CONSERVATION EFFORTS AND POLICY LANDSCAPE
Global Policy Context
Which countries have banned or are phasing out fur farming, and what conservation, public health, or animal welfare rationales drove those decisions?
According to PETA:
​
-
Total fur-farming bans: Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Republic of Ireland, Italy, Japan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Norway, Republic of North Macedonia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, United Kingdom.
-
Importation and sales bans: Ann Arbor (Michigan, U.S.), California, U.S. (the state and towns LA, SF, Berkeley, and West Hollywood have their own bans), Brookline, Lexington, Plymouth, Wellesley, Weston, and Cambridge (Massachusetts, U.S.), Hallandale Beach (Florida, U.S.), India, Israel, São Paulo (São Paulo, Brazil).
-
Partial bans: Denmark, France, Hungary, Islington (London, England), Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland, Oldham (Manchester, England), Romania, Spain.
-
Stricter regulations: Germany, Sweden, Switzerland.
​
Several countries do not have data on fur farming available.
​
Overall, these decisions were mainly driven by animal-welfare and environmental concerns, but COVID-19 has also been an important driver here, considering that mink can fall ill with the COVID-19 virus. This was a turning point in countries like Italy, for example. According to the Fur Free Alliance, over 20 million animals have been culled since 2020 on fur farms due to COVID, and over 450 mink fur farms in Europe and North America have been affected.
What does the global trend toward fur farming bans signal about international scientific and policy consensus?
It is clear that the global trend is geared towards total bans, even if the reasons behind them differ or if there are longer phasing out periods. Canada has been described as "unusual among advanced nations in its apparent historical reluctance to regulate fur farming” and its welfare laws have been characterized as “weak” in comparison to other countries (Simon, 2023, p. 188). The evidence on the environmental impact of fur farming is solid, as researchers consistently show that it is a resource-intensive industry with a carbon footprint significantly larger than livestock farming or other corners of the fashion industry. There is also significant evidence that fur farming is a great water polluter, and concerns around the use of toxic chemicals in the processing of the fur for commercialization. The COVID-19 pandemic also brought upon concerns for public health, as several zoonotic pathogens and diseases have been associated with fur-farmed animals (see this study).
What lessons can Canada draw from other countries' “just transition” approaches that supported workers and ecosystem restoration?
This Fur-Bearers report seems like the best resource for more info on this. They look at examples in Denmark, Belgium, Ireland, and BC of how fur farmers were able to either repurpose their mink sheds to grow strawberries, for example, or to turn to other industries such as restaurants, microbrewing, solar farming, and more.
They also specify how governments came up with financial incentives to get people to close out their farms earlier into the transition process. For example, farmers in Belgium were offered “degressive compensation”; the earlier they closed their farms, the greater the compensation would be. There were similar policies in Ireland and Denmark.
