<<

IN THE BALANCE 53

4. Livestock and the environment

Policy action is required to mitigate the impact of livestock production on the Livestock production systems environment and to ensure that the sector and makes sustainable contributions to security and reduction. Livestock The interaction of livestock with ecosystems production, like any economic activity, can is complex and depends on location and be associated with environmental damage. management practices. Most traditional Unclear property rights and the lack of livestock production systems are resource- adequate governance of the livestock driven in that they make use of locally sector can contribute to the depletion and available resources with limited alternative degradation of land, water and biodiversity. uses or, expressed in economic terms, low At the same time, the livestock sector is opportunity costs. Examples of such resources affected by the degradation of ecosystems include crop residues and extensive and faces increasing competition for land not suitable for cropping or other these same resources from other sectors. uses. At the same time, in mixed production represents a special systems, traditionally managed livestock often “feedback loop”, in which livestock provide valuable inputs to crop production, production both contributes to the problem ensuring a close integration between the two. and suffers from the consequences. Unless The rising demand for livestock products is appropriate action is taken to improve the changing the relationship between livestock of livestock production, the and natural resources. Modern industrial livelihoods of millions of people will be production systems are losing the direct at risk. link to the local resource base and are The livestock sector suffers from market based on bought-in feed. At the same time, and policy failures at many levels, including some of the resources previously available problems associated with open-access to livestock at a low cost are becoming resources, externalities and perverse increasingly costly, either because of growing incentives that encourage damaging practices. competition for the resources from other While some countries have made progress economic sectors and other activities (such in reducing and as production of biofuels; see Box 10) or associated with livestock production, many because society is placing greater value on more require appropriate policies and the non-market services provided by these enforcement capacity. Given the likely resources (such as water and air quality). continued strong growth in global demand The separation of industrialized livestock for livestock products and the reliance of production from the land used to produce many people on livestock for their livelihoods, feed also results in a large concentration there is an urgent need to enhance the of waste products, which can put pressure efficiency of natural-resource use in the on the absorptive capacity of the sector and to reduce the environmental surrounding environment. In contrast, footprint of livestock production. Given grazing and systems tend better management practices, the livestock to be rather closed systems, in which waste sector can reduce its footprint and contribute products of one production activity (, substantially to climate change mitigation. crop residues) are used as resources or inputs Achieving these objectives requires to the other. action on policy, institutional and technical The livestock sector is also a source levels. of gaseous emissions that pollute the atmosphere and contribute to the 54 THE STATE OF FOOD AND 2009

BOX 10 Expansion of biofuels production

Growing use of and oilseeds to been increasingly used in feeds in some produce fossil fuel substitutes – countries and production systems. and – represents a significant This suggests that biofuel by-products challenge for the livestock sector in terms have helped to offset some of the adverse of competition for resources. The global cost implications of the biofuels boom biofuel has experienced a period for the livestock industry. At the same of extraordinary growth, driven by a time, biofuel by-products represent an combination of high oil , ambitious important component of biofuel industry goals for use of renewable energy set revenues. If the livestock industry could by governments around the world and not absorb these by-products, their prices subsidies in many OECD countries. would fall sharply, thereby making biofuel This rapid growth has had important less economically viable. consequences for the and availability The impact of large-scale biofuel of crops, such as and oilseed rape, production on the livestock industry that are used as biofuel feedstocks. Most varies across regions and across livestock studies to date have focused on impacts types. The strongest impact is being felt in on the crop sector. However, the livestock those countries that are actively pursuing sector has also been strongly affected. efforts to increase biofuel use (e.g. the The most obvious consequence of large- of America and countries scale liquid biofuel production for the of the ), as as those livestock industry is higher crop prices, countries that are closely tied into the which raise feed costs. Biofuel production global agricultural economy. The impacts also increases returns to cropland, which across different livestock sectors are also encourages conversion of pastureland to quite diverse. For example, and cropland. beef producers traditionally use DDGS On the other hand, producing biofuels in their feed rations as it is palatable to creates valuable by-products, such as and well digested. They are thus distillers’ dried grains with solubles (DDGS) better positioned to gain from increased and oilseed meals, that can be used as DDGS availability than are other livestock feed and can substitute for grain producers, who may not be able to adjust in animal rations. Production of these their feed rations as readily to absorb the by-products has increased dramatically increased supply of DDGS. in recent years as a result of the boom in biofuel production. The prices of these

by-products have fallen relative to other Sources: Taheripour, Hertel and Tyner, 2008a and feedstuffs, and, as a result, they have 2008b.

effect. Continued growth 3.4 billion hectares for grazing (Table 12) and in livestock production will exacerbate 0.5 billion hectares for feed crops (Steinfeld pressures on the environment and natural et al., 2006); the latter figure corresponds to resources, calling for approaches that allow one-third of total cropland. for increased production while lowering the The total land area occupied by environmental burden. is equivalent to 26 percent of the ice-free terrestrial surface of the planet. Much of Livestock and land this area is too dry or too cold for cropping, Livestock is the world’s largest user of and is only sparsely inhabited. Management land resources, with grazing land and practices and use of pastureland vary widely, cropland dedicated to the production as does the productivity of livestock per of feed representing almost 80 percent hectare. In arid and semi-arid , of all agricultural land. The sector uses where most of the world’s LIVESTOCK IN THE BALANCE 55

TABLE 12 by region and country group, 1961, 1991 and 2007

REGION/COUNTRY PASTURE FOREST1 GROUPING

Area Share of Area Share of Area Share of total land total land total land

1961 1991 2007 2007 1961 1991 2007 2007 1991 2007 2007

(Million ha) (Percentage) (Million ha) (Percentage) (Million ha) (Percentage)

Baltic states and CIS2 235.4 224.4 198.5 9.2 302.0 326.5 362.1 16.9 848.8 849.9 39.6

Eastern 48.7 45.0 39.7 34.9 20.0 20.4 16.6 14.6 34.7 35.9 31.6

Western Europe 89.0 78.6 72.8 20.4 69.7 60.7 58.9 16.5 122.5 132.9 37.2

Developing 404.4 452.5 466.4 17.6 623.4 805.1 832.8 31.5 532.8 532.6 20.1

North 20.4 23.0 23.1 3.8 73.4 74.4 77.3 12.9 8.1 9.1 1.5

Sub-Saharan Africa 133.8 161.3 196.1 8.3 811.8 823.8 833.7 35.3 686.8 618.2 26.2

Latin America 88.7 133.6 148.8 7.3 458.4 538.5 550.1 27.1 988.3 914.6 45.1 and the

