From the President and IFST News

Serving up graduates

From the Chief Executive and <scp>IFST</scp> News

Hybrid meat

Food industry and engineering—Quo vadis?

Trends in food sensory science

Celebrity Chefs and New Meat Consumption Norms: Seeking Questions, Not Answers

From the President and IFST News

<scp>IFST</scp> vision for a <scp>UK</scp>‐wide national food strategy

From the President and<scp>IFST</scp>News

Overcoming barriers to sustainable, healthy diets

Editorial and News

Digitalising food manufacturing

This article calls into question how different the parallel ontologies of meat are in terms of the realities they enact. It argues that while biofabricated animal material is expected to transform the production and consumption of meat, the material’s ontologies reinforce existing interrelationships between the dominant meat culture and the law. Additionally, the expectations surrounding biofabricated animal material vests the material with transformative power, even though it does not challenge the structural factors, namely law and culture, which underlie the exploitation and commodification of animals. I begin by delineating the co-constituting relationship between law, the realities of meat production and consumption, and meat culture. I then unpack the interface between different ontologies of meat and consider why the contest has taken place in legal terrains. From here, I consider the key expectations that have assigned transformative power to biofabricated animal material. I suggest that these expectations work to reinforce existing meat culture, and the configurations of power that benefit from it, as supported via legal instruments.

Editorial and News

From the Chief Executive and News