See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/271728937

Halal meat markets in Europe

Data · February 2015

CITATIONS READS

0 883

2 authors:

John Lever M. Miele

University of Huddersfield Cardiff University
56 PUBLICATIONS   264 CITATIONS    81 PUBLICATIONS   1,735 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

An investigation of refugees' entrepreneurship View project

Conversion View project

All content following this page was uploaded by John Lever on 03 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Rural Studies 28 (2012) 528e537

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Rural Studies

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jrurstud

The growth of halal meat markets in Europe: An exploration of the supply

side theory of religion
John Lever*, Mara Miele 1
School of City and Regional Planning, Glamorgan Building, King Edward VII Avenue, Cardiff, Wales CF10 3WA, UK

a b s t r a c t
Keywords: Over the last 15 years dedicated markets for halal meat have emerged in a number of European countries.
Animal welfare While ethnic stores still constitute the major retail outlet for halal meat in most countries, ‘halal’ labelled
Halal meat markets
meat and meat products are increasingly available in supermarkets and fast food restaurants. Market
Religious slaughter
Supply side theory of religion
expansion has also facilitated the rise of new certification bodies, each with their own marketing
Third party certification strategies and interpretations of what constitutes authentic ‘halal’, who question the reliability of
certification policies that allow the practice of stunning before slaughter.
This paper offers a comparative analysis of these market trends and developments across four Euro-
pean countries. Based on research carried out during the EU funded Dialrel project, it draws attention to
the ways in which EU legislation and WTO trade guidelines hinder attempts to standardize halal certi-
fication by giving equal weight to pre-stun and non-stun halal slaughter practices emanating from
different regional schools of thought within Sunni Islam. Whilst recognising the impact of global politics
on the identity claims of Muslim groups across Europe, the paper draws on Einstein’s work on the ‘supply
side’ theory of religion to demonstrate how the diverse halal practices evident in the marketing strat-
egies of commercial and religious actors are now driving the rapid growth and development of halal
meat markets across Europe.
Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Across Europe halal meat markets are experiencing a period of
unprecedented growth and development, though the intensity
varies from country to country. In the UK and France there has been
year-on-year growth for well over a decade, while in Germany the
market is just starting to develop. The growth of these markets is in
some way linked to the increasing number of Muslim immigrants
across Europe and to the growing consumption of meat charac-
teristic of vertical mobility amongst second and third generation
Muslims (Bergeaud-Blackler, 2004; Bonne and Verbeke, 2007).
Halal meat and halal animal products are increasingly available in
non-ethnic stores, particularly supermarket chains and fast food
restaurants, and much as Jewish diners in the US are attracting
large numbers of non-Jewish consumers, so the consumption of
halal meat products by non-Muslims is also increasing across
Europe (Campbell et al., 2011).
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ44 (0) 29 208 74850.
E-mail addresses: LeverJB@Cardiff.ac.uk (J. Lever), MieleM@Cardiff.ac.uk
(M. Miele).
1
Tel.: þ44 (0) 29 208 79121; fax: þ44 (0) 29 208 74845.
As the market has grown the authenticity of the halal meat sold
in supermarkets and fast food restaurants has also been questioned
by some Muslims, who have reacted against the practice of stun-
ning and the use of mechanical blades (in the case of poultry)
allowed in the halal standards adopted by these economic actors.
As Muslims have attempted to reinforce their identity in the face of
war and global politics, the consumption of ‘authentic’ halal
products e particularly amongst Muslims living in non-Muslim
countries e has risen significantly as the legitimacy of Islam has
been widely questioned (Labour Force Survey, 2009; Marranci,
2009). However, while it may be the case that some Muslim
groups are asserting their identity through halal in the face of these
societal concerns, we propose that ‘supply’ side initiatives are now
also significant drivers of change in this context (Einstein, 2008).
Across the EU, an increasing number of religious and commercial
organisations are promoting the segmentation of the halal meat
market through qualification practices (Callon et al., 2002; Tregear
et al., 2007) that have created an image of ‘non-stunned meat’ as
being of ‘authentic’ halal quality.
As Bonne and Verbeke note, ‘halal is a credence quality attribute,
i.e., a product characteristic that cannot be evaluated or ascertained by
the individual consumer, even upon or after consuming the good’ (2007,
36). In the case of meat, the qualification of ‘halal’ addresses the

