This blog post examines the ethical conflict and legalization debate surrounding dog meat, a traditional part of Korea’s food culture, and where it is unfolding.
The debate over Korea’s dog meat culture has persisted for a long time. Korean animal lover groups and animal protection associations criticize the dog meat culture and consistently oppose the legalization of dogs as livestock. This is largely because dogs have long been recognized as beloved pets, treated as family members. The dog meat culture also faces persistent criticism internationally, being labeled barbaric and something that should disappear. A notable example occurred during the 1988 Seoul Olympics, when authorities ordered all boshintang restaurants in Seoul to remove their signs or replace the word ‘boshintang’ with alternatives like ‘sacheoltang’ or ‘yeongyangtang’ on their signage to avoid negative foreign media coverage.
Recently, however, voices are growing that argue affection or compassion for dogs cannot forever block the legalization of the dog meat industry. The need for legalization stems from the fact that demand for dog meat has consistently existed above a certain level, and a significant number of citizens seek it. Furthermore, some argue that rejecting dog meat as part of our unique culture denies the value of cultural relativism. In this context, the government inevitably faces significant deliberation over the issue of legalizing dog meat. Legalization would invite fierce criticism from animal rights groups and overseas, while delaying it indefinitely invites criticism for cultural subservience.
Before debating the pros and cons of legalizing dog meat, examining its nutritional properties and cultural characteristics reveals that dog meat is nutritionally rich in essential amino acids and has a nutrient composition similar to beef, pork, and chicken. The Donguibogam describes dog meat as having a ‘warm nature that aids blood circulation, soothes the five organs, and stimulates yang energy to enhance vitality.’ Furthermore, dog meat has a tender texture that shreds easily during cooking, making it much more digestible than other meats. It is a versatile ingredient with numerous advantages and appeal, as its nutrient content can be maximized through various cooking methods.
Historically, dogs are believed to be the first animals domesticated by humans on the Korean Peninsula. Traces of dog meat culture can be found in various archaeological sites and literature dating back to the Three Kingdoms period. The custom of eating bosintang (dog meat soup) on Boknal (the hottest days of summer) is also a unique tradition passed down from the Joseon Dynasty. Representative Joseon-era cookbooks, such as Joseon Musang Sin Sik Yori Jeobeop (The Ultimate New Style Cooking Methods of Joseon), Gyeongdo Japji (Gyeongdo Miscellany), and Gyuhap Chongseo (The Complete Collection of the Gyuhap), also detail dog meat dishes extensively. South Korea is the only country where the culture of eating dog meat is widespread throughout the entire nation. As such, dog meat possesses various advantages as a food ingredient and can be considered part of our country’s traditional food culture. These characteristics provide grounds that lend strength to those who support the legalization of dog meat.
However, the truly necessary reason for legalizing dog meat lies in the hygienic aspect. In Korea, comprehensive hygiene management of livestock products is governed by the Livestock Products Sanitation Management Act established by the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety. Article 2, Paragraph 1 of the Livestock Products Sanitation Management Act defines livestock as cattle, horses, sheep, pigs, chickens, ducks, and other animals raised for food (deer, rabbits, turkeys, geese, quails, pheasants, donkeys). These animals fall under the scope of the Livestock Products Sanitation Control Act, and their sale and distribution are conducted through strict procedures. In practice, the Act addresses inspection methods, inspectors, inspection locations, and pass standards for meat products in great detail. Every step of the process—from slaughter, processing, and packaging methods to storage, transportation, distribution, and sale—is strictly and hygienically managed under the Act until the products reach consumers. Specifically, according to the Enforcement Rules of the Livestock Products Sanitation Control Act, livestock products must be transported using a cold chain system to maintain refrigerated or frozen conditions. The cold chain system refers to a system that prevents food spoilage and quality degradation by distributing food at temperatures below ambient conditions, from the moment of processing until delivery to the consumer.
Meat is a food group that absolutely requires a cold chain system, alongside dairy products, because if not managed at low temperatures, its freshness rapidly declines, microorganisms proliferate, and it spoils quickly. However, since dogs are not recognized as livestock, all industries involved in the distribution and sale of dog meat are effectively illegal. In other words, without the deterrent of legal sanctions, there is no need to transparently disclose the distribution and sales processes, nor is there any requirement to follow hygienic and safe procedures. Put simply, when dog meat dishes appear on the table, there is absolutely no way to know whether this meat is fit for human consumption or not, or whether the slaughter and distribution processes were hygienic. Considering the persistent high demand for dog meat in Korea, a significant portion of the population is currently facing health risks and is denied their right to know about dog meat products. This is a serious and major problem. The government must step in to legalize the dog meat industry and then strictly manage the slaughter, distribution, processing, and sale of dogs for consumption, just as it does for other meats.
The introduction of an HACCP certification system for dog meat is also urgently needed. Given that HACCP certification is effectively mandatory rather than optional for the processing and distribution of livestock products, dog meat must also be provided to consumers safely and hygienically through HACCP. HACCP (Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point), commonly referred to as the ‘Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point system’, is a framework designed to eliminate hazards affecting the safety of livestock products throughout the entire process: from livestock rearing, slaughter, processing, packaging, to distribution. HACCP implementation is rigorously carried out through 7 principles and 12 procedures. Hazard factors are broadly categorized into biological, chemical, and physical agents, including microorganisms, parasites, chemicals, pesticides, drug residues, food additives, colorants, hair, dust, and metal fragments. Furthermore, strict standards are applied to workplace conditions such as temperature, pressure, and pH. While HACCP certification is not a legally mandated requirement, facilities without it often lose consumer trust due to perceived hygiene issues and face market rejection. Since dogs are not legally recognized as livestock, the dog meat industry currently has no incentive to adopt the HACCP certification system. Emphasizing hygiene and ensuring transparent distribution processes is costly and requires complex facility setup. Therefore, unless subject to legal oversight, the industry is unlikely to adopt HACCP certification.
Opposition to legalizing the dog meat industry has the unintended consequence of forcing the government to stand by without imposing any sanctions on the distribution and sale of dog meat, whose sources and processes remain unknown. Considering that demand for dog meat has been consistently high and will likely remain so, it is essential for public health and safe food consumption to redefine dogs raised for meat and amend laws so that the Livestock Products Sanitary Control Act applies equally to dog meat. Furthermore, alongside legalization, the HACCP certification system must be widely adopted so consumers can safely consume dog meat with confidence regarding its hygiene, just like other livestock products. Furthermore, it is necessary to consider public health and industrial ethics.
