Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION
Horse-meat aversion irrational but instructive
WASHINGTON -- The big story out of the British Isles last week was consumers in Ireland and the U.K. have been unwittingly eating horse meat in several products -- including burgers and packaged lasagna -- labelled as beef. As the New York Times notes, "Few things divide British eating habits from those of continental Europe as much as a distaste for consuming horse meat."
Horse meat is an interesting cultural case. While considered disgusting in Britain and North America ("So hungry I could eat a horse" is an expression here for a reason), over 200,000 horses are slaughtered for their meat every year in the European Union, according to the Humane Society International. It's also a staple in some Central Asian countries -- Kazakh Olympians brought along their own supply of horse sausages to the London Olympics. It seems to be something of an Anglo taboo, though an often hypocritical one. Australians, Canadians and New Zealanders don't generally eat horses, but they do slaughter them for export.
Economist Alvin Roth, winner of the 2012 Nobel Prize, uses horse meat as a central example in his famous paper, Repugnance as a Constraint on Markets. The idea of the paper is that cultural biases against certain transactions serve as market constraints that economists would do well to take seriously rather than dismissing as irrational. He discusses well-known examples such as organ-exchange markets and beliefs about the charging of interest in the Islamic world, as well as more outré practices such as dwarf-tossing.
Here's what he has to say about horse meat:
"Why can't you eat horse or dog meat in a restaurant in California, a state with a population that hails from all over the world, including some places where such meals are appreciated? The answer is that many Californians not only don't wish to eat horses or dogs themselves, but find it repugnant that anyone else should do so, and they enacted this repugnance into California law by referendum in 1998. Section 598 of the California Penal Code states in part: '(H)orse meat may not be offered for sale for human consumption. No restaurant, cafe, or other public eating place may offer horse meat for human consumption.' The measure passed by a margin of 60 to 40 per cent with over 4.6 million people voting for it."
Notice this law does not seek to protect the safety of consumers by governing the slaughter, sale, preparation and labelling of animals used for food. It is different from laws prohibiting the inhumane treatment of animals, such as rules on how farm animals can be raised or slaughtered, or laws prohibiting cockfights, or the recently established (and still contested) ban on selling foie gras in Chicago restaurants.
It is not illegal in California to kill horses; the California law only outlaws such killing "if that person knows or should have known that any part of that horse will be used for human consumption." The prohibited use is "human consumption," so it apparently remains legal in California to buy and sell pet food that contains horse meat (although the use of horse meat in pet food has declined in the face of the demand in Europe for U.S. horse meat for human consumption).
He would argue that laws against horse meat are irrational in a society where eating cows, pigs and other similar animals is considered perfectly acceptable. After all, the British consumers who are outraged about having been fed Polish horse meat were perfectly willing to buy lasagna made from cows that were likely raised and slaughtered in brutal factory farms and felt few moral qualms about it.
But Roth also suggests the fact that they are irrational doesn't mean such attitudes aren't real factors that should be taken into account by economists designing markets. In other words, if you want to stay in the packaged-lasagna business, don't sell horse meat to the Brits. And certainly don't pretend it's something else.
Josh Keating is an associate editor at Foreign Policy.
-- Troy Media
Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition February 14, 2013 A15
More FP News Voices
- Back to Top
- Return to FP News Voices
More FP News Voices
(1 of 50 articles for this year)
Tensions in Gulf monarchies palpable
04/30/2013 5:30 AM 0Poll
Most Popular FP News Voices
- Medicine-wheel garden proves fertile idea
- IOC again denies widows of Israeli athletes murdered in Munich a moment of silence
- Consequences to banks of Libor scandal staggering
- Better for daughters, better for sons
- Early childhood education overrated
- Healthbeat: Study finds that free birth control means fewer abortions and fewer teen births
- Mackerel wars harbinger of things to come
- We uncover naked people making the news
- Supreme Court to hear case of Saskatchewan woman who gave birth in store bathroom
- Abolition of human rights body a good idea
- 'Birth of the nation' was terrible
- Prison teacher ad drew huge response
- Consequences to banks of Libor scandal staggering
- Big Brother should be watching
- Malaysia: Sodomy and democracy
- Column: In the small pond of France, Zlatan Ibrahimovic makes waves like Moby Dick
- Better for daughters, better for sons
- Medicine-wheel garden proves fertile idea
- Column: Italy's "Super Mario" Balotelli rubs bigots' noses in their own ignorance at Euro 2012
- Early childhood education overrated
- We uncover naked people making the news
- Supreme Court to hear case of Saskatchewan woman who gave birth in store bathroom
Ads by Google












You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is register and/or login and you can join the conversation and give your feedback.
Have Your Say
New to commenting? Check out our Frequently Asked Questions.
The Winnipeg Free Press does not necessarily endorse any of the views posted. By submitting your comment, you agree to our Terms and Conditions. These terms were revised effective April 16, 2010.