”, is estimated to lead to the deaths of around 99% of male chicks in the UK (about 42 million animals annually).
Keeping egg-laying hens in small cages. Hens are often kept in cages to reduce space requirements and to make flock management easier. In many countries, this means battery cages that give each bird roughly the area of an A4 sheet of printer paper, with wire floors and little room to move or stretch their wings. The UK has moved away from these systems to some extent: about 23% of hens (around 11 million animals) are kept in enriched cages, which provide slightly more space and include features such as perches and nesting areas.
Cutting the beaks of young chicks. The tips of chicks’ beaks are trimmed, usually within the first week of life, to reduce injuries from feather-pecking in large, high-density flocks. This practice, called “beak trimming” or sometimes “debeaking”, is considered common in the UK, although its exact prevalence is not known.
Castrating young male calves. Young male calves are often castrated, either by placing a tight rubber ring around the scrotum, by using a clamp that crushes the blood vessels above the testicles, or by removing the testicles with a knife. This is typically done without any pain relief. The purpose is to make the animals easier to manage, prevent unwanted breeding, and produce higher-value meat. No estimate for its prevalence in the UK is available, but it is considered common practice.
Removing the horn buds of calves using a hot iron. This procedure, called “disbudding”, involves burning the horn-producing tissue of young calves to prevent horn growth and reduce the risk of injuries to other animals and farm workers. It causes acute pain and is often carried out without pain relief. In the UK, around 90% of calves are disbudded, affecting about three million animals each year. If calves are not disbudded when young, farmers may later remove fully developed horns, a practice known as “dehorning”, which is more invasive and painful. Similar practices are often applied to goats.
Killing newborn male dairy calves. Male calves in dairy systems are often killed shortly after birth because they cannot produce milk and have low economic value. In the UK, around 18% of dairy calves are killed at a very young age (about 80,000 animals).
Cutting or grinding the teeth of newborn piglets. Piglets’ teeth are shortened to reduce injuries to other piglets and to the sow’s udder. No estimate for its prevalence in the UK is available, but it remains widely used there and in many other countries.
Cutting the tails of newborn piglets. The tails of newborn piglets are partially amputated, typically without pain relief. This is done to reduce the risk of tail-biting in crowded or stressful conditions. Around 85% of UK piglets (about 7.7 million animals) undergo this practice, known as “tail docking”.
Keeping pregnant sows in narrow crates. During pregnancy, sows are kept individually in metal-barred crates, only slightly larger than their bodies: this means that for weeks, they can only stand up and lie down, but cannot turn around. These crates are used to reduce aggression between sows when keeping them in dense conditions. In the UK, around 60% of sows (about 200,000 animals) are kept in these conditions.
Castrating male piglets. Male piglets are castrated to prevent unwanted breeding and to reduce the risk of ‘boar taint’, an unpleasant smell and taste in the meat. In many countries, this is typically done by surgically removing the testicles without pain relief. It is common practice in much of the world, but has become rare in the UK, where pigs are usually slaughtered at a younger age, before boar taint typically develops.
Early separation of cows and calves. In dairy systems, calves are usually separated from their mothers within hours or days of birth to allow milk collection, causing significant distress to both the mother and her calf. It is common practice globally, including the UK.
Marking animals for identification. Farmed land animals are routinely marked so they can be identified and managed. This often involves piercing the ear with a plastic tag (“ear tagging”) or cutting out small sections of the ear (“ear notching”). In some regions, farmers also mark animals by burning the skin with a hot iron (“branding”). These procedures cause acute pain at the time they are performed. Ear tagging and similar identification methods are used around the world and affect the majority of farmed land animals, including in the UK.
Marking and handling animals in aquaculture. Farmed fish in intensive systems are routinely handled and sometimes physically altered for identification and management – for example, through fin clipping, tagging, or other marking techniques. These procedures can cause acute stress and pain, and are widely used in intensive aquaculture systems worldwide, including in the UK.
Transporting animals over long distances. Farmed animals are routinely moved between farms and to slaughterhouses, often over many hours in crowded vehicles, and in some countries without feed, water, or adequate temperature control. This is standard practice worldwide, including in the UK.