North America 221.5 231.3 215.5 11.5 282.3 255.4 253.7 13.6 609.2 613.5 32.9

Oceania 33.4 48.5 45.6 5.4 444.5 431.4 393.0 46.3 211.9 205.5 24.2

DEVELOPED COUNTRIES 633.8 632.4 576.2 10.9 1 119.0 1 094.1 1 083.4 20.5 1 815.7 1 829.0 34.7

DEVELOPING COUNTRIES 647.6 770.9 834.9 10.8 1 967.8 2 242.6 2 294.8 29.7 2 252.6 2 108.4 27.3

WORLD 1 281.3 1 403.2 1 411.1 10.8 3 086.7 3 336.8 3 378.2 26.0 4 068.3 3 937.3 30.3

1 Forest data available only from 1991. 2 CIS = Commonwealth of Independent States. Source: FAO, 2009b. are found, intensification of Ranching-induced deforestation is a is frequently technically unfeasible or common feature in Central and South unprofitable. Also, in much of Africa and America (Wassenaar et al., 2006). At the same Asia, pastures are traditionally common- time, grasslands are increasingly fragmented property areas. As a result of weakening and encroached upon by cropland and urban traditional institutions and increased land areas. White, Murray and Rohweder (2000) pressure, many of these have become estimate that more than 90 percent of the open-access areas. In these and other major North American tallgrass and almost -based systems, incentives and 80 percent of the cerrado to improve pasture management have been converted to cropland and urban are lacking; thus potential productivity gains uses. In contrast, the Asian Daurien and services are lost. and the Eastern and Southern Mopane and There are three major trends relating to Miombo woodlands in sub-Saharan Africa pasturelands: valuable ecosystems are being are relatively intact, with less than 30 percent converted to pastureland (e.g. clearing of converted to other uses. forest); pastureland is being converted to About 20 percent of the world’s pastures other uses (cropland, urban areas and forest); and have been degraded to and pastureland is degrading. some extent, and the proportion may be 56 THE STATE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 2009

as high as 73 percent in dry areas (UNEP, feed-crop production can lead to severe 2004). The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment land degradation, and estimated that 10–20 percent of all grassland biodiversity losses, while expanding arable is degraded, mainly by . Pasture land into natural ecosystems often has serious degradation is generally a consequence of ecological consequences, including the loss of a mismatch between livestock density and biodiversity and of ecosystem services such as the capacity of the pasture to recover from water and control. grazing and trampling. Ideally, the land- While increases in grain production have to-livestock ratio should be continuously been mostly achieved through intensification adjusted to the conditions of the pasture, on existing areas, much of the rapid increase especially in dry climates. However, because in production has been achieved of weakened traditional institutions, through expansion of cropping into natural increased pressures on resources and habitats. Pressure on land resources for feed increased obstacles to livestock movements, inputs has been mitigated in recent decades such adjustment is often not possible. This by the shift away from towards is particularly the case in the arid and semi- and poultry, which have better feed arid communal grazing areas of the Sahel conversion, and high-yielding breeds and and Central Asia. In these areas, increasing improved management practices. population and encroachment Meeting future demand for livestock of arable farming on grazing lands have products will, however, require further severely restricted the mobility of the improvements in livestock and land and limited options for their management. productivity as well as expanding feed Among the environmental consequences production area, at the expense of of pasture degradation are erosion, pastureland and natural habitats. degradation of vegetation, release of carbon from organic matter deposits, reduction in Livestock and water biodiversity and impaired water cycles. Livestock production systems differ in the Pasture degradation can be reversed to amount of water used per animal and in how some extent, although how quickly this can these requirements are met. In extensive occur and what methodologies are best systems, the effort expended by remain matters of debate. There is little in search of feed and water increases the doubt, however, that current productivity need for water considerably compared with is constrained by high stocking rates in intensive or industrialized systems. However, parts of Africa and Asia, where grazing intensive production has additional service lands are overexploited. Grazing lands can water requirements for cooling and cleaning be sustainably managed under common- facilities, generally resulting in much higher property systems. However, where common- overall water consumption than extensive property systems have broken down, systems. Both intensive and extensive systems is often observed. The can contribute to water pollution through economic rationale by which individual waste runoff, although the concentration of livestock holders attempt to maximize their livestock associated with intensive systems personal benefits when common-property exacerbates this problem. The processing of systems break down is clear: maximizing livestock products also uses large amounts of the number of animals per hectare allows water. for the harvesting of more of the resource The livestock sector accounts for about for individual gain. This encourages 8 percent of global water use, primarily overexploitation of land resources to the for of feed crops. The growth of detriment of overall productivity. industrial production systems is increasing the need for water for feed-crop production. Land dedicated to feed-crop production Water used directly for livestock production Most of the world’s feed-crop production and processing is less than 1 percent of occurs in OECD countries, but some water use globally, but often represents a developing countries are rapidly expanding much greater percentage of water use in their production of feed crops, notably maize dry areas. For example, the water consumed and soybean in South America. Intensive directly by livestock represents 23 percent of LIVESTOCK IN THE BALANCE 57

total water use in Botswana (Steinfeld et al., for livestock products is likely to have 2006). substantial impacts on and The livestock sector can harm water quality on competition for their use. However, through the release of , livestock–water interactions have been and other , pathogens and other largely neglected in both water and livestock substances into waterways and , research and planning to date (Peden, mainly from manure in intensive livestock Tadesse and Misra, 2007). This oversight will operations. Poor manure management often have to be addressed if the livestock sector contributes to pollution and is to continue to develop without causing of surface waters, groundwater and greater harm to the environment. coastal marine ecosystems and to the accumulation of heavy metals in . This Livestock and biodiversity may lead to harm to human health and loss Biodiversity refers to the range of animal, of biodiversity, and contribute to climate and microbial species (interspecific change, soil and water acidification and biodiversity) on earth as well as the richness degradation of ecosystems. of genes within a given species (intraspecific The separation of industrialized livestock biodiversity). It encompasses the genetic from its supporting land base interrupts the variation among individuals within the nutrient flows between land and livestock. same population and among populations. This creates problems of depletion of Ecosystem diversity is another dimension of nutrients at the source (land, vegetation biodiversity. and soil) and problems of pollution at the Agricultural biodiversity is a particular sink (animal wastes, increasingly disposed of case of intraspecific diversity that is an into waterways instead of back on the land). artefact of human activity. It includes The magnitude of the issue is illustrated by domesticated animals and as well the fact that the total amounts of nutrients as non-harvested species that support in livestock excreta are as large as or larger food provision within agro-ecosystems. than the total contained in all chemical Knowledge about biodiversity is often used annually (Menzi et al., 2009). embedded in social structures and may not There are a number of options available be equally distributed or necessarily freely to reduce the impact of the livestock sector communicated between different groups on water resources. These include reducing of people, including ethnic groups, clans, water use (e.g. through more efficient gender or economic groups (FAO, 2004b). irrigation methods and animal cooling For example, women who process may systems), reducing depletion or harm to have very different knowledge about breed water supplies (e.g. through increased characteristics, focusing as they do on wool, water-use efficiency and improved waste than men who livestock and focus on management and feed-crop fertilization and water consumption or disease practices) and greater replenishment of water resistance. resources through better land management. Livestock production systems affect Looking at manure treatment in biodiversity differently. Intensive systems particular, there is a wide range of proven rely on a limited number of crop species options, including separation , and animal breeds, although each may be composting and . These quite rich in terms of genetic background. offer a number of benefits, including: These systems depend on intensively allowing safe application of manure on food managed feed crops, which are often and feed crops; improved sanitation; better blamed for ecosystem degradation. odour control; production of biogas; and However, intensive land use may actually improved value of the manure. protect non-agricultural biodiversity by Most importantly, replacing fertilizer reducing pressure to expand crop and with manure would lower the environmental pasture areas. Extensive systems may host impact of food production (Menzi et al., a larger number of breeds and make use of 2009). a wider variety of plant resources as feed, The increased number of livestock needed but their lower productivity may increase to meet the projected growth in demand pressure to encroach more on natural 58 THE STATE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 2009

habitats. In general, the effect of livestock According to the Millennium Ecosystem on biodiversity depends on the magnitude Assessment (MEA, 2005), the most important of livestock impacts or the extent to which direct drivers of and biodiversity is exposed to those impacts, how ecosystem service changes are: habitat sensitive the biodiversity in question is to change (such as land-use changes, physical livestock and how it responds to the impacts modification of or water withdrawal (Reid et al., 2009). from them, loss of coral reefs, and damage Many livestock breeds – a component to floors resulting from trawling); of agricultural biodiversity – are at risk of climate change; invasive alien species; disappearing, in large part as a result of overexploitation; and pollution. Livestock increasing use of a narrow range of livestock contribute directly or indirectly to all these breeds in intensive systems. Box 11 addresses drivers of biodiversity loss, from the local the need to conserve domestic animal to global levels. Typically, biodiversity loss is diversity. caused by a combination of various processes

