Ideological Debate Emerges Within Veganuary, the Symbol of Vegetarian Campaigns
Claims Surface That Forcing Vegetarianism May Backfire
The global campaign "Veganuary," known for promoting vegetarianism worldwide, is currently facing internal resignations and heated debates over vegan ideology. On December 29, Yonhap News TV, citing the UK's GB News, reported that a key figure who had been active in Veganuary for a long time has sparked controversy by expressing opposition, arguing that vegan ideology may actually be detrimental to animal welfare.
A representative campaign promoting vegetarianism worldwide, "Veganuary," is facing internal resignations along with debates over vegan ideology. Photo is not related to the specific content of the article. Pixabay
Toni Vernelli, who served as Head of Communications at Veganuary for about six years, recently joined the animal welfare charity FarmKind and announced the launch of a new campaign titled "Forget Veganuary" in January next year. Veganuary began in the UK in 2014 with around 3,000 participants, encouraging people to try a vegan diet for the month of January. Since then, it has rapidly expanded, becoming a global campaign with over 25 million participants worldwide as of 2025.
However, Vernelli argued that this vegan-centric approach could actually undermine the original goal of reducing animal suffering. Having spent the past 30 years in the movement to spread vegetarianism, she pointed out, "Demanding people to give up meat entirely drives away even those who are concerned about factory farming." She added, "There are structural limitations to individual dietary changes, and financial contributions to animal welfare organizations can be a more effective means. There is a clear upper limit to how much people can reduce their meat consumption, whereas, in theory, there are no limits to changing agricultural practices through donations." FarmKind also highlighted that, while most Britons abhor factory farming, they continue to consume meat, emphasizing that the binary discourse of "eating meat is inherently unethical" has actually hindered behavioral change. In response to these arguments, Veganuary immediately issued a rebuttal.
A Veganuary spokesperson told GB News, "It's no different from setting a fire and then donating to the fire department," arguing that "as long as consumption and demand persist, no amount of donations can change the reality in which tens of billions of animals are raised, confined, and slaughtered every year." The spokesperson continued, "Donations may alleviate some issues, but dietary change directly reduces the root causes of animal suffering. The key is not to compensate after harm has occurred, but to prevent harm from happening in the first place."
This controversy is seen as bringing long-standing strategic conflicts within the vegan movement back to the surface. Some argue that vegan ideology, when perceived as overly morally superior or coercive, fuels public backlash, while others counter that animal welfare without dietary change cannot be a fundamental solution. Experts believe that this debate is likely to expand beyond individual resignations into a broader discussion about whether the future of the animal welfare movement should focus more on "individual ethical practice" or "structural change."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