There are also other routine procedures involved in food production that have major welfare implications, such as feed withdrawal before slaughter, and the slaughter process itself, which varies in the level of pain and distress animals may experience depending on the species and method used.
In addition, there are other painful practices that occur in specific sectors, for example force-feeding ducks and geese to produce foie gras, or removing the eyestalks of shrimp to stimulate reproduction in aquaculture.
To accelerate progress in reducing farm animal suffering, we need reliable data on how often these practices are used, and robust estimates of the intensity and duration of the pain they cause, as the Welfare Footprint Institute aims to quantify.
Appendix 2: Available surveys on people’s views on common farming practices
Here is a selection of surveys and petitions related to animal welfare:
Acceptability of Common Farming Practices - Bryant Research. Conducted in 2021, with around 1,000 participants in the UK. Large majorities described common farming practices as unacceptable. The strongest opposition was to confinement cages for chickens and pigs, which around 94% and 96% rated as unacceptable.
Knowledge and attitudes to factory farming practices in the UK and US: Can minds and behaviour be changed?6 Conducted in 2025, with around 2,000 participants in the UK and 2,000 in the US. The researchers found substantial knowledge gaps about common farming practices. When asked about 12 practices, at least three quarters of respondents rated every practice unacceptable. A significant share of participants supported banning factory farming (56% in the UK; 45% in the US).
Public Acceptability Of Standard U.S. Animal Agriculture Practices7 - Faunalytics (2025). Conducted in 2025, with around 1,000 participants in the US. Large majorities rated each of 12 standard animal agriculture practices as (somewhat or very) unacceptable. Opposition was broad across demographic groups.
Animals, Food, and Technology (AFT)8 - Sentience Institute. Conducted in 2017, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2023, and 2025, with around 1,000-1,500 participants each year in the US. The latest version resulted in a majority of people reporting discomfort with the way animals are used in the food industry, and relatively strong support for banning slaughterhouses and factory farming. About a third supported even banning animal farming as a whole.
On-farm animal welfare for certain animals: modernisation of EU legislation - European Commission. Public (not representative) consultation conducted in 2025, with over ~190,000 responses (75% from Germany). Respondents showed strong support for phasing out cages across species, found the systematic killing of day-old male chicks ethically problematic, and agreed that current rules do not ensure animals can express normal behaviour.
Attitudes of Europeans towards animal welfare - European Commission. Conducted in 2007 (data), 2015 (data), and 2023 (data), with around 26,000 participants in the EU; about 1,000 per country. This is a Eurobarometer omnibus survey which includes a list of questions about animal welfare. According to the latest version, 84% of Europeans believe that the welfare of farmed animals should be better protected in their country than it is now. A similar number support limiting the transport time of animals.
Public attitudes towards aquatic animal welfare - Eurogroup for Animals and Compassion in World Farming. Conducted in 2024, with around 12,000 participants from countries in the EU, US and China. Among the EU participants (around 9,000), the majority agreed that fish feel pain (71%), feel negative emotions like fear (60%), and are sentient (60%); 91% agreed that the welfare of fish should be protected as much or more than other farmed animals.
Support for the end of caged hens - Bryant Research. Conducted in 2023, with around 1,000 participants in Canada. Over three quarters found battery cages or enriched cages unacceptable.
Cages in farming - Compassion in World Farming / YouGov. Conducted in 2020, with around 24,000 participants in 28 European countries. The survey asks specifically on whether using cages in farming is cruel to the animals being farmed. In all countries, at least 48% (and in most countries more than 70%) agreed that using cages in farming is cruel to the animals being farmed. In almost all countries a majority supported banning cages.
Acceptability of pig housing systems - Schütz et al. Conducted in 2021 with around 1,000 participants in Germany. Free-range systems were rated most acceptable, while fully indoor slatted-floor systems were generally rejected. Even when presented with trade-offs (such as cost or environmental benefits), participants only made small compromises and continued to prefer higher-welfare options.