BOX 11 Conserving animal genetic resources

The livestock species contributing resources, is the most comprehensive to today’s agriculture and food global information source on livestock production are shaped by a long history genetic diversity. A total of 7 616 breeds of and development. are recorded in the Global Databank, Developments in the late twentieth comprising 6 536 local breeds and century – including increased 1 080 transboundary breeds. Of these, commercialization of livestock breeding, 1 491 are classified as being “at risk”.1 rising demand for animal products The true figure is likely to be even higher, in the developing world, production as population data are unavailable for differentials between developed and 36 percent of breeds. The regions with developing countries, new reproductive the highest proportion of their breeds biotechnologies that facilitate the classified as at risk are Europe and the movement of genetic material and Caucasus (28 percent of mammalian the feasibility to control production breeds and 49 percent of avian breeds) environments independently of the and (20 percent of geographical location – have led to a new mammalian breeds and 79 percent of phase in the history of international gene avian breeds). These two regions have flows. International transfer of genetic highly specialized livestock industries, material occurs on a large scale, both in which production is dominated by within the developed world and from a small number of breeds. However, developed to developing countries. These problems elsewhere may be obscured flows are focused on a limited number by the large number of breeds with of breeds. There is also some movement unknown risk status. In Latin America and of genetic resources from developing to the Caribbean, for example, 68 percent developed regions, largely for research of mammalian breeds and 81 percent purposes. Today, the world’s most of avian breeds are classified as being widespread cattle breed, the Holstein- of unknown risk status. The figures Friesian, is found in at least 128 countries. for Africa are 59 percent for Among other livestock species, Large and 60 percent for birds. This lack of White pigs are reported in 117 countries, data is a serious constraint to effective Saanen in 81 countries, and Suffolk prioritization and planning of breed in 40 countries. conservation efforts. There is a need for FAO’s Domestic Animal Diversity improved surveying and reporting of Information System (http://dad.fao.org), breed population size and structure, and a global databank for animal genetic of other breed-related information. LIVESTOCK IN THE BALANCE 59

of environmental degradation. This makes and overexploitation, for example through it difficult to isolate the contribution of the overgrazing of pasture plants. Water livestock sector. A further complication is pollution and emissions, mainly represented by the many steps in the animal from industrial livestock production, reduce food product chain at which environmental biodiversity, often drastically in the case impact occurs. of aquatic ecosystems. Pollution from Livestock-related land use and land- livestock enterprises, as well as overfishing use change modify ecosystems that are to provide fishmeal for , reduces the habitats for given species. Livestock biodiversity in marine ecosystems (Reid et al., contribute to climate change (see “Livestock 2009). and climate change”, below), which in turn Livestock first started to affect biodiversity has an impact on ecosystems and species. when animals were domesticated millennia The sector also directly affects biodiversity ago and provided with a way to through transfer of invasive alien species exploit new resources and territories that

The rapid spread of intensive livestock of men and women continues to be an production that utilizes a narrow important asset for resource-poor people, range of breeds has contributed to especially in terms of increased food the marginalization of traditional security and health. livestock production systems and the In September 2007, the international associated animal genetic resources. community adopted the first ever Global Global production of , milk and Plan of Action for Animal Genetic eggs is increasingly based on a few high- Resources (FAO, 2007b), comprising output breeds – those that under current 23 strategic priorities aimed at combating management and market conditions the erosion of animal genetic diversity are the most profitable in industrialized and at using genetic resources sustainably. production systems. Policy measures are They also adopted the Interlaken necessary to minimize the loss of the Declaration on Animal Genetic Resources. global public goods embodied in animal The Declaration recognizes that there genetic diversity. are significant gaps and weaknesses in Acute threats such as major disease national and international capacities epidemics and disasters of various kinds to inventory, monitor, characterize, (droughts, floods, military conflicts, etc.) sustainably use, develop and conserve are also a concern – particularly in the animal genetic resources, and that these case of small, geographically concentrated need to be addressed urgently. It also calls breed populations. The overall significance for mobilization of substantial financial of these threats is difficult to quantify. resources and long-term support for Threats of this kind cannot be national and international animal genetic eliminated, but their impacts can be resources programmes. mitigated. Preparedness is essential in this context, as ad hoc actions taken in an emergency will usually be far less effective. Knowledge of which breeds have characteristics that make them 1 A breed is categorized as at risk if the total priorities for protection, and how they number of breeding females is less than or equal to 1 000 or the total number of breeding are distributed geographically and by males is less than or equal to 20, or if the overall production system, is fundamental to such population size is greater than 1 000 and less plans, and more broadly to sustainable than or equal to 1 200 and decreasing and the percentage of females being bred to males of the livestock diversity management. From a same breed is below 80 percent. livelihood perspective, local knowledge Sources: FAO, 2007b and 2007c. 60 THE STATE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 2009

had previously been unavailable. Current oriented livestock production. This provides degradation processes are superimposed on greater opportunities for nutrient cycling, these historical changes, which continue to which is beneficial to the environment. affect biodiversity. However, excessive use of nitrogen fertilizer on dairy is one of the main causes of Differences in impacts between species high levels in in OECD and production systems countries (Tamminga, 2003). Manure runoff There are significant differences in the and from large-scale dairy operations environmental impact between species, and may also contaminate soil and water. between the different forms of livestock Beef is produced in a wide range of production. Both intensive and extensive systems that operate at different intensities production systems may damage the and scales. At both ends of the intensity environment, but in different ways. Pressure spectrum, considerable environmental to expand production, either through damage can occur. On the extensive side, intensification (increasing output per unit of cattle are often involved in degradation of land by increasing non-land inputs) or area vast grassland areas and are a contributing expansion (increasing output by expanding factor to deforestation through clearing land in production without changing of forest to provide pastureland (Table 13). inputs per unit of land), can have negative The resulting carbon emissions, biodiversity environmental consequences unless the value losses and negative impacts on water of common-property resources and the cost flows and quality constitute major of negative externalities are fully recognized environmental impacts. On the intensive and accounted for. side, concentration of livestock in often results in soil and water pollution, as Species the amount of manure and produced Cattle provide many products and services, far exceed the capacity of surrounding including beef, milk and traction. In many land to absorb nutrients. Moreover, cattle mixed farming systems, cattle are usually well in feedlots require more concentrate feed integrated in nutrient flows and can have a per kilogram of output than do poultry positive environmental impact (Steinfeld, de or pigs; as a result, they have significantly Haan and Blackburn, 1998) (see Table 13). higher resource requirements and hence In many developing countries, cattle and greater environmental impact. Greenhouse buffalo provide draught power for field gas emissions are also substantial from all operations; in some areas, particularly parts livestock production systems. In extensive of sub-Saharan Africa, use of animal traction systems, most GHGs result from land is increasing, substituting for fossil fuel use. degradation and enteric fermentation, Cattle manure is a good fertilizer; it presents whereas in intensive operations manure a low risk of over-fertilization and improves is the main source of GHGs. The higher soil structure. Livestock also use crop residues relative productivity of animals and lower and agro-industrial by-products, such as fibre content of feed rations in intensive cake and brewers grains, some of operations reduce emissions from which would otherwise be burned. However, enteric fermentation when expressed per cattle in extensive production systems in unit of . developing countries often have limited The production of sheep and goats is productivity. As a result, a large share of feed usually extensive, except for small pockets is spent on the animal’s maintenance rather of feedlots in the Near East and West Asia than on producing products or services and in North America. The capacity of small useful to people. The result is inefficient ruminants, particularly goats, to grow and use of resources and often high levels of reproduce under conditions that cannot environmental damage per unit of output, support any other form of agricultural particularly in overgrazed areas. production makes them useful and very Dairy cattle require large amounts of bulky often essential to poor pushed into fibrous feed in their diets. As a result, dairy these environments for lack of alternative herds need to be close to the source of their livelihoods. However, sheep and goats can feed, more so than other forms of market- severely reduce land cover and the potential LIVESTOCK IN THE BALANCE 61