0743-0167/$ e see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.06.004
 J. Lever, M. Miele / Journal of Rural Studies 28 (2012) 528e537
practice of slaughter, and it is therefore comparable to other
credence attributes that refer to the method of production rather
than to the intrinsic characteristics of the product. As with organic,
fair-trade and free-range products, halal certification also addresses
the ‘ethical’ dimension of production, which suggests that Muslim
‘identity’ can be asserted via purchasing practices. The ‘halal’ status
of meat can be ascertained in different ways; it is often tacitly
assumed for fresh products sold in ethnic butcher’s shops, but
increasingly it is communicated through dedicated labels in non-
Muslim retail outlets. It is this situation that has sparked strong
competition between certifying bodies promoting different notions
of ‘authentic’ halal.
These developments have been hugely controversial in a number
of European countries, creating tension between Muslim and non-
Muslim citizens (especially NGOs advocating better animal
welfare)2 and also amongst Muslims. Dispute between Muslims
emerge from debates about the origins of Islam, which Muslims
believe are derived from two sources e the Qur’an and Sunnah.
While the Qur’an provides a detailed and, for some, infallible source
of information about the origins of Islam, the Sunnah provides an
account based on the application of the principles established in the
Qur’an through the lived experience of the prophet Mohammed, as
recorded in the Hadiths.3 Two prescriptive sets of guidelines for halal
slaughter follow from these sources, and it is the underlying
discourses as they are now interpreted on which current debate and
controversy about the authenticity of halal meat stands.
The first position is based on an understanding that all people of
‘the Book’ share common slaughter practices and that Muslims can
therefore consume meat from animals reared and slaughtered by
Jews and Christians as well as by Muslims. Closely aligned with
mainstream science and animal welfare/rights concerns, this posi-
tion is based on EU legislation for the protection of animals at time
of killing (EU, 1993), which requires all animals to be made uncon-
scious by stunning prior to slaughter. However, this legislation is
interpreted in different ways by different halal certification bodies.
According to the Halal Food Authority (HFA) in the UK, poultry
(chickens, turkeys and ducks) can only be ‘immobilised’ prior to
slaughter using electric water baths, while ovine animals (lamb,
sheep and goat) can only be stunned using electric tongs. The
majority of bovine animals (cattle, bull, cow and ox) in the UK are
stunned with a captive-bolt pistol, but this is not permitted by the
HFA because of the risk that it may kill the animal (see HFA, 2012).4
The second position, which emerges from a derogation of the
above legislation, allows EU member states to grant slaughterhouses
that supply Muslim and Jewish communities an exception from the
requirement to stun animals prior to slaughter in line with the reli-
gious freedoms granted by Article 9 of the European Convention on
Human Rights (see Ferrari and Bottoni, 2010).5 While all Islamic
specialists agree that halal meat must emerge from the act of
slaughter, adherents of this position, common amongst Sunni
Muslims, argue that the status of halal meat is linked more directly to
2
See the recent debate in the Netherlands (Associated Press, 2011; Berg, 2011;
Tyler, 2012).
3
A hadith is a saying of the prophet Muhammad or a report about something
he did.
4
It is interesting to note that the HFA refer to the practice of stunning as a means
of ‘immobilising’ animals rather than making them unconscious, when the current
practices of stunning achieve both immobilization and unconsciousness if per-
formed correctly. However, for halal certifying bodies that endorse stunning, it is
important to communicate to their potential costumers/consumers that stunning
procedures do not interfere with the processes through which products become
halal, hence the focus on immobilization rather than stunning.
5
The derogation does not specify whether the Jewish and Muslim communities
should be local or even domestic, and there is thus great variation in its imple-
mentation, with some countries having more restrictive rules (Simonin, 2011).
529
Islam and to traditional halal practices. On this account, Muslims are
only permitted to consume the meat of an animal if the method of
stunning used is reversible (i.e. animals are unconscious but still alive
at the time of slaughter), the animal has been blessed by a Muslim
prior to slaughter (the ‘tasmiyyahh’) and the blood is allowed to drain
completely post-slaughter. If this is not the case, the meat produced
is rendered Haram (forbidden) rather than Halal (permitted)
(Bergeaud-Blackler, 2004, 2007).6 The main area of concern is with
the perceived risk that instead of being made unconscious by stun-
ning animals will suffer or be killed. As this quote from the Halal
Monitoring Committee’s (HMC) website in the UK states:
“Stunning the animal before slaughter leaves a huge doubt into the
halalness of the animal as many could be killed by the stunning
especially in the case of poultry. Furthermore, it prevents the
drainage of entire blood resulting in it being retained in the animal
and retained blood causes germs and bacteria, it deprives animals
from the benefits of tasmiyah due to it being unconscious, it is
inhumane to animals and causes unnecessary pain and suffering, it
is in reality done not for animal rights purposes, but in order for the
industry to kill more animals quicker so as to increase profits.”
(Abu Ibrahim) (www.halalmc.co.uk consulted on May 6th 2012)
It is this controversy about the effectiveness of stunning that
drives competition to define what is and is not ‘authentic halal’
amongst certifying bodies.
Both the pre-stun and non-stun positions are now permitted
within the EU. However, the acceptance of Muslim slaughter
without stunning has not been linear and EU member states have
integrated the practice into their own regulatory policies in an
uneven fashion, often in line with their own colonial histories and
attitudes towards animal welfare (Bergeaud-Blackler, 2007). In the
UK and France, former colonisers of vast Muslim territories, there
has been little hesitation in upholding the exemption from the
requirement to stun animals prior to slaughter and dual markets for
halal meat have expanded rapidly. In Germany, on the other hand,
where the state did not allow slaughter without pre-stunning for
Muslims until 2002, the expansion of the market has been
considerably slower. The picture is complex. In France and the
United Kingdom there are now recognisable halal markets for meat
from both pre-stunned and non-stunned animals, whilst in
Germany consumers appear less aware of the underlying debates
and the distinction is less evident.
The impact of derogation of EU legislation for the protection of
animals at the time of killing on market development is compli-
cated at the global level by the influence of WTO guidelines, which
require individual countries to give the same priority to imported
products as to domestic products in order to protect commercial
interests. It is our argument that this situation creates further
tensions in halal meat markets across Europe by facilitating a situ-
ation in which diverse halal practices emerging from different
regional schools of thought within Sunni Islam come into conflict to
hinder the development of a global halal standard. While the
growing number of Muslims consuming certified halal meat might
be linked to a number of demographic and societal factors, we draw
on Einstein’s (2008) theorization about the ‘supply side theory of
religion’ to suggest that the expansion of European halal meat
markets is also being driven by production side initiatives based on
a diverse range of halal practices and marketing strategies sup-
ported by commercial and religious actors in an expanding
6
The most common use of the terms halal and haram relate to meat products,
food ingredients and pharmaceuticals, but they are also applied in many other areas
of life. In meat production, they refer to handling, processing, logistics, food services
and animal welfare (see Section 6.3).
530 J. Lever, M. Miele / Journal of Rural Studies 28 (2012) 528e537
‘religious marketplace’. The paper concludes that these develop-
ments are likely to continue in line with the continuing expansion
of the global Muslim population and the EU’s attempt to protect
animal welfare at time of killing without threatening the economic
competitiveness of Europe’s animal farming industry.
The empirical material presented in the paper is drawn from the
EU funded project DIALREL (www.dialrel.eu).7 The main aim of the
project was to improve dialogue between religious communities in
Europe and different stakeholders, including the scientific
community, around the issue of animal welfare for farmed animals
at the time of slaughter. A specific part of the project addressed the