What do Brits think of UK farming practices? - YouGov. Conducted in 2020, with around 1,700 participants in the UK. This survey does not measure approval, but awareness. It shows that many people don’t know how widespread common farming practices are (e.g. 78% didn’t know how often carbon dioxide is used in slaughter).
Animal welfare priorities poll - Humane World for Animals / Focaldata. Conducted in 2023, with around 6,000 UK participants. 63% feel the Government should bring in legislation to phase out intensive farming to protect the environment and animals. 71% say policies improving animal welfare would reflect their values.
End the Cage Age - European Citizens’ Initiative. This initiative calls on the European Commission to propose legislation to prohibit the use of cages for EU farmed animals for a range of farmed species. It was launched in 2018 and has been signed by around 1.4 million Europeans.
Death by a thousand cuts - Flores et al. Published in 2025, with around 300 current or former farmers in the UK. It reveals that, for farmers, sending animals to the slaughterhouse is “hard” (68%) or even “a horrible day” (49%).
And here are some additional polls on general attitudes towards animals and animal rights:
Causes and protesting - YouGov. Conducted in 2023, with around 1,000 participants in the US. The survey asks about 17 different causes, and “Animal rights” is supported by 49% of people (only surpassed by “Racial equality”, "Religious freedom”, and “Free speech”). It is not among the causes people support the most, but it is one of the causes with the lowest opposition.
Do you think that animals are conscious? - YouGov. Conducted in 2024, with around 3,700 participants in the US. Participants were asked if they think animals are conscious. 53% replied “Definitely”, and 30% “Probably”. Only 17% are unsure or think they are not.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Max Roser and Hannah Ritchie for their valuable suggestions and feedback on this article.
Endnotes
As my colleague Hannah explains in a separate article, there is no specific definition of a “factory farm”. Under reasonable assumptions, 85% of animals in the UK are factory farmed, according to Compassion in World Farming, and 99% in the US, according to the Sentience Institute.
According to some estimates, the practice of ‘chick culling’ amounts to 40-45 million male chicks killed each year in the UK alone. Some countries have banned this practice, but it is still commonplace in most of the world.
This is called the small body problem: smaller animals must be killed in greater numbers to produce the same amount of meat as larger animals.
Cultivated meat is real meat grown from animal cells rather than produced by raising and slaughtering animals. Cells are grown in controlled conditions to produce muscle and fat, using the same biological processes that occur inside an animal. It has already been used to produce animal foods such as chicken, beef burgers, salmon, and pork fat. In 2025, the UK started selling pet food made of cultivated chicken meat.
Ostarek, M., Rogers, C., & Nadel, S. (2026). Knowledge and attitudes to factory farming practices in the UK and US: Can minds and behaviour be changed? Zenodo.
Anthis, Jacy Reese; Ladak, Ali (2025), “Animals, Food, and Technology (AFT) Survey 2017–2025”, Mendeley Data, V2.
Cite this work
Our articles and data visualizations rely on work from many different people and organizations. When citing this article, please also cite the underlying data sources. This article can be cited as:
Pablo Rosado (2026) - “Most people care about farm animals — our food system doesn't reflect that” Published online at OurWorldinData.org. Retrieved from: 'https://wip-stagingserver-resources.owid.pages.dev/most-people-care-about-farm-animals-our-food-system-doesnt-reflect-that' [Online Resource]
BibTeX citation
@article{owid-most-people-care-about-farm-animals-our-food-system-doesnt-reflect-that,
author = {Pablo Rosado},
title = {Most people care about farm animals — our food system doesn't reflect that},
journal = {Our World in Data},
year = {2026},
note = {https://wip-stagingserver-resources.owid.pages.dev/most-people-care-about-farm-animals-our-food-system-doesnt-reflect-that}
}
Reuse this work freely
All visualizations, data, and code produced by Our World in Data are completely open access under the Creative Commons BY license. You have the permission to use, distribute, and reproduce these in any medium, provided the source and authors are credited.
The data produced by third parties and made available by Our World in Data is subject to the license terms from the original third-party authors. We will always indicate the original source of the data in our documentation, so you should always check the license of any such third-party data before use and redistribution.