for forest regrowth. Under overstocked environment but also bear opportunities conditions, they are particularly damaging for mitigation. Table 13 shows preliminary to the environment through degradation of observations on the environmental impacts vegetative cover and soil. associated with different level of intensity in Pigs in traditional mixed systems, fed production, also discussed below. With the on household waste and agro-industrial specialization of crop and livestock activities by-products, turn that would and in areas of animal waste concentration, otherwise go to waste into high-value nutrient cycles traditionally achieved in animal . Pigs also require less feed mixed crop–livestock systems are being per unit of output than ruminants. As such, broken. The cost of transporting nutrients to they have lower demand for land for feed cropland is often prohibitive (especially for production. However, it is estimated that pigs water-rich slurries), and manure is disposed in mixed systems now account for only about of in the local environment, often exceeding 35 percent of global production. manure its absorption capacity. This often causes can be a valuable fertilizer but crop producers severe water and soil pollution, particularly generally prefer cattle and poultry waste in densely populated areas. However, on because pig manure has a strong odour and the positive side, the growing scale and often comes in a slurry form. It is, however, geographical concentration of livestock well adapted to use in biogas digestors. production facilitate the implementation Poultry production systems have undergone of environmental policies by reducing the most extensive structural change of enforcement costs; the higher profitability any livestock subsector. In OECD countries, of production units attenuates costs of production is almost entirely industrial, compliance, while the concentration of while in many developing countries it is production in a smaller number of easily already predominantly industrial. Among accessible units minimizes monitoring costs. traditional livestock species (excluding fish), Longer food chains, driven by the poultry is the most efficient feed converter, concentration of consumers in urban and industrial poultry production is thus the centres, mean that production systems most efficient form of livestock production, have to bridge long geographical distances despite its dependence on feedgrains and between the site of feed production and the other high-value feed material. Poultry consumer. Decreasing transport costs have manure has a high nutrient content, is allowed the relocation of production and relatively easy to manage and is widely used processing activities to minimize production as fertilizer; it is also sometimes used in feed costs. Globally, this process has helped to for ruminants. Other than that caused by overcome local resource constraints and feed-crop production, the environmental allowed people located in food-deficit areas damage caused by poultry is much less than to be fed. However, it also involves large- that caused by other species, although it may scale extraction and transfers of nutrients be locally important. and virtual water embedded in feed and animal products, with detrimental long-term Production systems consequences for ecosystems and soil . As discussed in Chapter 2, in response to Improved animal productivity and feed escalating demand for livestock products, conversion efficiency have been achieved the livestock sector is undergoing structural through the application of a wide range of change towards more capital-intensive technologies, including feeding, , systems, specialized and larger production animal health and housing. The shift units relying on purchased inputs, higher towards species, and poultry in animal productivity and greater geographical particular, has further improved the sector’s concentration. This has altered the feed conversion efficiency. This has resulted environmental impacts of the sector. It has in substantially less land and water being also offered the sector new options for needed to produce feed to achieve the levels mitigating such impacts, with a range of cost, of production to meet current demand. socio-economic and gender implications. Productivity gains are, however, also The structural changes in livestock associated with a number of environmental production are often detrimental to the concerns. The relatively low resistance to 62 THE STATE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 2009

TABLE 13 Major environmental impacts of different production systems1

RUMINANT SPECIES (CATTLE, SHEEP, ETC.) (PIGS, POULTRY)

Extensive Intensive Traditional Industrial grazing2 systems3 systems4 systems

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

CO2 emissions from land use and land-use change ns for grazing and feed-crop ------production CO emissions from energy and 2 ns ns input use -- -- in ns ns ns rangelands ++ from ns ns digestion --- --

Nitrous oxide from manure - --- ns --

LAND DEGRADATION

Expansion into natural habitat --- ns ns -- Overgrazing (vegetation change, soil --- ns ns ns compaction) Intensive feed production ns ns () -- --

Soil fertilization +++++

WATER DEPLETION AND POLLUTION

Alteration of -- - ns ns

Pollution with nutrients, ns ns pathogens and drug residues -- ---

BIODIVERSITY

Habitat destruction from feed- crop production and animal --- - ns --- wastes Habitat pollution from feed- crop production and animal ns -- ns --- wastes Loss of domestic animal genetic ns ns diversity -- ---

Ecosystem maintenance ++ ns ns ns

1 Observed relationships under common management practices. 2 Extensive grazing systems for ruminants are predominantly based on natural grasslands in marginal environments. 3 Intensive systems for ruminants are generally based on improved grasslands (using irrigation, fertilizers, improved varieties and ), with supplementary feeding or confined feeding of grain and . 4 Traditional systems for monogastrics include mixed farming systems or backyard scavenging systems. Note: ns = not significant. Source: FAO. LIVESTOCK IN THE BALANCE 63

diseases of highly productive breeds, the concentration of large numbers of animals when economic incentives are properly set, in large production units and the need to productivity gains associated with capital avoid disease outbreaks has led producers and labour intensification significantly to use substantial amounts of drugs, often improve the efficiency of natural-resource as routine preventive measures. Residues use; where resources and pollution are priced from these drugs pass into the environment, appropriately, intensification of production harming ecosystems and public heath. In has been associated with improved particular, the sometimes indiscriminate environmental efficiency (less consumption use of has led to the selection of of natural resources and lower emissions -resistant strains of bacteria, now per unit of animal product). This is already threatening human health in Europe and the case for land use on a global scale, but North America (Johnson et al., 2009). Highly also for water and nutrients in an increasing productive breeds also require a tighter number of OECD countries. control of their environment (temperature, light) than traditional breeds, thus increasing water and energy consumption. Livestock and climate change Deforestation and land degradation are the main processes through which Global average surface temperatures have extensive grazing systems emit GHGs. Range increased by about 0.7 °C in the last century management can be improved to prevent (IPCC, 2007). temperatures have risen, carbon losses and sequester carbon, turning there has been significant melting of snow extensive systems into net GHG removers. and ice in the polar regions and sea levels Intensification and restoration of pasture are projected to rise. The Intergovernmental and fodder production, driven by rising Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concludes land prices, generally also have other that anthropogenic GHGs, including carbon positive environmental consequences as dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous they limit land expansion and improve feed oxide (N2O) and halocarbons, have been quality. The latter, in turn, contributes to responsible for most of the observed the reduction of methane emissions from temperature increase since the middle of the enteric fermentation. Nutrient overloads in twentieth century. dairy production areas have generally been Amid growing concerns over climate related more to the import of nutrients change, agriculture, particularly livestock, through supplementary feed and fertilizer is increasingly being recognized as both a for silage production than to deficiencies in contributor to the process and a potential pasture management. victim of it. Policy interventions and technical Overall, the change from traditional mixed solutions are required to address both the and extensive systems to more intensive impact of livestock production on climate systems has probably had a positive effect in change and the effects of climate change on improving land- and water-use efficiency but livestock production. negative effects on water pollution, energy consumption and genetic diversity. Moreover, The impact of livestock on climate traditional and mixed systems have been change unable to meet the burgeoning demand Livestock contribute to climate change by for livestock products in many developing emitting GHGs, either directly (e.g. from countries, not only in terms of volume but enteric fermentation) or indirectly (e.g. from also in terms of sanitary and other quality feed-production activities, deforestation to standards. Intensification of production create new pasture, etc.). appears thus indispensable, while avoiding emissions can arise from excessive geographical concentration of all the main steps of the livestock production animals. cycle. Emissions from feed-crop production The potential to improve the and pastures are linked to the production environmental performance of intensive and application of chemical fertilizer and systems is also greater than for traditional pesticides, to soil organic-matter losses and extensive systems. Experience shows that and to transport. When forest is cleared 64 THE STATE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 2009

