The paper shows how ‘dietary pluralism’ (the presence of different food-related habits, requirements, convictions) challenges food security (the ‘access to sufficient, safe, nutritious food to maintain a healthy and active life’ World Food Summit, 1996) and, in so doing, raises issues of justice. Three underexplored challenges of dietary pluralism are analysed concerning: (i) requests for the accommodation of religion- or culture-specific practices of animal slaughter; (ii) demands of transparency of the food chain to accommodate different standards of edibility of animal products; (iii) different views of the health impact of eating animal products. To clarify how these challenges raise issues of justice (as opposed to personal taste), we concentrate on the possible tensions and concurrences between the institutions’ duties to protect individual and public health, on the one hand, and freedom of choice, on the other, and discuss their normative implications for ensuring food security in circumstances of dietary pluralism.