transparency of different distribution channels for halal (and
kosher) meat whilst examining the level of information provided to
both halal (and kosher) consumers and non-religious consumers
(Lever et al., 2010). Given the lack of available data on the actual
number of animals slaughtered according to halal and shechita
(Jewish) methods, and the intermingling of these supply chains
with the non-religious market, this was a difficult task. There is no
obligation to label as halal or kosher the parts of an animal carcass
that are not used for halal and kosher products; when only part of
a carcass is required for a specific market the remaining cuts go into
the conventional market unlabelled (Bergeaud-Blackler, 2004;
RSPCA, 2009). However, despite the difficulties this situation
created the research team uncovered some interesting insights into
the diverse economic and religious practices that are driving the
expansion of dual halal meat markets across the EU. Our method-
ology was qualitative and involved interviews with prominent
certification bodies and retailers in countries that exemplify the
diverse institutional environments and market development across
Europe. Further documentary analysis was undertaken where
necessary, particularly to understand trends at the global level
(Lever et al., 2010).8
The paper contributes to the debate about the role of food
standards and the increasing importance of third party certification
(TPC) (Busch, 2000, 2011; Eden et al., 2008; Guthman, 2007; Miele
et al., 2005; Goodman, 2004) by looking at the growth and devel-
opment of the halal meat market across Europe. It examines the
origins of the controversy about stunning animals at the time of
killing and the implications of these debates for the expansion of
halal meat certification practices. The paper starts off by presenting
some key cases from European countries that illustrate the growing
diversification of the halal market and the different institutional
arrangements deployed to address the controversy between animal
welfare and human rights legislation. These developments have
given rise, we argue, to ‘hybrid’ forms of governance of religious
slaughter through which competing policy objectives are
addressed as single political problems (Lockie and Higgins, 2007;
Stenson and Watt, 1999). The derogation of the requirement to stun
animals prior to slaughter in line with religious motives has thus
been put in place, we contend, to achieve more than one goal
through institutionalised mixed forms of shared responsibility.
Initially the paper examines market development in the UK and
France, the EU countries with the largest Muslim populations. In
between these two case studies there is a discussion of the global
halal meat market and the ‘supply side’ theory of religion, which
structure our argument that supply side initiatives are now
significant drivers of change in this context, promoting meat from
7
Reports from the project are available at the website.
8
The full project title was: ‘Religious slaughter, improving knowledge and
expertise through dialogue and debate on issues of welfare, legislation and socio-
economic aspects’, contract no. 43075 European Union, FP6 Priority 5 “Food
Quality and Safety”. The funding body was not involved in the study design, data
collection, analysis and interpretation of the data, nor in the writing of the report
and in the decision to submit this paper for publication.
non-stunned animals as being ‘more authentic’ halal. The paper
next examines two very different types of market development in
Germany and Norway, before providing a more in-depth analysis of
the attempt of develop a global halal standard and the underlying
tension between the merits of the Malaysian standard and the
economic and religious concerns of the Organisation of the Islamic
Conference (OIC).9 It is the divergent halal practices that emerge
from this relationship, we argue, and their acceptance within EU
policy and WTO commercial discourses, that now play a significant
role in the increasing complexity of halal meat markets across the
EU. We now turn to our first case study, the United Kingdom.
2. The United Kingdom
The Muslim population in the UK is very diverse, thought the
vast majority have roots in South Asia, particularly Pakistan,
Bangladesh and India. The population has increased rapidly over
the last decade; between 2004 and 2008 it was reported to have
grown by more than 500,000 to around 2.4 million, a growth rate
ten times faster than the rest of society (Kerbaj, 2009). The market
for halal meat is also growing at a significant rate, with the Halal
Food Authority (HFA), the major halal certifying body in the UK,
estimating a 30% growth in 2006 alone. However, there is still
a great deal of resistance to buying fresh halal meat at supermar-
kets and it has been estimated that around 70e80% of all halal meat
in the UK is ‘fake’ (Mintel, 2002). Although things are starting to
change as supermarket sales increase, many Muslims still prefer to
buy fresh meat from independent retailers, who are seen to offer
trust in the face of growing concerns about the authenticity of the
commercial forms of halal meat that have emerged alongside
market growth (Fischer, 2010; Pointing and Teinaz, 2004).
2.1. Market growth and development
As the UK’s oldest and largest certification body, the HFA has
been at the centre of much of the recent debate and controversy
created by market expansion. Set up in 1994 to regulate halal meat
through the licensing of slaughterhouses, the HFA emerged just as
halal was becoming an important aspect of Muslim identity in the
UK (Fischer, 2005). Prior to this, many Muslims considered meat
sold in mainstream retail outlets to be produced by people of the
Book and therefore suitable for consumption.
The HFA has experienced continuing growth in line with the
expansion of the UK market and the president estimates that they
now certify around 75% of the UK’s halal meat (Interview with HFA
President, 2010). This figure includes most of the UK’s poultry,
which is slaughtered in large, highly mechanised, modern slaugh-
terhouses where the use of mechanical blades and electrical stun
baths for reversible stunning are commonplace (Higgin et al., 2011).
This method of slaughter is considered acceptable for the halal
standard proposed by the HFA, and it is compatible with the current
EU regulation on the protection of animals at time of killing (EU,
1993).10 However, as noted above, there is no obligation to label
any surplus poultry slaughtered in this way as halal when it is sold
into the mainstream market.
Over recent years the HFA’s position has been criticized by
Muslim organisations opposed to these practices. One such orga-
nisation is the Halal Monitoring Committee (HMC), the UK’s major
9
The OIC is an international NGO that attempts to provide a collective voice for
the interests of 57 Muslim states worldwide.
10
This regulation has now been replaced by the 2009 EU COUNCIL REGULATION
(EC) No 1099/2009 of 24 September 2009 on the protection of animals at the time
of killing, which will be applied from 2013.
 J. Lever, M. Miele / Journal of Rural Studies 28 (2012) 528e537
certifier of non-stunned halal meat, which was set up by a group of
Ulama (Muslim Legal Scholars) in 2003 with a clearly defined
mission to assure Muslims that they are eating ‘genuine Halal’.
Whilst recognising the HMC’s position, the HFA president has
consistently argued that with ever-greater numbers of animals
being slaughtered for halal meat ‘we have to use some kind of
mechanisation, some kind of stunning to immobilise the animal’
(Interview with HFA President, 2009). This argument is highly
problematic for the HMC, who argue that the entire UK meat
industry is tainted by their involvement in the production of meat
which is claimed to be halal but which is not. They argue that the
word ‘halal’ is abused by both Muslims and non-Muslims alike and
that, although difficult, it is possible to keep up with the increase in
demand for halal meat whilst respecting what they define as
traditional ‘halal rules’. They attempt to overcome these problems
through a monitoring and assessment scheme that draws on the
authority of Muslim scholars and a marketing strategy that pres-
ents ‘non-stunned’ meat as being of ‘authentic’ halal quality.
This position has been hugely controversial for animal welfare
NGOs and adherents of the pre-stunning discourse aligned with
mainstream science. The Farm Animal Welfare Council has been at
the forefront of this debate, arguing for the pre-stunning exemption
to be lifted (FAWC, 2003, 2009). However, the HMC contests animal
science’s claim that making animals unconscious through stunning
alleviates unnecessary suffering, and they consider stunning and
mechanical slaughter unacceptable on a number of levels, as we
observed above. They argue that are not against science per se, only
science ‘that might contradict the rules of Islam’ (Interview with
HMC Executive and Religious Scholar 2010).11
Despite these controversies, the pre-stun and non-stun posi-
tions are both evident in the retail strategies of some of the UK’s
