In order to redesign the political framework for animal husbandry in Germany, the federal government has convened new advisory committees since 2019: the Competence Network for Livestock Husbandry (“Borchert Commission”), which stopped its work in the summer of 2023 at its own request, and the Agriculture Future Commission (ZKL). This article comparatively examines how these committees implement the stakeholder dialogue and to what extent the social dialogue on the future of animal husbandry is adequately represented. The analysis includes the results of the “SocialLab Future Workshop for Agricultural Animal Husbandry”, which was implemented as a scientific project parallel to the commissions. The focus is on comparing the thematic orientation and forms of participation as well as the objectives put forward for animal husbandry. If state committees are to reflect the social debate about the future of animal husbandry, they must take two developments into account. Firstly, a paradigm shift in agricultural policy is on the horizon: the preservation of large animal populations in Germany and the expansion of animal husbandry are no longer unquestioned starting points for the debate. The acceptance and demand to replace animal products with suitable alternatives is increasing. This goes hand in hand with economic actors' fears of loss and existence related to livestock farming. Secondly, the landscape of actors is changing. Today, the interests of agriculture are represented by a large number of heterogeneous actors. In addition, the representation of animal and environmental protection is becoming increasingly important in the debate. According to their self-image, animal protection actors represent the full interests of animals as a whole, which also includes reducing animal husbandry. This calls into question classic animal protection concepts. Environmental consequences of animal husbandry have received greater attention for years. This initial situation already makes the content-related concept of the committees a point of conflict: namely whether only the manner (“how”) or also the quantitative development of agricultural animal husbandry (“how much”) is up for discussion. In the state committees examined, there is a reluctance to discuss the future extent of animal husbandry or a reduction in both animal husbandry and the corresponding consumption, although these are certainly desired by society. Actors who have an interest in reducing animal husbandry are represented in a minority in both the ZKL and the BK. In order to achieve an open-ended and widely accepted dialogue about the future of animal husbandry, we would have to - the interests in animal husbandry are on an equal footing with interests in alternatives to animal husbandry as well - the tasks and roles of representing animal and environmental protection are redefined.