The Trust Cost of Cheap Imports, According to Farmers

Britain presents itself as a global leader in animal protection and welfare. A report by Animal Policy International, however, found that of the 88 countries that have/are negotiating tariff-free access to UK markets for animal products, 84 countries have welfare standards below those required by British law. This leaves British farmers pressured to compete on price and intensify their farming systems.

We interviewed 6 agroecological farmers in Britain to explore the true cost of cheap imports. This blog summarises findings from a VSF research project titled: ‘Agroecological Farmers’ Perspectives on Animal Welfare, International Meat Trade, and Sustainable Farming Futures in Britain’.

You can access the full report here, and if you take only one thing from this research, we'd encourage you to read the farmer quotes throughout to learn about this topic from those on the ground. We identified four key themes in farmers' experiences, challenges, and adaptive strategies around cheap imported animal products:

1. Animal care and environmental stewardship are central to farming identities.

2. There are both limitations and opportunities in market-based animal welfare governance.

3. Relocalising food systems is key to countering the hidden costs of industrial supply chains.

4. Broader political and cultural change is essential for higher animal welfare and sustainable food systems. 

Theme 1: Animal care and environmental stewardship are central to farming identities

Farmers made it clear that farming is much more than a business: it’s a way of life built on knowledge, responsibility, and care for both animals and the land. There's a strong sense of pride in the work they do, not only in caring for animals on their own farms, but also in Britain’s reputation for world-leading animal welfare standards. Many described a deep sense of responsibility in their role, and a feeling that good farming means looking after ecosystems as well as animals, but that this is very difficult in the face of market pressures that reward efficiency, scale, affordability, and output over holistic care. 

Animal welfare to me is utmost. It's a priority above everything else … if you're not giving your livestock the best life possible, then your heart isn't in it, really (Farmer 2).

I was born into this job, and I do it because I feel a responsibility towards it … a kind of stewardship is how I see it. [And the livestock] are performing a service for the land, too (Farmer 3). 

[Animal welfare is not about] de-beaking or cutting this or trimming that or, square metres of housing space … [it’s about] seeing them as sentient beings. At the root of it is considering the animals' overall holistic health and wellbeing (Farmer 1).

But a lot of people ask me: "How can I send my animals to slaughter? How do I cope?” I have the knowledge that I've given that animal the best life it could possibly have had … We're always there to care for them … and I take solace from that (Farmer 4).

Theme 2: There are both limitations and opportunities in market-based animal welfare governance

Demand for cheap food doesn’t come from nowhere. People are under real financial pressure during this cost-of-living crisis, and farmers are also often operating on stressfully tight margins. The deeper problem is a global food system built around producing as much as possible, as cheaply as possible, where the true costs are pushed onto animals, the environment, and farmers both in the UK and abroad.

Trade deals tend to prioritise price over animal welfare or sustainability, while supermarkets play a major role in driving prices down, hiding the real cost of food, and pushing farms towards more intensive, factory-style systems.

This creates a clear class divide, where higher-welfare, sustainable food is often only accessible to those who can afford it, which farmers recognised as unfair and unsustainable. The suggested market solutions were: better and more ambitious welfare certification that actually pays farmers fairly, clear and mandatory labelling so people can see how food is produced, and supermarkets taking more responsibility for absorbing costs so higher-welfare food becomes genuinely accessible, not a luxury. 

People have this disconnect, and they believe everything should be cheap … I don't know whether the customers expect it or whether, actually, the supermarkets say [or make] the customers expect it (Farmer 5).

It's important that we don't judge people's consumption where it's to do with economic means … I think that's really problematic. We want people to be able to make ethical consumption choices regardless of their income … [But generally, perhaps] we need to eat a lot less meat and be prepared to pay for it when we do (Farmer 3). 

Chicken is one of those things where, really, we should probably be looking deeper into our souls about how chicken is made and sorting that industry out, changing the breeds … [Regarding the meat industry as a whole] … If a supermarket wants to grade welfare standards, it just puts greater requirements on the supply chain. And then it uses it as a marketing tool to say “this supermarket has implemented the [example] animal welfare standard, which goes above and beyond the legal requirements” (Farmer 4). 

Businesses that have world-class products aren't normally scraping the barrel or relying on government subsidies. I think a good incentive [for higher national AW standards] would be for better … more transparent food labeling … We do everything to the highest standards and then go into supermarkets where it’s not clearly communicated. I don’t think a small British flag says enough to reflect the vast differences in welfare (Farmer 2).

Theme 3: Relocalising food systems is key to countering the hidden costs of industrial supply chains

Shorter, more local food systems are a practical response to the problems created by large-scale industrial supply chains. Things like direct farm sales, farmers’ markets, community-supported agriculture, and telling the story behind farm produce were seen as both fairer and more meaningful ways of doing business. And the kinds of food system models consumers should support, where possible. These approaches were described as helping farmers keep a fairer share of the value of what they produce, instead of losing it to intermediaries, while also reducing pressure to intensify just to stay competitive. Relocalisation was also seen as a way of reconnecting people with where their food comes from, rebuilding trust and a sense of shared responsibility for animals, land, and farming practices.

If it’s sourced in Britain, we can have more control over welfare, pollution, and the environmental impact of what we do.  If we outsource [meat production], we can export our bad habits … Ask where your food is coming from. Ask robust questions. Investigate it. And I know it gets overpowering, but food is important … What happens to those animals? What about the workers? Are they getting a decent wage? What about the soil? … Investigate how your food is produced (Farmer 1).