for pasture and feed crops, large amounts anaerobic and warm conditions. Finally, the of carbon stored in vegetation and soil slaughtering, processing and transportation are also released into the atmosphere. of animal products cause emissions mostly In contrast, when good management related to use of fossil fuel and practices are implemented on degraded development. land, pasture and cropland can turn into net carbon sinks, sequestering carbon from The impact of climate change on the atmosphere. At the level, methane livestock

(CH4) and (N2O) are emitted Table 14 summarizes the direct and indirect from enteric fermentation and manure. In impacts of climate change on grazing and species (i.e. cattle, buffalo, non-grazing livestock production systems. It and sheep), microbial fermentation in the is likely that some of the greatest impacts of converts fibre and into climate change will be felt in grazing systems products that can be digested and utilized in arid and semi-arid areas, particularly at by the animals. Methane is exhaled by these low latitudes (Hoffman and Vogel, 2008). animals as a by-product of the process. Climate change will have far-reaching Nitrous oxide is released from manure consequences for animal production through during storage and spreading, and methane its effects on and range productivity. is also generated when manure is stored in Increasing temperatures and decreasing

BOX 12 Assessing the contribution of livestock to GHG emissions

The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report dioxide emissions, 37 percent of methane presents agreed levels of overall and 65 percent of nitrous oxide emissions anthropogenic GHG emissions for defined (FAO, 2006). The combined emissions

categories representing economic sectors expressed in CO2 equivalents amount to (e.g. industry, 19.4 percent; agriculture, about 18 percent of anthropogenic GHG 13.5 percent; , 17.4 percent; emissions. transport, 13.1 percent) (Barker et al., Along the animal food chain, the major 2007). The IPPC suggests that these figures sources and amounts of emissions are: should be seen as indicative, as some t Land use and land-use change:

uncertainty remains, particularly with 2.5 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent.

regard to CH4, N2O and CO2 emissions. Includes CO2 release from forest and In addition, for agriculture and forestry, other natural vegetation replaced the above figures are expressed as gross by pasture and feed crop in the emissions and do not take into account neotropics and carbon releases from the existing carbon capture that is the soils, such as pasture and arable land basis for photosynthesis. Emissions dedicated to feed production. associated with animal products fall t Feed production (excluding carbon across several of these categories. Feed released from soil and plants):

production causes emissions in the 0.4 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent.

agriculture, forestry (through land-use Includes CO2 from fossil fuel used in change), transport and energy categories. chemical fertilizer for

Enteric fermentation and manure feed crops and N2O and ammonia

management associated with livestock (NH3) released by chemical fertilizers rearing lead to methane and nitrous oxide applied to feed crops and from emissions accounted for under agriculture. leguminous feed crops. Slaughtering, processing and distribution t Animal production: 1.9 gigatonnes

cause emissions accounted for in the of CO2 equivalent. Includes CH4 from

industry, energy and transport categories. enteric fermentation and CO2 from Taken together in a food chain approach, on-farm use of fossil fuel. livestock therefore contribute about t Manure management: 2.2 gigatonnes

9 percent of total anthropogenic carbon- of CO2 equivalent. Includes CH4, N2O LIVESTOCK IN THE BALANCE 65

rainfall reduce yields of rangelands and (Table 14). Reduced agricultural yields and contribute to their degradation. Higher increased competition from other sectors are temperatures tend to reduce animal feed predicted to result in increased prices for both intake and lower feed conversion rates grain and oilcakes, which are major sources (Rowlinson, 2008). Reduced rainfall and of feed in non-grazing systems (OECD–FAO, increased frequency of drought will reduce 2008). The development of energy-saving primary productivity of rangelands, leading programmes and policies promoting the use to overgrazing and degradation, and may of clean energy may also result in increased result in food insecurity and conflict over energy prices. A warmer climate may also scarce resources. There is also evidence increase the costs of keeping animals cool. that growing seasons may become shorter Climate change will play a significant in many grazing lands, particularly in sub- role in the spread of vector-borne diseases Saharan Africa. The probability of extreme and animal parasites, which will have weather events is likely to increase. disproportionately large impacts on the most In the non-grazing systems, which are vulnerable men and women in the livestock characterized by the confinement of animals sector. With higher temperatures and more (often in climate-controlled buildings), the variable precipitation, new diseases may direct impacts of climate change can be emerge or diseases will occur in places where expected to be limited and mostly indirect they formerly did not. Moreover, climate

and NH3 mainly from manure storage, land-use changes (such as deforestation), application and deposition. pasture management, enteric fermentation t Processing and international transport: and manure management. Cattle and

0.03 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent. buffalo are responsible for an especially Comparing species, cattle and buffalo large share of the livestock sector’s are responsible for more of these emissions in Latin America and South emissions than are pigs and poultry Asia, where they are estimated to account (see table). Emissions associated with large for more than 85 percent of the sector’s ruminants are predominantly related to emissions, mainly in the form of methane. Emissions of greenhouse gases along the animal food chain and estimated relative contribution from major species

STEP IN ANIMAL ESTIMATED EMISSIONS1 ESTIMATED CONTRIBUTION BY SPECIES2 FOOD CHAIN Cattle and Small Pigs Poultry buffaloes ruminants

(Gigatonnes) (Percentage of total livestock sector emissions) Land use and land- 2.50 36 ns use change NNN N N

Feed production3 0.40 7 NNNNN ns

Animal production4 1.90 25 NNNN N N NN

Manure management 2.20 31 NN NNN ns ns

Processing and 0.03 1 N N NNN ns transport

1 Estimated quantity of emissions expressed as CO2 equivalent. 2 N = lowest to NNNN = highest. 3 Excludes changes in soil and plant carbon stocks. 4 Includes enteric methane, machinery and buildings. Note: ns = not significant. Source: Adapted from Steinfeld et al., 2006. 66 THE STATE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 2009

TABLE 14 Direct and indirect impacts of climate change on livestock production systems