major fast food restaurants and supermarket chains. In 2009, the
HFA launched a halal trial at small number of Kentucky Fried
Chicken (KFC) restaurants in areas of London with a high Muslim
population, which has since been extended to many more outlets
across the UK (Interview with HFA President 2010). The super-
market chains ASDA and Tesco first started selling halal meat from
pre-stunned animals in 2000; from 2007 to 2010 respectively they
have also sold meat from non-stunned animals in a number of in-
store halal butchers and specialist world food outlets. An ASDA
executive argued that ASDA went down this path because they
wanted to ‘please all’ their customers, and that the market is
growing because of ‘consumer trust in the local butchers’ they
employ. However, market growth is clearly a defining factor, with
ASDA’s non-stun market now having an increasing year-on-year
turnover (Interview with ASDA Executive 2010).12
3. The global halal meat market and the ‘supply side’ theory
of religion
The stun and non-stun positions evident in the strategies of UK
supermarket and restaurant chains are mirrored in debates about
halal standardization at the global level, where tensions between
Malaysia and the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC)
collide in a way that hinders the development of a global halal
standard and enhances market complexity.
The OIC’s Standing Committee for Economic and Commercial
Cooperation (COMCEC) has been working to develop halal stan-
dards for over three decades. For most of this period they were
11
The HMC has recently become embroiled in a tax scandal in the UK, which has
upset many in the Muslim community.
12
The National Halal Food Group (www.nationalhalal.com) supply’s ASDA’s non-
stunned halal meat products.
531
against stunning per se, but in 2010 scholars from the OIC’s Islamic
Fiqh Academy in Jeddah made a landmark announcement that
stunning could be used in the slaughter of poultry (Nazar, 2010).
Similar developments are evident in Malaysia. When the state
standard MS1500 was launched in 2004 it came with a qualification
that stunning is ‘not recommended’, but in 2009 the standard was
revisited with a commitment to accommodate pre-slaughter
stunning under certain conditions. All this suggests a coming
together of the positions of these two major players in the global
standards project, but if we look a little deeper we see that e much
as EU legislation is a factor in the growth of halal meat markets in
Europe e so the influence of WTO trade guidelines at the global
level undermines consensus in the market by prioritising
commercial interests in a way that gives equal weight to different
halal practices emerging from different regional schools of thought
within Sunni Islam.
It is at this juncture that the significance of halal practices and
the relevance of Einstein’s insights about supply side initiatives
become important considerations in our argument. In opposition to
proponents of the secularisation thesis, who argue that the decline
in traditional forms of religious participation signals a waning of
religious belief, Einstein argues that changing religious practices
now emerge from production (supply) as well as societal (demand)
side pressures, and that different religious packages now offer
different benefits for individual consumers in this sense. Discussing
Warner’s (1993) account of developments in the US during the
1980s, where the emergence of ‘spiritual entrepreneurs’ in a ‘reli-
gious marketplace’ changed the ways in which individuals engaged
with religion, Einstein argues that in a free market religious
suppliers can serve the needs of consumers by marketing faith,
much like food, in any number of ways.
Of particular significance is Einstein’s argument about the
inevitable interdependence of religion and marketing in modern
consumer culture. As Einstein states: ‘Religions create meaning
through myths, rituals, and practices; marketing creates meaning
through advertising and shopping. Religion is the acceptance of a belief
system; marketing is the acceptance of beliefs about a product’
(Einstein, 2008, 78). However, Einstein also points out that the
relationship between religion and commerce has always been
uneasy. While the process of commercialisation has helped to make
many religious practices e feasts and holidays, for example e
mandatory forms of participation in consumer culture, churches
often preach support for those unable to consume in the prescribed
manner. Thus, as Einstein (2008, 75/6) states, while ‘the underlying
beliefs are in conflict, the institutions of religion and commercial
culture do in fact support each other in staying viable’. We can see the
significance of these arguments in the following case studies,
where we observe halal markets developing to a lesser or greater
extent in line with the practices of commercial and religious actors
in an expanding religious marketplace.
4. France
France has the largest Muslim population in Europe. In 2000
official sources suggested that there were four Million French
Muslims, but more recently a figure of seven Million has been put
forward (L’islam dans la République, 2006). Most French Muslim’s
have links with the Maghreb in North Africa, though there are also
large numbers from West Africa and Turkey (Stéphane, 2004).
The French market for halal meat has been growing steadily
since the 1970s, but much like the UK market it has grown rapidly
over the last decade as ‘halal’ has become central to the religious
and cultural identity of many young Muslims. Unlike the UK,
however, where the vast majority of halal slaughter is performed
with pre-stunning, in France most halal slaughter is performed
532 J. Lever, M. Miele / Journal of Rural Studies 28 (2012) 528e537
with no stunning. Notwithstanding these differences, the problems
that have emerged as the halal market has expanded are very
similar; market growth is currently estimated to stand at around
15% annually, with the market valued at between V3 and 5 billion
(SOLIS, 2010). Research participants suggested that calls for better
certification have also intensified during this period, and much like
the UK this trend is reflected in the marketing strategies of French
supermarket and fast food chains. Quick and KFC have recently
opened ‘halal only’ restaurants, while the French supermarket
chain Casino has introduced a halal line called Wassila. Casino
decided to do this, they claim, in response to confusion in the
market. However, their approach is itself symptomatic of the
underlying complexity of the market, with Casino initially using
seven certification schemes for Wassila, including the HMC from
the UK, a development that led the consumer blog Al Kanz to claim
their approach lacked transparency, did not guarantee halal and
was disrespectful to Muslims. As Al Kanz (2009) stated, ‘To invest in
a market without studying the codes and constraints is to risk the loss
of all credibility.’
This situation sums up the French market; it is huge and hard to
define and there is a widespread feeling that it is in a ‘mess’.
Consumers are increasingly ‘warned’ about unlabelled halal meat
and there have been rumours that as much as 90% of commercial
halal meat is fake (Le Figaro, 2010). Certification is sometimes
presented as the solution to these problems, but it has been esti-
mated that there may be as many as 50 separate halal labels and
certification schemes operating across France.
4.1. Market development
The impact of these developments can be seen in the experi-
ences of Group Doux, one of France’s major agrifood companies. Set
up as a family business in the 1930s, Group Doux grew dramatically
during the 1970s to become one of Europe’s major exporters of
poultry. However, despite strong business relationships with
a number of countries in the Middle East since the 1950s, and halal
certification through an organisation recognised by the French
state since the 1990s, doubt has recently been cast on their role in
the provision of halal chicken for KFC. The Communication Officer
at Groupe Doux argued that this situation has emerged as a direct
result of concerns over stunning and two contradictory tendencies:
a ‘hardening of attitudes’ towards halal meat by Muslim consumers
and a ‘growing sensitivity about animal welfare’ by consumers in
general. Discussing the problems that emerged as a result of these
developments, the interviewee argued that the meat industry was
unprepared for the complexity of the problems that emerged as the
halal market expanded: ‘And here we open a Pandora’s box, we
realize that there is not one process, that this is history still in the
making’ (Interview with Groupe Doux Communication Officer
2010).
At this point, we can again observe the tensions that have emerged
as a result of the EU derogation legislation. Much like the UK, the
mainstream position has been challenged by the growth of Muslim
concerns about the authenticity of halal meat, and by an increasingly
complex certification continuum characterised by a diverse range of
halal practices and an increasingly blurred boundary between reli-
gious and commercial culture. At one end of the certification
