Climate change compels us to rethink the ethics of our dietary choices and has become an interesting issue for ethicists concerned about diets, including animal ethicists. The defenders of veganism have found that climate change provides a new reason to support their cause because many animal-based foods have high greenhouse gas emissions. The new style of argumentation, the ‘climatic argument(s) for veganism’, may benefit animals by persuading even those who are not concerned about animals themselves but worry about climate change. The arguments about the high emissions of animal-based food, and a resulting moral obligation to abstain from eating such products, are an addition to the prior forms of argument for principled veganism grounded on the moral standing of, and concern for, nonhuman animals. In this paper, we examine whether the climatic argument for veganism is convincing. We propose a formulation for the amended version of the argument and discuss its implications and differences compared to the moral obligations of principled veganism. We also reflect upon the implications of our findings on agricultural and food ethics more generally.

中文翻译：

---

气候素食主义有令人信服的理由吗？

气候变化迫使我们重新思考我们饮食选择的伦理问题，并已成为关注饮食的伦理学家，包括动物伦理学家的一个有趣的问题。素食主义的捍卫者发现，气候变化为支持他们的事业提供了新的理由，因为许多动物性食品的温室气体排放量很高。新的论证方式，即“素食主义的气候论证”，甚至可以说服那些不关心动物本身但担心气候变化的人，从而使动物受益。关于动物性食物的高排放的论点，以及由此产生的不吃此类产品的道德义务，是对基于非人类动物的道德地位和关注的原则性素食主义的先前论点形式的补充。在本文中，我们检查素食主义的气候论点是否令人信​​服。我们为该论点的修正版本提出了一个公式，并讨论了它与有原则的素食主义的道德义务相比的含义和差异。我们还更广泛地反思了我们的发现对农业和食品伦理的影响。