GRAZING SYSTEMS NON-GRAZING SYSTEMS

vIncreased frequency of extreme weather events vChange in water availability (may increase or decrease, according to region) vIncreased frequency and magnitude of drought and floods vIncreased frequency of extreme weather events DIRECT IMPACTS (impact less acute than for extensive systems) vProductivity losses (physiological stress) due to temperature increase vChange in water availability (may increase or decrease, according to region)

vAgro-ecological changes and ecosystem vIncreased resource prices, e.g. feed, water shifts leading to: and energy alteration of fodder quality and quality vDisease epidemics INDIRECT IMPACTS changes in host–pathogen interactions resulting vIncreased cost of animal housing, in an increased incidence of emerging diseases e.g. cooling systems disease epidemics

Source: FAO.

change may result in new transmission overuse and to major inefficiencies in the mechanisms and new host species. All production process. Policies to protect the countries are likely to be subject to increased environment should introduce adequate animal-disease incidence but poor countries market pricing for the main inputs, for are more vulnerable to emerging diseases example, by introducing full-cost pricing because of the paucity of veterinary services. of water and grazing. Defining men’s and Can climate change benefit livestock? women’s property rights and access rights There may be some positive outcomes to scarce shared resources is also a key for the livestock sector from warmer factor in ensuring efficient resource use and temperatures, but this largely depends on preservation of natural resources. when and where temperature changes A host of tested and successful happen. General conclusions thus cannot technical options are available to mitigate be drawn. For example, higher winter environmental impacts of agricultural temperature can reduce the cold stress activities (Steinfeld et al., 2006). These can experienced by livestock raised outside. be used in resource management, in crop Furthermore, warmer winter weather and livestock production, and in reduction may reduce the maintenance energy of post- losses. However, for these requirements of animals and reduce the to be widely adopted and applied requires need for heating in animal housing. appropriate price signals that more closely reflect the true scarcities of production factors, and correction of the distortions Improving natural-resource use that currently provide insufficient incentives by livestock production for efficient resource use. The recent development of water markets and more Measures need to be taken to address the appropriate water pricing in some countries, impact of livestock production on ecosystems, particularly those facing , are which otherwise may worsen dramatically steps in that direction. given the projected expansion of the livestock sector. Demand for animal products Correcting for environmental needs to be balanced with the growing externalities demand for environmental services, such as Although the removal of price distortions at clean air and water, and recreation areas. the input and product levels will go a long Current prices of land, water and feed way to enhancing the technical efficiency of resources used for livestock production natural-resource use in livestock production, often do not reflect the true scarcity value this often may not be sufficient to control of these resources. This leads to their the sector’s environmental impacts more LIVESTOCK IN THE BALANCE 67

effectively. Externalities4, both negative and to manage because of major methodological positive, need to be explicitly factored into issues in the valuation of biodiversity, but the policy framework so that the full costs of they already find a ready uptake where pollution and other negative environmental they can be financed through impacts are recognized. The application of revenues. Carbon sequestration services, the “provider gets – polluter pays” principle through adjustments in grazing can be helpful, although the challenge for management or abandonment of pastures, society is to decide who has the right to may also play a much larger role; given pollute and how much. the potential of the world’s vast grazing Correcting for externalities, both positive lands to sequester large amounts of carbon, and negative, will lead livestock producers mechanisms are being developed to use this to make management choices that are potentially cost-effective avenue to address less costly to the environment and to climate change. society at large. Livestock holders who Suggesting a shift from current extractive generate positive externalities need to be grazing practices to practices that enhance compensated, either by the immediate the provision of environmental services beneficiary (such as for improved water raises two questions of paramount quantity and quality for downstream users) importance: How should the profits from or by the general public (such as for carbon environmental services be distributed? And sequestration from reversing pasture how can poor people who currently derive degradation). their livelihoods from extensive livestock While remain an important benefit from this? The State of Food and tool in controlling negative externalities, Agriculture 2007 discussed the concept of there is a trend towards taxation of payments for environmental services and the environmental damage and provision of implications for poverty alleviation in detail financial incentives for environmental (FAO, 2007a). benefits. This may gain momentum in future, initially tackling local Accelerating technological change externalities but increasingly addressing A number of technical options could also transboundary impacts through lessen the impacts of intensive livestock international treaties, underlying regulatory production. Good agricultural practices frameworks and market mechanisms. can reduce and fertilizer use Government policies may be required in feed cropping and intensive pasture to provide incentives for institutional management. Integration of ecological in this regard. production systems and technologies The opportunity cost for livestock to use can restore important soil habitats and marginal land is changing. In many regions, reduce degradation. Improvements in livestock occupy land for which there is no extensive livestock production systems can viable alternative use. Increasingly, other also make a contribution to biodiversity uses (e.g. biodiversity conservation, carbon conservation, including, for example, sequestration, production of feedstock for adoption of silvipastoral and flexible biofuels) are competing with pasture in grazing management systems that actually some regions. In future, next-generation increase biodiversity, quantity of forage, ethanol production from cellulosic material soil cover and soil organic matter and thus may emerge as another competitor for reduce water loss and drought impact and rangeland use. Water-related services will increase CO2 sequestration. Combining such probably be the first to grow significantly local improvements with restoration or in importance, with local service provision conservation of an ecological infrastructure schemes the first to be widely applied. at the watershed level may offer a good way Biodiversity-related services (e.g. species and to reconcile the conservation of ecosystem landscape conservation) are more complex function with the expansion of agricultural production. In industrial and mixed production systems, 4 An externality is an unintended or undesired side-effect of an economic activity that harms (negative externality) or there is a large gap between current levels benefits (positive externality) another party. of productivity and levels that are technically 68 THE STATE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 2009

attainable, indicating that considerable building and informed decision-making at efficiency gains can be realized through the policy, investment, rural development better management. However, achieving and producer levels. Technological these is more difficult in resource-poor improvements need to be oriented towards areas, which are often also ecologically more optimal integrated use of land, water, marginal areas. human, animal and feed resources. Improved and efficient production technologies exist for most production Reducing the negative environmental impacts systems. However, access to relevant of intensive livestock production information and the capacity to select The environmental problems created by and implement the most appropriate industrial systems mostly derive from technologies are constraining factors. their geographical location and These constraints can be reduced through concentration. In extreme cases, size may interactive knowledge management, capacity be a problem – sometimes units are so large

BOX 13 The European Union – integrating environmental protection requirements into the Common

Since the Agenda 2000 reform (March v Cross-compliance. The full granting of 1999), the Common Agricultural Policy income support is now conditional on (CAP) of the European Union (EU) has had the respect of: statutory management two pillars: a market and income policy requirements (relating to the (first pillar); and a policy to promote the environment, animal welfare and sustainable development of rural areas public, animal and plant health), (second pillar). A number of measures including those stemming from five introduced with the 2003 CAP reform environmental Directives; minimum (effective as of January 2005) and the standards of good agricultural and Rural Development Policy 2007–2013 environmental conditions (GAECs); are expected to lead to a mitigation of and the obligation to maintain land the environmental impact of livestock under permanent pasture. This is production through the following: a further incentive to comply with v Decoupling. The Single Farm environmental legislation such Payment decoupled from as the Directive (reduced production has replaced most of fertilizer use and improved practices, the direct payments under different e.g. for manure management). The Common Market Organizations. GAECs have to include, inter alia, This implies reducing many of the provisions related to the maintenance incentives for intensive production of soil organic-matter levels (e.g. associated with increased and arable stubble environmental risks, thus encouraging management), the protection of soils extensification, decreased livestock against erosion and the maintenance numbers, reduced fertilizer use, of carbon sinks (e.g. through the etc. However, Member States have requirement to maintain permanent been allowed to keep a part of pasture). the payments coupled, inter alia, v Assistance to sectors with special the suckler cow premium (up to problems (so-called Article 69 100 percent), the special beef measures). Member States may premium (up to 75 percent), the retain by sector (e.g. livestock slaughter premium for cattle (up to sector) up to 10 percent of national 40 percent for adults and 100 percent budget ceilings for direct payments. for calves) and the sheep and goat Payments are made to farmers in premium (up to 50 percent). the sector (or sectors) concerned by LIVESTOCK IN THE BALANCE 69