continuum stand the well-established halal services at the large
urban mosques in Paris and Lyon, which often have longstanding
business relationships with the meat industry. At the other end are
a new kind of cultural and religious organisation, the most famous
being AVS (an acronym for ‘A Votre Service’ (to serve you)). Compa-
rable to the HMC in the UK, this organisation has a growing reputa-
tion for the promotion of stricter ‘halal rules’, professionalism and
transparency. However, the cost of their certification service often
makes it an unviable proposition for the start up halal businesses that
are emerging across France. It is in this context that ‘self-certification’
has emerged as a major issue (Lever et al., 2010).
4.2. Self-certification
A good example of a ‘self-certified’ business is Halaldom, an on-
line home delivery service for halal lamb in the Paris region. Set up
in 2008 by two entrepreneurs, Halaldom initially sold meat as
a trial at the Eid celebration. Instead of taking a full carcass in the
time-honoured manner of the traditional halal butcher, the part-
ners asked abattoirs for ‘a marketed package that they could deliver
to homes’ (Interview with Halaldom partner, December 2009). Nine
out of ten abattoirs didn’t take their ‘AgneauBox’ e a polystyrene
box that holds a 25 kg lamb e seriously at first and it took more
than a year before they were accepted as a serious market actor.
As a young business with an unusual profile, certification was
meant to be an asset to Halaldom and they initially explored
certification with AVS. However, Halaldom’s application presented
AVS with a number of problems, most notably the company’s role
as ‘intermediary’ in the provision of halal, which meant the point of
delivery could not be controlled by AVS. These complexities meant
that the cost of AVS certification was too much for Halaldom’s start
up budget and they began to explore the possibility of self-
certification instead, eventually finding an abattoir with an exclu-
sive halal line and its own certification scheme. However, the
abattoir is not well known and they only stamp a carcass once,
which means their claims about authenticity are not always visible.
Nevertheless, Halaldom does not claim that their product is ‘certi-
fied halal’ only that it is ‘guaranteed to be halal’.13 Their success is
based on a strong communication strategy with Muslim consumers
and the provision of an original product that is compatible with
religion and tradition.
Although they can never fully assure consumers about the
‘quality’ of their product, it could be argued that community
commitment plays an important role in Halaldom’s attempt to
build consumer trust. In line with the Eid tradition, they donate
a percentage of every order to the community, a practice
consumers can follow by donating to a Muslim charity. While
Halaldom’s approach epitomises a new way of selling halal meat in
France, and of doing business well, this innovative new company
also targets and attracts Muslim consumers through a marketing
strategy based on the use of traditional Muslim symbols and
language.
At this juncture we can observe the relevance of Einstein’s
argument about the inevitable interdependence of religion and
marketing in modern consumer culture, and of our own argument
about the influence of different halal practices. Indeed, while
Halaldom’s product is extremely well marketed, their approach
also reflects a lack of consensus in the market. While the owners
believe there are ‘core’ halal standards based on ‘core’ Muslim
principles, they also argue that ‘greater transparency’ in the market
would help to reassure Muslim consumers (Interview with Halal-
dom partner, December 2009). Despite claims to the contrary, there
is little consensus within the Muslim community about halal
practices. While some producers believe that centralization will put
the market in order, others believe standardization will curtail the
opportunities it now offers. In what follows we observe two very
different types of market development, which further illustrate the
interplay of diverse halal practices and supply side pressures (Lever
et al., 2010).
13
As in the UK, meat from animals slaughtered according to halal methods is sold
into the mainstream market unlabelled (Bergeaud-Blackler, 2004).
 J. Lever, M. Miele / Journal of Rural Studies 28 (2012) 528e537
5. Market development in Germany and Norway
5.1. Germany
Germany has a population of more than 82 Million, of which
approximately 4% are Muslim of Turkish origin. Although things are
starting to change, the German halal meat market is still in its
infancy compared to the UK and French markets. Debate about the
authenticity of commercial forms of halal meat has only recently
intensified as consumer concerns about animal welfare have forced
the Aldi and Lidl supermarket chains to think through the impli-
cations of selling halal meat (Schröder, 2009). Consequently, as an
executive from Germany’s major certification body e the European
Halal Certification Institute (EHZ) e pointed out, because German
consumers are not overly concerned about the expansion of the
halal market at the present time, debate about the merits of pre-
stunned and non-stunned meat has not emerged to the same
extent as it has done elsewhere (Interview with EHZ executive and
supermarket owner 2009).
Much like the HMC in the UK, EHZ certifies on the opinion of
Muslim scholars. Unlike the HMC, they work closely with the meat
industry and they permit stunning and mechanical slaughter to
varying degrees in different areas of production. Pre-stunning is
generally becoming more acceptable amongst German Muslims;
fifteen years ago EHZ scholars did not even permit stunning for
poultry; today 95 per cent allow it. Fifty per cent also permit
stunning for lambs, though the stunning of cattle is still forbidden
on the grounds that the captive-bolt method is irreversible
(Interview with EHZ executive/supermarket owner 2009). Halal
poultry is the biggest growth area in Germany, as the regulation is
less stringent than it is for halal red meat. This gives producers
a big advantage in the marketplace and it is an area where
controversy may to emerge as the market grows and expands. An
executive from an EHZ certified poultry processor was clearly
aware of this when he claimed that it would be ‘counterproductive’
to market his company’s products to non-Muslims at the present
time (Interview with Executive at Anonymous German Poultry
Company 2009).
While the German market remains underdeveloped compared
to the UK and French markets, it is starting to get more attention
from international producers and certification agencies. The
German Federation of Turkish Wholesalers and Retailers recently
claimed that German companies would be well advised to embrace
the halal market (Schröder, 2009), while the Malaysian National
New Agency ‘Bernama’ has also drawn attention to the potential
the German market offers Malaysian producers (Mehta, 2009). How
long it takes for the market to grow as it has done elsewhere
depends, it appears, on the take up of these opportunities by halal
entrepreneurs and on the ongoing attempt to foster halal stan-
dardization (Lever et al., 2010). As we observe in our case study of
Norway below, standardization facilitates a more collaborative set
of relations that negates the influence of different halal practices
and the role of supply side initiatives.
5.2. Norway
The majority of Norway’s 72,000 Muslims live in the capital
city Oslo; most are of Pakistani origin, though immigration from
Somalia has recently increased (Statistics Norway, 2009). Animal
welfare standards in Norway are widely regarded as the highest
in the world (Skarstad et al., 2007); unlike the EU, where the
derogation of EU legislation for the protection of animals at the
time of killing allows minority groups to practice stunning
without slaughter in line with their own cultural traditions,
under Norwegian law it is a requirement that all animals are
533
stunned prior to slaughter. While the Jewish population still
import kosher meat to bypass this stringent regulation, collabo-
ration between the Muslim community and the Norwegian food
authorities has facilitated an ongoing process of halal standardi-
zation that has been beneficial for everyone concerned (Lever
et al., 2010).
Unlike the EU countries discussed above, the grocery sector in
Norway is horizontally rather than vertically integrated, with
manufacturers and farmer’s cooperatives rather than retailers
dominating. The major producer of halal meat in Norway is the
farmer’s cooperative Nortura. As well as selling carcasses and cuts
of halal meat in the marketplace, Nortura also supply processed
halal products through their own-label halal brand Alfathi, which
they purchased outright from a Somali entrepreneur in 2006.
Prior to this, the owner of Alfathi worked with the Norwegian
Islamic Council to find a slaughtering method that different
Muslim groups could agree on, and which the Norwegian Food
Safety Authority would validate. As the latter was not interested
in dialogue, this was a difficult task and it took over two years to
