Too Expensive or Too Cheap? A Review of ‘Fake Meat Displacing Real Meat’

Foodthink’s Take

I believe the reason *Fake Meat Displaces Real Meat* has garnered so much attention is that everyone reads something different into it. If we outline the main themes, there are roughly three threads:

The first thread is that yak prices are too low.

Although the cost of rearing animals on natural pastures is relatively low, it remains difficult to withstand the shock of low-priced imported beef. In recent years, herders have found it hard to sell their yaks at a reasonable price, leading to precarious livelihoods.

In my view, to clarify this issue, we need to understand: have the prices of grass-fed yaks actually fallen, or have production costs for herders risen? Or is it that the rising cost of living has increased cash expenditure, meaning the income from selling yaks no longer covers these costs, making the prices appear to have dropped in relative terms?

Some argue that the way to solve the livelihood problem for herders is to sell yak meat at a premium, using slogans such as “They eat Cordyceps, drink mineral water, and produce Liuwei Dihuang pills,” thereby increasing herders’ income.

If we delve deeper into the logic here, we find that it is the market, not the herders, that needs to hear this story. Conversely, if beef and mutton prices were truly pushed higher, would local herders still be able to afford them? On the contrary, high prices might make them entirely unaffordable.

For instance, twenty or thirty years ago, Cordyceps were very common in Tibetan areas and could be picked up and chewed on a whim. But as the market price soared to 200,000 yuan per jin, would the herders picking them still be willing to eat them?

This leads to the second thread of the article: as marketisation develops, the price of local grass-fed beef rises, making high-priced grass-fed yak meat unaffordable for local herders.

To tell this story more comprehensively, we need to understand the causes of these high prices—is it due to decreased production, rising costs, or malicious market manipulation? Or is it that the income levels of local residents are too low compared to the price of the meat?

Furthermore, we must ask: who exactly can no longer afford grass-fed beef? If herders in urban areas cannot afford it, then who is ultimately consuming this beef?

The third logic presented by the two authors is that middlemen manipulate the market, leading to the paradoxical simultaneous occurrence of falling yak prices and rising yak meat prices.

To help readers grasp this logic, there is a need to further understand the market mechanisms for yak meat and grass-fed beef, and the nature of the relationship between producers and middlemen.

We can also read a grand narrative of capitalist monopoly into this story: how capitalism uses its advantages in capital, technology, and markets to destroy local economies and secure a monopolistic economic position.

From a capitalist perspective, the notion that “herders should naturally eat the meat they produce” is illogical. In a marketised environment, we typically do not consume what we produce; instead, we exchange our own competitive products for the competitive products of others.

The act of not consuming one’s own products is precisely the logic of the market; this may indeed sound cruel. In other words, if market logic is followed to the letter, it inevitably leads to a situation where herders are unable to eat their own local grass-fed meat.

From a sociological perspective, the transformation of beef and lamb from basic necessities into luxury goods—making them unaffordable for ordinary herders who have settled in towns—is a form of “disembedding” brought about by the process of marketisation.

But is there a logic beyond that of the market?

For millennia, beef and lamb have been more than mere sources of protein and calories for survival; they embody complex layers of meaning, encompassing taste, culture, and identity. Consequently, they should not be governed solely by market logic, but should instead return to the logic of the rural community.

Perhaps the more pressing question is how to “re-embed” beef and lamb into traditional pastoral societies, and how to strike a balance between market logic and the logic of rural communities. It is indeed a perplexing challenge.

Furthermore, we can discern the differences between young and old herders, and between those who remain on the pastures and those who have migrated to urban areas. Ultimately, through the reader’s imagination, this article reveals numerous stories, with many more threads and logics left to contemplate.