(hundreds of thousands of pigs, for feed availability, as at present. Policy options example) that waste disposal will always be to overcome the current economic drivers of an issue, no matter where these units are the peri-urban concentration of production located. units include zoning, mandatory nutrient What is required, therefore, is to bring management plans, financial incentives the amount of waste generated into line and facilitation of contractual agreements with the capacity of locally accessible land between livestock producers and crop to absorb that waste. Industrial livestock farmers (see Box 14). In Thailand, high must be located as much as possible where were levied on poultry and pig production cropland within economic reach can be used within a 100 km radius of Bankok, while to dispose of the waste, without creating areas further away enjoyed -free status. problems of nutrient loading, rather than This led to many new production units geographically concentrating production being established away from the major units in areas favoured by market access or consumption centre (Steinfeld et al., 2006).

the retention. They can be spent in in addition to eliminating or phasing specific types of farming important out some production-constraining for the protection or enhancement measures (abolition of set-aside of of the environment or improving the arable land and gradual phasing out of quality and marketing of agricultural milk quotas), strengthened some of the products. aforementioned instruments. Beef and v Modulation. The Agenda 2000 veal payments, except the suckler cow reform introduced the possibility premium, are to be fully decoupled by of shifting support from market 2012 at the latest. Cross-compliance was policy to measures contributing to amplified with a new GAEC standard environmentally benign practices concerning the establishment of buffer (the concept is referred to as strips along watercourses. Measures to “modulation”). The 2003 CAP reform address disadvantages for farmers in made modulation a compulsory certain regions (Article 68 [ex-Article 69] measure, with direct payments having measures) were made more flexible, to be reduced (by 3 percent in 2005, covering farmers in the dairy, beef and 4 percent in 2006 and 5 percent sheep and sectors (and in the in the years from 2007 onwards). sector) in disadvantaged areas as The funds are being shifted into well as economically vulnerable types of rural development, increasing the farming in these sectors. The modulation possibility to stimulate the adoption of rate was increased by 5 percent, in environmentally friendly production four steps from 2009 to 2012, and techniques. an additional reduction in payments The rural development regulation by 4 percent is applied to payments for the period 2007–2013 provides exceeding €300 000 (about US$425 000). further opportunities to strengthen the The funds thus obtained are transferred contribution of the CAP to improving the to rural development for the financing environment. Three key priority areas of new operations (biodiversity, water related to the environment were defined management, renewable energies, climate in the Community strategic guidelines change, accompanying measures for dairy for rural development: climate change, production, and innovation). biodiversity and water. In 2008, the CAP underwent a so-called Source: EU Commission Web site (ec.europa.eu/ “Health Check” reform. The reform, agriculture/index_en.htm). 70 THE STATE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 2009

BOX 14 Reducing nitrate pollution in Denmark

Common Agricultural Policy In Denmark, the intensification of animal housing and improved housing agriculture during the last 50 years design, required covers on dung heaps, disturbed the natural , banned slurry application by broadcast causing significant emissions of ammonia spreader, and required slurry to be to the atmosphere and nitrate pollution incorporated into the soil within 6 hours of water. High concentrations of nitrates of application. in groundwater and surface water The main instruments of nitrogen impaired drinking water quality (EEA, regulation in Denmark are mandatory 2003) and caused eutrophication of fertilizer and crop-rotation plans, with and coastal marine areas. In the early crop-specific limits on the amount of 1980s, public concern over eutrophication plant-available nitrogen that can be of Danish coastal waters helped motivate applied, and statutory norms for the the Danish Government to regulate utilization of nitrogen from animal nitrogen emission from the country’s manure. The norms reflect how much agriculture sector. nitrogen in the manure is assumed to be Beginning in 1985, Denmark adopted plant-available. This also sets a limit on a series of action plans and regulatory how much mineral fertilizer each measures that have dramatically increased may apply. Each year, farmers are required nitrogen use efficiency in agriculture and to inform the Ministry of Food how much reduced nitrogen pollution (Mikkelsen mineral nitrogen fertilizer they have et al., 2009). Among other things, these purchased. The application of nitrogen plans required livestock producers to from animal manure and mineral fertilizer increase manure slurry storage capacity, cannot exceed the total nitrogen norm for stop spreading slurry during the winter a given farm. months, adopt mandatory fertilizer The regulations have been very budgets to match plant uptake to successful in reducing nitrogen leaching nutrient applications, install covers on from soils. However, nitrogen leaching slurry tanks, and reduce stocking density in some water basins is still high and in some areas. In 2001, the Ammonia further regional reduction may be needed Action Plan provided subsidies to to achieve good ecological quality in all encourage good manure handling in coastal waters (Dalgaard et al., 2004).

Regulations are also needed to deal with heavy-metal and drug-residue issues at the Dealing with climate change feed and waste levels, and to address other and livestock public health aspects, such as food-borne pathogens. Livestock can play an important role in both Both industrialized and more-extensive adapting to climate change and mitigating livestock production systems need to strive the effects of climate change on human to minimize possible emissions, with waste welfare. Efforts to mitigate the effects management adapted to local conditions. of livestock on climate change focus on In parallel, there is a need to address reducing GHG emissions from livestock. the environmental impacts associated Livestock can also help the poor adapt to with production of feedgrain and other the effects of climate change. The ability concentrate feed. Feed is usually produced of communities to adapt to and mitigate in intensive agricultural systems, and the climate change depends on their socio- principles and instruments that have been economic and environmental circumstances developed to control environmental issues and their access to the right information and there need to be widely applied. technology. LIVESTOCK IN THE BALANCE 71

An important question to consider is farming systems, i.e. stall feeding and how to blend adaptation and mitigation grazing. strategies. This requires a careful analysis of v Breeding strategies, such as: the trade-offs between , (i) strengthening local breeds, which are equity and environmental sustainability. adapted to local climate stress and feed Dealing with climate change poses challenges sources; and (ii) improving local breeds for growth and development, particularly in through cross-breeding with heat- and the low-income countries, but there are also disease-tolerant breeds. significant synergies between adaptation v Market responses through promoting and mitigation actions, e.g. improved range interregional trade, credit schemes and management can both sequester carbon and market access. improve grassland productivity. v Institutional and policy changes, e.g. introduction of livestock early-warning Strategies for adaptation systems, and other forecasting and crisis- There is an urgent need for effective preparedness systems. strategies for adapting to climate change. v and technology research to Climate change is occurring much faster than provide greater understanding of the adaptation. It can exacerbate already existing causes of climate change and its impact vulnerabilities and increase the impact of on livestock, to facilitate development other stresses, such as natural disasters, of new breeds and genetic types, to poverty, unequal access to resources, food improve animal health, and to improve insecurity and incidence of animal diseases. water and . Livestock producers have traditionally v Livestock management systems to allow adapted to environmental and climate efficient and affordable adaptation changes. However, increased human practices to be developed for rural poor population, urbanization, economic who are generally unable to purchase growth, growing consumption of expensive adaptation technologies. of animal origin and commercialization Systems should: (i) provide shade have made those coping mechanisms less and water to reduce heat stress from effective (Sidahmed, 2008). Coping and risk increased temperature, a natural low- management strategies are urgently needed. cost alternative to air-conditioning; Livestock are key assets held by poor (ii) reduce livestock numbers, using more people, particularly in and productive animals to increase efficiency agropastoral systems, fulfilling multiple of production while reducing GHG economic, social, and risk management emissions; and (iii) adjust the livestock functions. Livestock are also a crucial coping numbers and herd composition to mechanism in variable environments; as this optimize use of feed resources. variability increases, they will become even There is reasonable information on the more important. For many poor people, the component pieces of livestock systems and loss of livestock assets means a decline into how they may be affected by climate change. chronic poverty with long-term effects on At the systems level, however, less is known their livelihoods. about how these changes may interact to There are a number of ways to increase the affect livelihoods. These interactions must adaptation capacity of traditional producers be understood at the micro level in in extensive systems (Sidahmed, 2008). These to tailor adaptation strategies. At the same include: time, there is a need to identify vulnerable v Production adjustments through: populations more clearly as a key step in (i) diversification, intensification, assessing adaptation needs. This urgently integration of pasture management, calls for research programmes that can livestock and crop production, changing support the development of national and land use and irrigation, altering the regional policies. timing of operations, conservation of nature and ecosystems; and (ii) introduction of mixed livestock 72 THE STATE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 2009