convince Norway’s Imam’s that Alfathi halal was trustworthy.
Eventually a small number of Imams travelled to Nortura’s abat-
toir to observe production procedures and soon afterwards
a method of slaughter acceptable to all parties was agreed. With
the Imams operating as certifiers of halal meat in their own
communities trust began to grow and a small range of processed
halal products began to appear in Norwegian supermarkets.
Dialogue has continued over recent years, primarily over the
introduction of halal chicken into the Norwegian market, though
there are worries that the encroachment of the European market
and the emergence of a more mixed Muslim population e
adhering to different schools of thought e will undermine the
country’s high animal welfare standards and challenge the halal
consensus (Lever et al., 2010).
6. Halal standardization at the global level
As global food exchange has intensified, food practices and
religious preference have become increasingly intertwined
(Bergeaud-Blackler, 2007; Bonne and Verbeke, 2007; Fischer,
2008). Einstein’s (2008) work on the ‘supply side theory of reli-
gion’ provides a useful framework to examine these developments,
drawing attention to the increasing interdependence between
religious and commercial culture. Whilst stressing the value of the
insights that emerge from this perspective, Einstein is also quick to
point out that unlike most consumer goods where demand can be
manipulated, the supply of religious goods can only be increased
because a market already exists. It is here that the supply side
changes influencing market growth and development can be
aligned with the call for a global halal standard.
Fischer (2005, 2009) addresses this issue in a discussion of
market developments in the UK, arguing that the lack of an over-
arching halal authority has left the UK market open to fraud and
corruption in the areas where religion and consumer culture meet.
He suggests the UK is in a similar position to Malaysia before the
introduction of their state halal standard and that a common
standard would help to counter bad practices and move the market
forward. The point about standardization is well made, and well
debated, as we have seen, in France as well as the UK, but Fischer to
some extent overlooks the ways in which contradictory influences
at the global level are driving market expansion and hindering halal
standardization. The most notable tension is between the Malay-
sian Department of Islamic Development (JAKIM), the state agency
overseeing halal certification, and the Organization of the Islamic
Conference (OIC). It is to the issues that emerge from this rela-
tionship that we now turn.
534 J. Lever, M. Miele / Journal of Rural Studies 28 (2012) 528e537
6.1. Malaysia’s role and influence at the global level
Since the launch of their state standard MS1500 in 2004,
Malaysia has emerged as a leading player in the global halal market
and the major actor in the global standards debate. As Fischer
(2009, 76) notes, these developments cannot be separated from the
country’s steady economic growth over recent decades and from
‘centralized state incentives’ that have strengthened ‘halal
production, trade and consumption’. Much as in Europe, there is
increasing interdependence between religious and commercial
interests in Malaysia. Unlike Europe, however, this interdepen-
dence is the result of ideologically driven nationalist policies that
have deployed halal to counter accusations of excessive secularism
since independence from Britain in 1957 (Fischer, 2005).
It is these political developments that have driven the rise of
MS1500, primarily as an internal policy mechanism, and latterly as
an important global benchmark. The significance of MS1500 at the
global level is evident in its citation ‘by Codex Alimentarius
Commission [CAC] as the best example in the world in terms of
justification of Halal food’ (Noordin et al., 2009, 1). The Commission
was established in 1962 by the Food and Agriculture Organization
of the United Nations and the World Health Organization to set
global standards in a number of areas, and the guidelines that
emerged have become the ‘most important international reference
point for developments associated with food standards’ (Veggeland
and Borgen, 2005, 676). However, the Codex guidelines have gone
through some important transformations since their inception.
Prior to 1995, they were based on a voluntary ‘gentleman’s agree-
ment’, and so long as members did not interfere with the wider
process of standardization they could refuse to adopt codex stan-
dards if they were not aligned with their own national interests;
political tension was thus generally alleviated because CAC
members controlled the standards they adopted. Post 1995,
however, after the Uruguay round of the GATT trade negotiations,
things changed considerably, with codex standards coming under
the control of the WTO, a development that increased political
tension by allowing members of the commission to pursue stan-
dards in line with their own national interests (Veggeland and
Borgen, 2005). This situation is clearly evident in the halal
market, where different halal practices are often aligned with
diverse national and regional interests.
6.2. Different schools of thought within Sunni Islam
The vast majority of worlds Muslim’s are Sunni (Map 1), but
there are four separate schools of thought/jurisprudence (or
Madh’hab) within the Sunni, the Hanafi, Hanbali, Maliki and Shafie,
each with different degrees of national and regional influence (see
Table 1 below). Although the theology of each is accepted by each of
Table 1
Sunni schools of jurisprudence and their national and regional influence.
Hanafi Hanbali Maliki Shafie
Central Asia Saudi Arabia North Africa Egypt
Afghanistan West Africa Somalia
Pakistan Indonesia
India Thailand
Russia Singapore
Bangladesh Philippines
Northern Egypt Yemen
Iraq Amongst Kurds
Turkey In Kerala (India)
The Balkans Brunei
Western countries Malaysia
the others, differences of opinion are evident on many things,
including halal practices (Wan Hassan, 2007).
These differences were recognised by the CAC in their general
guidelines for the use of the term halal issued in 1997. Although the
guidelines stay clear of contentious halal issues, they recognise that
‘there may be minor differences in opinion in the interpretation of
lawful and unlawful animals and in the slaughter act, according to the
different Islamic Schools of Thought.’ As such, the ‘guidelines are
subjected to the interpretation of the appropriate authorities of the
importing countries’, which means that ‘the certificates granted by
the religious authorities of the exporting country should be accepted in
principle by the importing country, except when the latter provides
justification for other specific requirements (CAC, 1997).’ This justifi-
cation is in line with WTO ‘conformity assessments’, which state
that WTO members must give the same priority to imported
products as to domestic products in order to protect commercial
interests (Lonconto and Busch, 2010). However, as many poor OIC
countries do not have the infrastructure they need to engage with
the global halal market, this allows the non-Muslim countries that
currently dominate global production to export to these countries
unhindered by claims for unanimity. This situation is a major
source of concern within the OIC and there are worries that the
emergence of a common halal standard from outside the OIC will
further prevent economic growth and development within it
(Muhammad, 2009).
6.3. Malaysia’s trading interests vs. OIC growth and development
As the major halal player at the global level, the Malaysian
Government finds itself in a difficult situation, pulled between their
attempt to provide support for their OIC partners lacking appro-
priate halal infrastructure and the need to protect their national
interests. On the one hand, Standards Malaysia provide training for
OIC countries lacking the procedures and knowledge they need to
make the most of the opportunities the global halal market now
offers (Standards Malaysia, 2009). On the other hand, in tandem
with Standards Malaysia, JAKIM have been pushing a strategy to
make Malaysia a global halal hub, latterly through a series of global
partnerships (Muhammad et al., 2009; Noordin et al., 2009). One
such partnership is between the Penang State Halal Agency and the
Halal Industries Group Plc., a private equity company set up to
promote and develop halal in emerging markets (BBC, 2010). JAKIM
plays a crucial place in this process, putting the MS1500 standard
into practice through its role as the sole Malaysian certification
agency (Standards Malaysia, 2010).
Malaysia has had some success in overcoming their competing
priorities, with Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan adopting MS1500 in
2008 and 2009 respectively, but their dual strategy still creates
tensions about specific halal practices in some instances. While the
Malaysian MS1500 standard, for example, which is based on the
Shafie School of thought, allows stunning for all bovine animals,
