Because having 10x the funding we currently have is not a realistic prospect, especially in the near or mid-term future, it is difficult to say exactly how we would allocate this kind of funding.
We can also say that with an unanticipated spike in funding, we would also be able to work on new initiatives that, at this time, we do not have the funds for.
Expansion into corporate fish welfare work is an extremely impactful field that has the potential of positively influencing welfare changes for a large number of fish. Our core grant from THL does not cover any work for fishes, and so if we came into significant unexpected funding, this would move up on our agenda.
We also intend to use our institutional campaigning expertise to undertake corporate plant-based advocacy—asking companies to commit to increasing their plant-based offerings—at some point in the future. As with corporate fish work, there are currently question marks around resourcing this, and unanticipated additional funding would remove those.
First and foremost, however, THL UK would allocate more resources to our existing corporate and legislative approaches if we came into large sums of unexpected funding. Our Corporate Relations and Campaigns Teams are relatively small (5 employees in total) and significant new funding would allow us to bring in extra capacity, enabling us to bring more varied, and intense, pressure to a larger number of corporate targets.
While there are multiple approaches that have the potential to impact farmed animal welfare in meaningful ways, there are also multiple organisations working in the UK and beyond within their specific area of knowledge, skill and focus. For us, this area is securing meaningful welfare changes for animals raised for food, and thanks to our campaigning expertise, we are able to impact the lives of exponentially more animals, and reduce more suffering, by investing our energy in winning institutional campaigns.
Thanks for this question! And hi Klara, thanks for your answer on behalf of THL UK! I also wanted to chime in from the perspective of THL.
If THL were to receive more significant additional funding, we have developed a robust expansion plan for the OWA through 2030. The goal of this expansion is to free one billion hens from cages by 2030 and achieve a critical tipping point in the OWA’s mission to eliminate battery cages from the planet. Campaigns against global companies have worked well, but to phase out battery cages across the globe, we must have a robust and high-functioning alliance in every major country.
Our success in building an effective global alliance is outpacing the operational support THL is able to provide, given our own resource constraints. Our current model of having a single regional OWA coordinator to support upwards of 20 member groups with differing needs across an entire continent is no longer sustainable. As the OWA is one of the only international movement building resources available, our constraints mean that groups are unable to get the training and support that they need, alongside the strategic guidance and leadership development. We also see a huge appetite from groups to expand what the OWA is offering so that we can be an even more effective global coalition.
To achieve the current need and anticipated growth, we need to create small teams in key regions around the world that can then support the differing needs of groups in their respective regions. To scale this up, we estimate this will cost a minimum of $2.5M in 2024, with capacity to increase our OWA grants by an additional $1M, and closer to $8.5M in 2025.
Another program that is primed for expansion is the Animal Policy Alliance—already 14 member groups strong, and we have a goal to reach at least 30 active alliance members by 2025. THL launched the APA in 2022 to organize, unite, and empower local and state-level animal advocacy groups that are involved in issue-based advocacy and implementing legislative strategies for animals with policy agendas that include animals raised for food. These groups harness and channel the grassroots power of a significant base of animal protection advocates in the United States that they then use to create relationships with legislators at the city, state and federal level, and advocate for policies that benefit animals. Over time, through its leadership role in this alliance and through its grant-making capacity, THL will also influence local groups to focus more on farmed animal and food system issues.
THL could effectively use up to $2M to expand the APA team and provide grants to member organizations in 2024. We distributed $500K in grants in 2022 and were unable to continue the grants program in 2023 due to funding constraints. But through this process, we know the need for funding policy work in the US is strong, and that there are dozens of groups eager to expand their advocacy for farmed animals.
Both of these alliances have significant room to scale. We have detailed plans to use 2-3x funding for these programs, but we could scale even further and achieve our desired impact more quickly with additional funding.
For full details of THL’s room for more funding, check out this post!
Thanks for the response Klara- this is really interesting. Am I right in reading you as saying that the provision of your core funding is conditional on it being used for land-based farm animals?
There are no restrictions on our core funding based on type or breed of animal, whether land-based or otherwise.
The only restriction is due to the fact the grant comes from a US 501(c)(3) organisation (THL) and is, therefore, subject to US laws regarding lobbying. As such, this funding cannot be used for lobbying or legislative work, such as our legal case challenging the legality of fast growing breeds of chicken and our fish work, which, up until now, has been solely focussed on legislative action.
Thank you for your question.
