“Veganism Would Devastate the Economy and Cause Massive Unemployment”

The world will not go vegan overnight. Any shift in diets would occur over years or decades, allowing markets and workers to transition gradually.

With ample time to adapt, farmers can shift to growing crops, and companies can diversify into alternative proteins. Studies suggest a gradual transition, with one analysis projecting that by 2040, most meat consumption will come from plant-based or cultured alternatives rather than slaughtered animals (an AT Kearney analysis, as reported by The Guardian).²

Recent modeling studies suggest that even ambitious scenarios, such as global substitution of 50% of animal products with plant-based alternatives by 2050, would occur over multiple decades.³ This timeframe allows for measured economic transitions rather than abrupt displacement.⁴

Policy can further cushion the change: governments could offer retraining programs or subsidies to help agricultural communities transition to new livelihoods. In short, the shift toward veganism can be managed through a transition over time, not an abrupt shock.⁵

A global shift away from animal products isn’t just about reducing harm—it could drive economic revitalization. By eliminating the costly inefficiencies of using animals as intermediaries in food production, societies can streamline their systems, reduce waste, and save billions in healthcare and environmental costs, all while creating jobs and expanding new industries that support public well-being.

• More Plants, More Jobs. A 2025 Faunalytics study suggests that shifting toward more plant-based eating could result in considerable job creation. A scenario with moderate growth results in a few thousand new jobs, while significant growth leads to the creation of tens of thousands. In both scenarios, more plant-based eating corresponds to more job creation.⁶
• Higher GDP and Tax Revenue. A move toward a plant-based economy could realistically boost both GDP and tax revenue. According to the same 2025 Faunalytics study that projected job growth, a substantial expansion of the plant-based sector could add about 4% more to the U.S. GDP and increase total tax revenue by around 2%.⁷
• Healthcare Savings. A study published by the National Academy of Sciences calculates a health-care savings of around $1,067 billion annually with a vegan diet.⁸ That’s over $3,000 for each person in the United States. Savings stem from the reduced need for medical care, as a vegan diet tends to decrease the likelihood of health issues.
• Environmental Savings. A transition to plant-based food systems, which generally have a significantly lower environmental footprint, can lead to substantial cost reductions. Similar to healthcare savings, reduced environmental damage means fewer resources are spent on cleanup, disaster recovery, and managing the consequences of resource scarcity, all of which are real economic costs.
  • A 2023 study published in Nature Food found that reducing consumption of animal-based foods could avoid up to $5.7 trillion in economic losses tied to ecosystem quality decline. These avoided costs reflect reduced environmental damage such as deforestation, land degradation, and biodiversity loss, demonstrating how dietary shifts can help protect natural systems that are critical to long-term economic resilience.⁹
  • An Oxford Martin School study estimated that the economic benefits derived from reduced greenhouse gas emissions resulting from dietary changes could amount to as much as $570 billion (globally) annually.¹⁰

People are willing to pay more. Even if a vegan transition does entail economic adjustments, people often prioritize ethics and sustainability over short-term financial considerations. We’ve seen this in public opinion and historical actions.

• While we advocate for an end to animal exploitation rather than incremental welfare reforms, it’s telling that many Americans are willing to spend more to reduce animal suffering within the current system. According to a 2024 American Humane survey of 1,003 U.S. adults, 58% said they would pay a premium for products labeled as humanely raised.¹¹
• A PwC global consumer survey in 2024 found consumers willing to spend nearly 10% more, on average, for sustainably produced goods—evidence that principles (like sustainability) can trump pure price concerns.¹²

Economies have historically shown resilience and adaptability during major transitions, such as the Industrial Revolution, automation, and the decline of key industries like whaling. These shifts typically span decades, allowing time for societal adjustment and economic restructuring.

Examples:

• The mechanization of agriculture in the 20th century caused far more significant employment disruption than dietary shifts would likely produce. For example, in 1900, about 40 percent of the U.S. workforce was employed in agriculture; by 2000, that share had dropped to under 2 percent.¹³ Yet, economies successfully adapted through worker migration to other sectors, educational investments, and the development of new industries that absorbed displaced labor. The economy didn’t collapse; it evolved and grew stronger.¹⁴
• Another example of how the economy can adapt is what happened when cars replaced horse-drawn carriages in the early 1900s. Jobs tied to horses—like carriage makers, blacksmiths, and stable hands—faded out, but at the same time, the booming auto industry created millions of new jobs in areas like car manufacturing, maintenance, gas stations, and building roads from 1910 to the 1930s.¹⁵
• The decline of the whaling industry, once a significant economic pillar, was gradually superseded by the use of petroleum. These innovations, coupled with the increasing scarcity of whales due to overhunting, rendered whaling economically unsustainable. As a result, capital and labor transitioned to burgeoning industries like petroleum refining, illustrating how technological progress can redirect economic structures and labor markets.¹⁶

Change is the only constant in the economy. Entire industries have faded—such as telephone operators, VHS rental stores, and print newspaper jobs—while new ones have emerged, including cellular networks, streaming services, and digital media. There’s no reason to think that phasing out animal exploitation would defy this trend. In fact, it will continue to drive innovation in areas like protein production and cruelty-free fashion, creating new, diverse job opportunities.

When society has decided something is fundamentally wrong, it has acted despite dire economic warnings.

• Abolition of slavery in the 19th century is an example: opponents argued Britain’s wealth “rested on goods produced by slaves” and that ending the slave trade would destroy jobs and prosperity. Moral conviction prevailed, slavery was abolished, and the economy adapted and grew through the Industrial Revolution.¹⁷
• Industries once warned that banning child labor would cripple the economy, citing increased costs and job losses. Yet society ultimately chose to protect children, prioritizing ethical progress over profit. Over time, the economy adapted to the new standards. This reflects a broader truth: people are often willing to support economic shifts in the service of humane and moral advancement.¹⁸