this practice is not allowed in Pakistan, Russia or Poland, for
example, which all adhere to the Hanafi School of thought. Such
differences were evident across our EU case studies, with scholars
aligned with different certification schemes adhering to different
halal practices within and across national boundaries. As we have
observed above, while scholars from the EHZ in Germany are
becoming more tolerant of mechanical slaughter and pre-stunning
in many areas of production, HMC scholars from the UK increas-
ingly refuse stunning in all areas of production. Not surprisingly, it
has been argued that to be fully acceptable to all OIC members any
global standard must accommodate the concerns of all four Sunni
schools of thought (Oorjitham, 2009).
Over recent years, the standards issue has been taken up at the
World Halal Forum through the ICCI IHI Halal Integrity Alliance (IHI),
 J. Lever, M. Miele / Journal of Rural Studies 28 (2012) 528e537
Map 1. Islam by schools of thought (Adapted from Hashim, 2010).
which was launched at the 5th World Halal Forum in Kuala Lumpur
in 2010 alongside the first four modules (logistics, food services,
slaughtering and processing, and animal welfare) of proposed
standard conformity assessments for the halal market. The Malay-
sian Government played a big role in the emergence of this non-
profit organization, committing RM15 million over three years to
improve access to the halal market for all 57 OIC countries. However,
there are clearly concerns over the influence the Malaysians wield,
and this is continuing to create tensions between the OIC and JAKIM
over the economic aspects of standardization (Observations made at
World Halal Forum 2010). While Malaysia is as dependent on
imports of poultry and red meat as many of its OIC partners, their
role as the major Muslim certifier of halal meat puts them in a much
stronger economic position than most OIC members.
7. Discussion
In a globalizing religious marketplace dominated by unregu-
lated free trade it is perhaps not surprising that attempts to
harmonize halal through the use of standards is often equated with
compromise by some of the actors involved (Hashim, 2010). As
Einstein (2008) states, when barriers for entry into markets are low,
and the benefits for suppliers are high, competition for religious
consumers will be no doubt be considerable. In highlighting the
increasing interdependence of religious and commercial interests,
Einstein also draws attention to the potential for further alignment
in the halal meat market. Norway provides one example of such
alignment, demonstrating how standards can bring together reli-
gious and commercial interests in a way that produces mutually
beneficial outcomes.
In most European Union countries, however, the current (1993)
and forthcoming (2013) regulation on the protection of animals at
14
New Zealand has chosen a different course of action, imposing an obligation to
stun animals for halal slaughter and post-cut stun for shechita slaughter (see
RSPCA, 2009).
535
time of killing provides an exemption from the requirement to stun
animals prior to slaughter. This exemption is motivated by the EU’s
intention to give priority to human rights (i.e. religious freedom)
over animal welfare considerations.14 In the dynamic market for
halal meat this has provided an opportunity for new certifying
bodies to segment the market by making the claim that only
slaughter without stunning produces authentic ‘halal’ meat. The
complexities involved and the lack of clear information and guid-
ance has contributed greatly to the growth of ‘hybrid’ forms of
governance and third party certification within the halal supply
chain. The result is great variation across Europe in the public tasks
of protecting both animal welfare and human rights, which, in
this case, are managed through the performance of government
agencies, supply chain operators and non-profit organisations acting
within institutionalised mixed forms of shared responsibility.
8. Conclusions
For a long time, most Muslim communities in Europe consid-
ered the meat available to them in supermarkets and restaurants to
be acceptable because it was produced by people of the ‘Book’. Over
recent decades the status and qualification of halal meat has been
increasingly questioned by Muslims in a number of European
countries, especially those with large Muslim immigrant pop-
ulations. During this period, a plethora of new certifying bodies and
schemes have emerged to propose different standards for halal
meat with the aim of reassuring the growing number of Muslim
consumers in these countries about the religious quality of the
meat they are consuming. It is this segmentation of the market, we
argue, and the increasing differentiation entailed, that is now
playing a significant role in the expansion of halal meat markets.
At the global level, this process is underpinned by the practices
of the WTO, which prioritize commercial interests. In the EU, where
increasing numbers of secular and religious actors are competing
for religious consumers through the use of innovative and sophis-
ticated marketing strategies, these issues are complicated by the
536 J. Lever, M. Miele / Journal of Rural Studies 28 (2012) 528e537
derogation of current legislation on the protection of animals at
time of killing, which allows religious slaughter to be carried out
without stunning. This situation enables new supply chain actors to
adopt and promote different positions within and across national
boundaries in line with their own particular traditions, establishing
‘hybrid’ forms of governance and third party certification schemes.
Miele et al. (2005) have shown that there is already a tension at the
heart of EU policy discourses between trade and animal welfare
that prevents animal welfare from becoming an object of governing
in its own right, with farm animals being seen both as sentient
beings worthy of respect and as inputs into the agricultural system.
When we throw human rights into the mix the picture becomes
more complex still and we arrive at a situation, as in the UK and
France, where both religion and economics are used to justify limits
to animal welfare arguments. As well as protecting human rights, it
could therefore be argued that the EU derogation on religious
slaughter is helping to drive an important European food market at
the expense of animal welfare.
Frank (2002) argues that self-regulating trade has both
a ‘retarding’ and ‘enhancing’ impact on animal welfare in this sense.
We only have to look to Norway for evidence of this claim, where
there are concerns that the encroachment of the European market
will undermine the country’s high animal welfare standards and
the emerging halal consensus. With the global Muslim population
expected to increase from 1.6 billion to 2.2 billion by 2030 (Pew
Forum, 2011), the EU’s attempts to improve animal welfare
without threatening the economic competitiveness of Europe’s
agrifood industry (EU Animal Welfare Plan, 2006e2010) are likely
to drive the further expansion and differentiation of halal meat
markets. However, as recent attempts to abolish religious slaughter
without stunning in the Netherlands demonstrate (Associated
Press, 2011; Berg, 2011; Tyler, 2012),15 EU policy in this area is
likely to come under continued pressure from animal rights/
welfare NGOs and from increasing numbers of European citizens.
Acknowledgements
John Lever, Marc Higgin and Mara Miele of Cardiff University
conducted the UK research. Florence Bergeaud-Blackler of UniMed
in Marseilles and Maria de Puig of Cardiff University conducted the
French research. The research into the German market was carried
out by researchers at Bsi-Schwarzenbek (www.bsi-schwarzenbek.
de) and by John Lever; Lill Vramo of the SIFO Research Institute
in Oslo (www.sifo.no) carried out the Norwegian research. John
Lever conducted documentary research into developments at the
global level; Haluk Anil of Bristol University conducted observa-
tions at World Halal Forum in Malaysia. John Lever completed the
comparative research and analysis with Maria Puig. Thanks are due
to Stephen Vertigans of Robert Gordon University for reading an
early draft of this paper, and to Jan Edwards for reproducing the
map. Thanks also to the two anonymous reviewers for their
insightful and useful comments.
References
Al Kanz, 2009. Wassila Casino, Thunder on the Halal. http://www.al-kanz.org/2009/
08/05/casino-wassila.
Associated Press, 28 June 2011. Netherlands Parliament Rules Against Ritual Animal
Slaughter. The Guardian. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/28/
netherlands-animals-ritual-slaughter.
BBC, 2010. Halal Industrial Park Proposed for South Wales. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/
hi/wales/8518739.stm.
15
Following the example of Switzerland, Luxembourg, Norway, Sweden and more
recently New Zealand.
Berg, R., 2011. Should Animals Be Stunned Before Slaughter?. http://www.bbc.co.uk/
news/magazine-14779271.
Bergeaud-Blackler, F., 2004. In: Harvey, M., McMeekin, A., Warde, A. (Eds.), Social
Definitions of Halal Quality: The Case of Maghrebi Muslims in France, in
