Muslim Consumers’ Perspectives
On Animal Welfare in Halal Production and Dietary Choices in Türkiye
Executive Summary
Halal, an Arabic term meaning what is permissible under Islamic law, guides the consumption and lifestyle choices of nearly two billion Muslims worldwide. In the context of food, halal refers to products that meet specific religious criteria for sourcing, preparation, and processing. For many consumers, halal is not merely a dietary requirement but part of a broader moral framework, often associated with compassion, cleanliness, and the ethical treatment of animals involved in food production.
As the global Muslim population grows and demand for halal products expands, the halal sector has become one of the fastest-growing segments of the global food economy. Understanding how consumers interpret halal in relation to animal treatment, and how faith-based perspectives shape dietary choices, is therefore critically important. A closer examination of these perceptions can help inform more effective and context-sensitive strategies to advance animal protection and institutional reform within halal food systems—an area that has received limited attention in research to date.
This study aims to address this gap by analyzing survey responses from 788 Muslim adults in Türkiye (fielded February–March 2025) regarding (i) views on animal welfare in halal production and related religious perspectives on dietary choices, and (ii) perceptions of who is responsible for ensuring animal welfare in halal products. The findings provide an overview of how halal, animal welfare, and responsibility are understood in this context. In what follows, we summarize the key findings and outline relevant recommendations for advocacy organizations.
Key Findings and Recommendations
Key finding: Animal welfare is widely seen as a requirement for halal status, and halal is often perceived as offering better treatment than non-halal systems. Nearly seven in ten participants (69.7%) agree that animals must be well treated throughout their lives and that welfare standards must be met for a product to qualify as halal, and more than half (55.7%) believe halal production provides better treatment than non-halal systems. These views are especially common among those who consider halal consumption very important.
Recommendation: Frame welfare improvements as strengthening halal integrity by aligning practices with widely held consumer expectations. Where gaps exist between expectations and current practices, carefully tested efforts to share this information with consumers may help generate public demand for stronger standards and oversight.
Key finding: Halal certification bodies and government institutions are seen as primarily responsible for ensuring good treatment of animals in halal production. Participants who view animal welfare as a requirement for halal status most often assign responsibility to halal certification bodies (80.0%) and government institutions (77.6%), followed by factories and farms involved in the production (67.9%). Religious authorities and consumers are seen as less central. Overall, responsibility is understood mainly as institutional.
Recommendation: Communicate these expectations directly to certifiers and regulators. Emphasizing that many consumers see animal welfare as part of their responsibility may support efforts to strengthen standards, oversight, and transparency.
Key finding: Those who place high importance on halal are more likely to see religious actors and consumers as responsible. Participants who consider consuming halal food “very important” are more likely to assign responsibility not only to certification bodies and government institutions, but also to religious authorities, religious leaders, and consumers. For this group, ensuring good treatment of animals appears to be a shared responsibility that extends beyond formal oversight.
Recommendation: Consider engaging religious scholars and community leaders in dialogue on animal welfare and halal principles. Referencing consumer expectations may help strengthen these discussions and build support for welfare-related initiatives within religious contexts.
Key finding: While animal welfare is widely viewed as a requirement for halal, stunning remains controversial. Only 17.3% of participants support permitting stunning in halal slaughter. Support is particularly low among those who place high importance on halal consumption and those who report higher religious practice. This indicates that endorsement of animal welfare as a principle does not necessarily imply support for all specific practices intended to improve animal welfare.
Recommendation: Investigate the specific religious and practical concerns underlying opposition to stunning and engage religious authorities and certification bodies in structured discussions about permissible welfare-improving practices. Public communication can reference stunning methods accepted under some halal food production processes internationally, and explain the conditions under which they are considered compliant.
Key finding: A majority of participants view plant-based diets as compatible with Islam. Around 62.1% agree that choosing a plant-based diet does not raise objections from an Islamic perspective.
Recommendation: Incorporate this perception into outreach and communication efforts. Highlighting that many consumers view plant-based choices as compatible with halal principles may support engagement on dietary change. At the same time, further research should explore the reasons behind reservations among some groups to better understand potential barriers to acceptance.
