放牧为美元:负责任的投资,为健康和可持续的动物农业在澳大利亚

IF 3.6 2区 社会学 Q1 AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Katherine Sievert, Rachel Carey, Christine Parker, Ella Robinson, Gary Sacks
{"title":"放牧为美元:负责任的投资,为健康和可持续的动物农业在澳大利亚","authors":"Katherine Sievert,&nbsp;Rachel Carey,&nbsp;Christine Parker,&nbsp;Ella Robinson,&nbsp;Gary Sacks","doi":"10.1007/s10460-024-10642-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Investments by the global finance sector contribute to industrial-scale agriculture along with its harmful environmental impacts, making their actions significant in supporting or opposing sustainable food systems transformation. Previous research has shown that institutional investors identify animal agriculture as an important consideration with respect to environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues regarding sustainable food systems. This study aimed to explore ways in which so-called ‘responsible’ investors in Australia consider risks related to animal agriculture, and whether existing ESG metrics are ‘fit-for-purpose’ for assessing issues related to sustainable animal agriculture. Nineteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with responsible investors and relevant non-government organisations (NGOs) in Australia. We found that the responsible investment sector lacked mechanisms to recognise the inter-connections between animal agriculture and multiple environmental and social outcomes. Furthermore, we found that investors largely focused on ‘techno’ solutions to the impacts of animal agriculture, such as alternative proteins, through a ‘single issue’ lens. They rarely made connections to other relevant ‘food systems’ issues, such as health. We conclude that holistic approaches are needed to monitor and assess the impacts of animal agriculture in the investment sector and suggest that integrated ‘food systems’ metrics will be necessary to inform these approaches.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7683,"journal":{"name":"Agriculture and Human Values","volume":"42 2","pages":"863 - 884"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10460-024-10642-8.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Grazing for dollars: responsible investing for healthy and sustainable animal agriculture in Australia\",\"authors\":\"Katherine Sievert,&nbsp;Rachel Carey,&nbsp;Christine Parker,&nbsp;Ella Robinson,&nbsp;Gary Sacks\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10460-024-10642-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Investments by the global finance sector contribute to industrial-scale agriculture along with its harmful environmental impacts, making their actions significant in supporting or opposing sustainable food systems transformation. Previous research has shown that institutional investors identify animal agriculture as an important consideration with respect to environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues regarding sustainable food systems. This study aimed to explore ways in which so-called ‘responsible’ investors in Australia consider risks related to animal agriculture, and whether existing ESG metrics are ‘fit-for-purpose’ for assessing issues related to sustainable animal agriculture. Nineteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with responsible investors and relevant non-government organisations (NGOs) in Australia. We found that the responsible investment sector lacked mechanisms to recognise the inter-connections between animal agriculture and multiple environmental and social outcomes. Furthermore, we found that investors largely focused on ‘techno’ solutions to the impacts of animal agriculture, such as alternative proteins, through a ‘single issue’ lens. They rarely made connections to other relevant ‘food systems’ issues, such as health. We conclude that holistic approaches are needed to monitor and assess the impacts of animal agriculture in the investment sector and suggest that integrated ‘food systems’ metrics will be necessary to inform these approaches.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7683,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Agriculture and Human Values\",\"volume\":\"42 2\",\"pages\":\"863 - 884\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10460-024-10642-8.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Agriculture and Human Values\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10460-024-10642-8\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agriculture and Human Values","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10460-024-10642-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

全球金融部门的投资促进了工业化规模的农业及其有害的环境影响,使他们的行动在支持或反对可持续粮食系统转型方面具有重要意义。先前的研究表明,机构投资者将动物农业视为与可持续粮食系统相关的环境、社会和治理(ESG)问题的重要考虑因素。本研究旨在探讨澳大利亚所谓的“负责任”投资者如何考虑与动物农业相关的风险,以及现有的ESG指标是否“适合”评估与可持续动物农业相关的问题。对澳大利亚负责任的投资者和相关非政府组织(ngo)进行了19次半结构化访谈。我们发现,负责任的投资部门缺乏识别动物农业与多种环境和社会结果之间相互联系的机制。此外,我们发现投资者通过“单一问题”的视角,主要关注解决动物农业影响的“技术”解决方案,如替代蛋白质。它们很少与卫生等其他相关的“粮食系统”问题联系起来。我们的结论是,需要采用整体方法来监测和评估动物农业对投资部门的影响,并建议需要综合的“粮食系统”指标来为这些方法提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Grazing for dollars: responsible investing for healthy and sustainable animal agriculture in Australia

Investments by the global finance sector contribute to industrial-scale agriculture along with its harmful environmental impacts, making their actions significant in supporting or opposing sustainable food systems transformation. Previous research has shown that institutional investors identify animal agriculture as an important consideration with respect to environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues regarding sustainable food systems. This study aimed to explore ways in which so-called ‘responsible’ investors in Australia consider risks related to animal agriculture, and whether existing ESG metrics are ‘fit-for-purpose’ for assessing issues related to sustainable animal agriculture. Nineteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with responsible investors and relevant non-government organisations (NGOs) in Australia. We found that the responsible investment sector lacked mechanisms to recognise the inter-connections between animal agriculture and multiple environmental and social outcomes. Furthermore, we found that investors largely focused on ‘techno’ solutions to the impacts of animal agriculture, such as alternative proteins, through a ‘single issue’ lens. They rarely made connections to other relevant ‘food systems’ issues, such as health. We conclude that holistic approaches are needed to monitor and assess the impacts of animal agriculture in the investment sector and suggest that integrated ‘food systems’ metrics will be necessary to inform these approaches.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Agriculture and Human Values
Agriculture and Human Values 农林科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
13.30%
发文量
97
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: Agriculture and Human Values is the journal of the Agriculture, Food, and Human Values Society. The Journal, like the Society, is dedicated to an open and free discussion of the values that shape and the structures that underlie current and alternative visions of food and agricultural systems. To this end the Journal publishes interdisciplinary research that critically examines the values, relationships, conflicts and contradictions within contemporary agricultural and food systems and that addresses the impact of agricultural and food related institutions, policies, and practices on human populations, the environment, democratic governance, and social equity.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信