Because having 10x the funding we currently have is not a realistic prospect, especially in the near or mid-term future, it is difficult to say exactly how we would allocate this kind of funding.
We can also say that with an unanticipated spike in funding, we would also be able to work on new initiatives that, at this time, we do not have the funds for.
Expansion into corporate fish welfare work is an extremely impactful field that has the potential of positively influencing welfare changes for a large number of fish. Our core grant from THL does not cover any work for fishes, and so if we came into significant unexpected funding, this would move up on our agenda.
We also intend to use our institutional campaigning expertise to undertake corporate plant-based advocacy—asking companies to commit to increasing their plant-based offerings—at some point in the future. As with corporate fish work, there are currently question marks around resourcing this, and unanticipated additional funding would remove those.
First and foremost, however, THL UK would allocate more resources to our existing corporate and legislative approaches if we came into large sums of unexpected funding. Our Corporate Relations and Campaigns Teams are relatively small (5 employees in total) and significant new funding would allow us to bring in extra capacity, enabling us to bring more varied, and intense, pressure to a larger number of corporate targets.
While there are multiple approaches that have the potential to impact farmed animal welfare in meaningful ways, there are also multiple organisations working in the UK and beyond within their specific area of knowledge, skill and focus. For us, this area is securing meaningful welfare changes for animals raised for food, and thanks to our campaigning expertise, we are able to impact the lives of exponentially more animals, and reduce more suffering, by investing our energy in winning institutional campaigns.
Thanks for this question! And hi Klara, thanks for your answer on behalf of THL UK! I also wanted to chime in from the perspective of THL.
If THL were to receive more significant additional funding, we have developed a robust expansion plan for the OWA through 2030. The goal of this expansion is to free one billion hens from cages by 2030 and achieve a critical tipping point in the OWA’s mission to eliminate battery cages from the planet. Campaigns against global companies have worked well, but to phase out battery cages across the globe, we must have a robust and high-functioning alliance in every major country.
Our success in building an effective global alliance is outpacing the operational support THL is able to provide, given our own resource constraints. Our current model of having a single regional OWA coordinator to support upwards of 20 member groups with differing needs across an entire continent is no longer sustainable. As the OWA is one of the only international movement building resources available, our constraints mean that groups are unable to get the training and support that they need, alongside the strategic guidance and leadership development. We also see a huge appetite from groups to expand what the OWA is offering so that we can be an even more effective global coalition.
To achieve the current need and anticipated growth, we need to create small teams in key regions around the world that can then support the differing needs of groups in their respective regions. To scale this up, we estimate this will cost a minimum of $2.5M in 2024, with capacity to increase our OWA grants by an additional $1M, and closer to $8.5M in 2025.
Another program that is primed for expansion is the Animal Policy Alliance—already 14 member groups strong, and we have a goal to reach at least 30 active alliance members by 2025. THL launched the APA in 2022 to organize, unite, and empower local and state-level animal advocacy groups that are involved in issue-based advocacy and implementing legislative strategies for animals with policy agendas that include animals raised for food. These groups harness and channel the grassroots power of a significant base of animal protection advocates in the United States that they then use to create relationships with legislators at the city, state and federal level, and advocate for policies that benefit animals. Over time, through its leadership role in this alliance and through its grant-making capacity, THL will also influence local groups to focus more on farmed animal and food system issues.
THL could effectively use up to $2M to expand the APA team and provide grants to member organizations in 2024. We distributed $500K in grants in 2022 and were unable to continue the grants program in 2023 due to funding constraints. But through this process, we know the need for funding policy work in the US is strong, and that there are dozens of groups eager to expand their advocacy for farmed animals.
Both of these alliances have significant room to scale. We have detailed plans to use 2-3x funding for these programs, but we could scale even further and achieve our desired impact more quickly with additional funding.
For full details of THL’s room for more funding, check out this post!
That’s really exciting to hear- thank you!
Thanks for the response Klara- this is really interesting. Am I right in reading you as saying that the provision of your core funding is conditional on it being used for land-based farm animals?
Thank you for the follow up question.
There are no restrictions on our core funding based on type or breed of animal, whether land-based or otherwise.
The only restriction is due to the fact the grant comes from a US 501(c)(3) organisation (THL) and is, therefore, subject to US laws regarding lobbying. As such, this funding cannot be used for lobbying or legislative work, such as our legal case challenging the legality of fast growing breeds of chicken and our fish work, which, up until now, has been solely focussed on legislative action.
Thanks Klara, I didn’t realise that legal campaigns had to be funded separately, this is very useful info.