Qualities of Food. Manchester University Press.
Bergeaud-Blackler, F., 2007. New challenges for Islamic ritual slaughter: a European
perspective. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 33 (6), 965e980.
Bonne, K., Verbeke, W., 2007. Religious values informing halal meat production and
the control and delivery of halal credence quality. Agriculture and Human
Values 25, 35e47.
Busch, L., 2000. The moral economy of grades and standards. Journal of Rural
Studies 16 (3), 273e283.
Busch, L., 2011. How animal welfare standards create and justify realities. Animal
Welfare 20 (1), 21e27. http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/ufaw/aw/
2011/00000020/00000001/art00004.
CAC, 1997. (Codex Alimentarius Commission) General Guidelines for the Use of the
Term Halal (CAC/GL 24-1997). www.codexalimentarius.net/download/
standards/352/CXG_024e.pdf.
Callon, M., Méadel, C., Rabeharisoa, V., 2002. The economy of qualities. Economy
and Society 31 (2), 194e217.
Campbell, H., Murcott, A., MacKenzie, A., 2011. Kosher in New York City, Halal in
Aquitaine: challenging the relationship between neoliberalism and food
auditing. Agriculture and Human Values 28, 67e79.
Eden, S., Bear, C., Walkerb, G., 2008. Understanding and (dis)trusting food assurance
schemes: consumer confidence and the ‘knowledge fix’. Journal of Rural Studies
24, 1e14.
Einstein, M., 2008. Brands of Faith: Marketing Religion in a Secular Age. Routledge
EU 1993.
EU Animal Welfare Action Plan 2006e2010, Available at: http://europa.eu/
legislation_summaries/food_safety/animal_welfare/f82003_en.htm.
EU, 1993. The COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 93/119/EC of 22 December 1993 on the Protec-
tion of Animals at the Time of Slaughter or Killing.
FAWC, 2003. Report on the Welfare of Farmed Animals at Slaughter or Killing e Part
1: Red Meat Animals. http://www.fawc.org.uk/reports/pb8347.pdf.
FAWC, 2009. Report on the Welfare of Farmed Animals at Slaughter or Killing, Part
2: White Meat Animals. http://www.fawc.org.uk/pdf/report-090528.pdf.
Ferrari, S., Bottoni, R., 2010. Legislation Regarding Religious Slaughter in the EU
Member, Candidate and Associated Countries, Dialrel Research Report, www.
dialrel.eu.
Fischer, J., 2005. Feeding secularism: the halal market in London. Diaspora 14 (2/3).
Fischer, J., 2008. Religion, science and markets: modern halal production, trade and
consumption. EMBO Reports 9 (9).
Fischer, J., 2009. The other side of the logo: the global halal market in London. In:
Lindgreen, A., Hingley, M.K. (Eds.), The New Cultures of Food, Marketing
Opportunities from Ethnic, Religious and Cultural Diversity. Gower Publishing.
Fischer, J., 2010. Halal Sanatised: Health and Science in a Globalized Religious
Market. In: Tidsskrift for Islamforskning e Sharia i praksis. Fatwa, forbrug og
feminisme, 1.
Frank, J., 2002. The actual and potential contribution of economics to animal
welfare issues. Society & Animals 10 (4).
Goodman, M.K., 2004. Reading fairtrade: political ecological imaginary and the
moral economy of fairtrade foods. Political Geography 23, 891e915.
Guthman, J., 2007. The Polanyian way? Voluntary food labels as neoliberal gover-
nance. Antipode 39, 456e478.
Hashim, D., 2010. The Quest for a Global Halal Standard, Presented at the Meat
Industry Association of New Zealand Annual Conference, Christchurch, 19e20
September.
HFA, 2012. Halal Food Authority: Brief Guidelines for Halal Ovine. Bovine and
Poultry Slaughter. http://www.halalfoodauthority.co.uk/HFA%20Brief%
20Guidlines%20for%20slaughtering.pdf.
Higgin, M., Evans, A., Miele, M., 2011. A good kill: socio-technical organization of
slaughter. In: Charles, N., Carter, B. (Eds.), Humans and Other Animals: Critical
Perspectives. Palgrave McMillan, London, pp. 173e185.
Kerbaj, R., 2009. Muslim Population ‘Rising 10 Times Faster Than Rest of Society’.
The Times. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article5621482.ece.
Labour Force Survey, 2009. http://www.statistics.gov.uk.
Le Figaro, 25 February 2010. Nous avons tous déjà mange de la viande halal ou
casher (We have all already eaten halal or kosher meat). http://www.lefigaro.fr.
Lever, J., Puig, M., Miele, M., Higgin, M., 2010. From the Slaughterhouse to the
Consumer Transparency and Information in the Distribution of Halal and
Kosher Meat, Dialrel Research Report WP 4.4, www.dialrel.eu.
L’islam dans la République, 2006. Haut Conseil à L’intégration. Ministère de
l’Intérieur.
Lockie, S., Higgins, V., 2007. Roll-out neoliberalism and hybrid practices of regulation
in Australian agri-environmental governance. Journal of Rural Studies 23, 1e11.
Loconto, A., Busch, L., 2010. Standards, techo-economic networks, and playing
fields: performing the global market economy. Review of International Political
Economy 17 (3), 507e536.
Marranci, G., 2009. Understanding Muslim Identity: Rethinking Fundamentalism.
Palgrave Macmillan.
Mehta, M., 2009. Germany’s Halal Market Unleashes Opportunities for Malaysian
Suppliers. http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsbusiness.php?
id¼441480.
Miele, M., Murdoch, J., Roe, E., 2005. Animals and ambivalence: governing farm
animal welfare in the European food sector. In: Higgins, V., Lawrence, G. (Eds.),
 J. Lever, M. Miele / Journal of Rural Studies 28 (2012) 528e537
Agricultural Governance: Globalization and the New Politics of Regulation.
Routledge, Oxford, UK, pp. 110e125.
Mintel Oxygen, 2002. Report on Halal Foods UK. http://oxygen.mintel.com/sinatra/
oxygen/display/id¼34617.
Muhammad, N., Isa, F.M., Kifli, B.C., 2009. Positioning Malaysia as Halal Hub: inte-
gration role of supply Chain strategy and Halal assurance scheme. Asian Social
Science 5 (7).
Muhammad, R., January/February 2009. Standardisation: a solution for achieving
economic growth in the Muslim world. The Halal Journal.
Nazar, S., 2010. Stunning Is Halal, Says OIC’s Islamic Fiqh Academy. http://
halalmedia.net/stunning-is-halal-says-oic-islamic-fiqh-academy.
Noordin, N., Noor, N.L.M., Hashim, M., Sanicho, Z., 2009. Value Chain of Halal Certi-
fication System: a Case of the Malaysia Halal Industry, Presented at European and
Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems, Izmir, Turkey, July 13e4th.
Oorjitham, S., April 20th 2009. Draw halal standard from all 4 Sunni schools. New
Straits Times.
Pew Forum, 2011. The Future of the Global Muslim Population: Projections for 2010e2030.
http://pewforum.org/The-Future-of-the-Global-Muslim-Population.aspx.
Pointing, J., Teinaz, Y., September 2004. Halal Meat and Food Crime in the UK, Paper
Presented at the International Halal Food Seminar. Islamic College of Malaysia.
RSPCA, 2009. Farm Animals Department Information Sheet: Religious Slaughter.
http://www.rspca.org.uk/servlet/Satellite?blobcol¼urlblob&blobheader¼appli
cation%2Fpdf&blobkey¼id&blobtable¼RSPCABlob&blobwhere¼11092671626
36&ssbinary¼true.
Schröder, D., 2009. Halal Is Big Business: Germany Waking up to Growing Market
for Muslim Food. Spiegel Online International. http://www.spiegel.de/
international/germany/0, 1518, 653585,00.html.
Simonin, D., 2011. Communication at the International Workshop on ‘Implementa-
tion of EU Regulation on Religious Slaughter’ With Representatives of All 27 EU
Member States, Organized by DG Sanco, 21st of January 2011, Brussels (BE).
View publication stats
537
Skarstad, G.A., Terragni, L., Torjussen, H., 2007. Animal welfare according to
Norwegian consumers and producers: definitions and implications. Interna-
tional Journal of Sociology of Food and Agriculture 15 (3), 75e90.
SOLIS, 2010. http://www.solisfrance.com.
Standards Malaysia, 2009. International Achievements in Standards Development.
www.standardsmalaysia.gov.my.
Standards Malaysia, 2010. JAKIM: Malaysia’s Sole. Halal Certification Body. http://www.
daganghalal.com/enewsletter/january-eNewsletter ED23_featuredhalalarticle.
html.
Statistics Norway, 2009. http://www.ssb.no/en.
Stenson, K., Watt, P., 1999. Governmentality and the ‘death of the social’? A
discourse analysis of local government texts in south-east England. Urban
Studies 36 (1), 189e201.
Stéphane, P., 2004. Les statuts juridiques de l’islam dans l’Union européenne.
l’Institut de Recherche sur le Monde arabe et Musulman (I.R.E.M.A.M),
C.N.R.S Aix-en-Provence, Marseille. http://www.iehei.org/bibliotheque/
PapiISLAM.pdf.
Tregear, A., Arfini, F., Belletti, G., Marescotti, A., 2007. Regional foods and rural
development: the role of product qualification. Journal of Rural Studies 23,12e22.
Tyler, J., 2012. Dutch Compromise on Ritual Slaughter. Radio Netherlands World-
wide. http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/dutch-compromise-ritual-slaughter.
Veggeland, F., Borgen, S.V., 2005. Negotiating international food standards: the
World Trade Organization’s impact on Codex Alimentarius Commission.
Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions
18 (4), 675e708.
Wan Hassan, W.M., July/August 2007. Globalising halal standards: issues and
challenges. The Halal Journal.
Warner, R.S., 1993. Work in progress toward a new paradigm for the sociological
study of religion in the United States. The American Journal of Sociology 98 (5),
1044e1093.