We have no idea of the true cost of our cheap meat on everything, on our health, on the health of the planet, on the farmers. If the trade deal was with a country that had completely banned farrowing crates, it might raise the bar rather than lower it. [But] … I just don't know how some of the more extreme [industrial] livestock enterprises are going to be viable … if you look at the Met Office report for 2050 and the temperatures they talk about … we're going to have to change our diets [as a nation], and where we're currently importing [cheap meat] from, it’s going to get even hotter (Farmer 6).

Buy direct from the farm … and then the farm ends up with a fairer share of the market … and you can have that relationship [between communities and farms] (Farmer 5). 

Quality produce is [mostly] sold through private, non-agricultural companies, whereas we should be creating cooperative structures in beef and lamb, where we retain control of the product through to the end consumer. I think farmers need to do more in terms of taking ownership of our product, branding it, and bringing it to market ourselves, or working with companies that have stronger community links. There’s so much potential in brands because every farm has a story (Farmer 2).

Theme 4: Broader political and cultural change is essential for higher animal welfare and sustainable food systems

Conventional farming today reflects post-war policies designed to increase food production at all costs, encouraging larger farms, higher stocking densities, high chemical inputs, and maximum yields. While it once helped feed the country during hardship and through recovery, many farmers now feel this ‘productivist model’ is outdated in the face of climate pressures, biodiversity loss, and growing concern for animal welfare. It can limit innovation and keep farming locked into intensive, exploitative systems with wide-reaching impacts on animals, people, and the environment. 

England’s Agricultural Transition Plan (2021–2028), involving a shift away from direct payments towards public money for public good, is an important step, but not yet reliable for all farmers. Agroecological approaches, like lower stocking densities, heritage breeds, mixed systems, and fewer external inputs, were seen as key to better animal welfare and long-term resilience. So, meaningful change depends on stronger policy, stable agri-environmental funding schemes, and markets that genuinely reward higher welfare and sustainable farming rather than greenwash.

Change can’t stop at the farm gate: imports should have to meet the same animal welfare standards as Britain, and public procurement (like hospital and school food) should play a much bigger role in supporting sustainable, agroecological food, too.

The government paid [farmers] to take out the trees and hedges … under the pretence of feeding a nation that was struggling after the war. So they did the right thing. And now everyone's like, “You shouldn't have done this”. [Farmers] want to do the right thing, but maybe they don't quite know what the right thing is. They’re not really being provided with that support … [Imagine] you've got all your infrastructure, you've got all your [livestock breed] genetics, your dairy contract is based on yielding a certain amount of milk, [and] your loan is based on your dairy contract. Even if you're thinking, "I might want to make a change here”, you’re trapped (Farmer 6). 

Livestock farming is at a pivotal point, which is why you’re seeing a lot of diversification on farm, driven by uncertainty around subsidies. Farms are looking for alternative income streams, but fundamentally, they are there to produce food, and there’s only a certain number of holiday lets or glamping sites a community can sustain. Environmental schemes on their own aren’t yet sufficient, and what farmers need is clearer direction and coordination from government  (Farmer 2).

[Resilience] means being able to produce food, and that production needs to be low-input crops-wise and high-welfare livestock-wise … You’ve got to have good soil health, and you've got to have a mixed business … [Further, the government should] ensure that any imports meet UK requirements. If you buy a car or a kettle, it has to meet UK requirements. You're not allowed to bring a kettle into the UK that doesn't meet those standards. So why should it be different with food? (Farmer 5).

By not many measures is agriculture working. In terms of farm incomes, pollution, biodiversity [loss]. It's broken … I've been much more interested in undoing some of the bad work that I did and was funded to do. And I decided to do it. I don't blame anybody else for doing it other than myself. Everyone, every farm, is different, every farm is unique, but we have to find a kind of template that works for restoring nature … I think what I’ve learned is about the web of nature and how our actions can have completely unpredictable consequences … I want my legacy to be something that begins to restore that  (Farmer 1).

Key Takeaways

Farmers in Britain are being pulled in all directions: market pressures toward factory farming, environment and animal welfare goals, pressure from supermarkets and campaign groups, and an increasingly complex workload behind the scenes.

While debates about animal farming can be divisive and heated, cheap imported animal products highlight a shared problem that deserves action across vegan and farming communities. It brings together concerns about animal welfare, rural livelihoods, and environmental sustainability in one place. 

Across the interviews, one message stands out: cheap food is not actually cheap. It pushes the real costs onto animals, farmers, ecosystems, and public health. The challenge, then, is not just to support farmers, but to rethink the systems that decide what food is worth. That means asking harder questions about where our food comes from, choosing to support more transparent, ethical and ecological food systems where possible, and pushing for policies and markets that make high-welfare, sustainable food the accessible norm rather than an indulgence or exception. 

What can you do?

• Sign the petition on our home page.
  

• Join Communities Against Factory Farming.
  

• Join community food projects, cooperatives, or campaigns working toward fairer food systems.

  
  

• Attend local farmers’ markets and buy directly from producers (where possible) to support independent and local food initiatives rather than relying on large retailers alone.
  

• Share this research and start conversations about the hidden costs of food production.
  

• Contact local MPs and policymakers to advocate for stronger environmental, welfare, and rural support policies. You can also join the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Animal Welfare.

Lead Researcher and Author: Eve Marshall