Strategies for mitigation enteric fermentation and emission of Many impacts of climate change can be methane from the rumen or the hindgut avoided, reduced or delayed. It is important (Dourmad, Rigolot and van der Werf, to stress that adaptation and mitigation 2008). Also, the amount of feed intake is efforts cannot eliminate all impacts of climate related to the amount of waste product. change and sometimes are in conflict. In A higher proportion of concentrate identifying mitigation strategies, it is essential in the diet results in a reduction in to bear in mind the cost of implementation methane emission (Lovett et al., 2005). and potential trade-offs with adaptation v Reducing methane produced during needs. Reforestation is considered cost- digestion. Methane production in the effective, but other strategies may not be digestive system of the animal (especially easy to implement or cost-effective. ruminants) can be reduced by use of The impact of livestock on climate change feed additives, antibiotics or is largely through their production of GHGs (UNFCCC, 2008). (see “The impact of livestock on climate v Improved feed conversion. Reducing change”, above). the amount of feed required per unit of from the livestock sector can be reduced by output (beef, milk, etc.) has the potential changes in animal feeding management, in to both reduce the production of GHGs manure management and in management of and to increase farm profits. Feed feed-crop production: efficiency can be increased by developing v Improved feeding management. breeds that are faster growing, and that Feed composition has some effect on have improved hardiness, weight gain or

BOX 15 Tapping the climate change mitigation potential of improved land management in livestock systems

Agricultural systems that combine carbon markets. Accessing the carbon improved pasture management with soil market is currently an expensive and improvements (reduced soil disturbance complex process, requiring substantial and improved soil cover) can lock up more upfront investment in financial and carbon in soils and biomass, emit less biophysical analysis before carbon credits

methane (CH4) per unit product and release can be sold. Concerns over permanence 1 less nitrous oxide (N2O) than less-well-run and additionality of these sink-enhancing systems. Many of these measures can also activities, investment risks and accounting increase productivity by enhancing the uncertainties have prevented most amount of fodder available and increasing land-based mitigation measures from the water-holding capacity of the soil. In becoming eligible for offsets under the Latin America, a project that introduced Kyoto mechanisms. So far, only animal silvipastoral measures (improved feeding waste management (methane capture practices with trees and shrubs) to increase and combustion) and afforestation or biodiversity and carbon sequestration, reforestation activities are allowed as was shown also to increase carbon storage offsets in the compliance market. These

and reduce CH4 and N2O emissions (by offsets account for only about 1 percent 21 percent and 36 percent, respectively) of the total value of offsets issued under (World Bank, 2008b). The land-use changes the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) were also shown to raise incomes by in 2007, or about US$140 million out of 55.5 percent in Costa Rica and 66.9 percent the total of some US$14 billion available in Nicaragua (World Bank, 2008b). under the CDM. More widespread adoption of improved Land-based mitigation options play land management techniques for a more prominent role in voluntary greenhouse gas mitigation is currently carbon markets. Currently, there are two hindered, in part, by high costs faced voluntary standards issuing carbon offsets by individual producers trying to access for grassland management – the Voluntary LIVESTOCK IN THE BALANCE 73

milk or egg production. Feed efficiency grazing are potentially the most cost- can also be increased by improving herd effective ways to reduce and offset GHG health through improved veterinary emissions (see Box 15). The resultant services, preventive health programmes increases in vegetation cover and soil and improved water quality. organic-matter content sequester v Improved waste management. Most carbon, while inclusion of high-quality methane emissions from manure derive forage in the animals’ diet contributes to from pigs, beef cattle feedlots and dairy reducing methane emissions per unit of farms, where production is concentrated product. Improved grazing management in large operations and manure is stored also generally improves the profitability under anaerobic conditions. Methane of production. mitigation options involve the capture v Reducing deforestation. Deforestation of methane by covered manure-storage to provide new pasture or land to

facilities (biogas collectors). Captured produce feed crops releases more CO2 methane can be flared or used to than any other livestock-related activity. provide a source of energy for electric Intensification of pasture management generators, heating or lighting (which and feed production can reduce the

can offset CO2 emissions from fossil land requirements per unit of animal fuels). product produced, thus curbing v Grazing management. Increased use land-use expansion. Intensification of pasture to provide feed and good alone is not sufficient, however, and pasture management through rotational complementary measures are required

Carbon Standard (VCS) and the Chicago- could instead be supported under based Climate Exchange (CCX). The VCS mechanisms that require less stringent standard, for example, has recently monitoring, for example at the sectoral issued guidelines for activities aimed at or regional level. An increased awareness generating carbon credits for improved of the contribution of land management grassland management. The improved to control of greenhouse gas emissions practices aim at enhancing and of the important economic and stocks by increasing below-ground inputs environmental co-benefits associated or slowing decomposition, enhancing with some mitigation options is raising nitrogen-use efficiency of targeted crops, the profile of agriculture in the climate fire management, feed improvements, change debate in the lead-up to the improved livestock genetics and improved United Nations Framework Convention stocking rate management (VCS, 2008). on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Post-2012 Soil carbon credits account for about Climate Agreement negotiations in half of the credits traded by CCX, and Copenhagen at the end of 2009. nearly 20 percent of those traded under the voluntary carbon market overall. While the voluntary market is relatively 1 Additionality refers to activities that would not small, it has been growing quickly – from have happened in the absence of the carbon US$97 million in 2006 to US$331 million in finance support: (i) the proposed voluntary measure would not be implemented, or (ii) 2007 (Hamilton et al., 2008). the mandatory policy/regulation would be The high costs faced by individual systematically not enforced and that non- producers accessing carbon markets has compliance with those requirements is widespread in the country/region, or (iii) the programme led to discussions on whether the current of activities will lead to a greater level of offset generation system and its strict enforcement of the existing mandatory policy/ regulation. (Adapted from UNFCCC CDM glossary, accounting requirements are well suited available at http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/ to agricultural activities. These activities Guidclarif/glos_CDM_v04.pdf.) 74 THE STATE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 2009

in order to address the other drivers biodiversity, land and forest resources of deforestation such as unclear land and water quality, and will contribute to tenure and logging for timber. global warming. v Changing livestock consumption. Shifting v A key policy focus should be on consumption from animal products with correcting market distortions and policy high associated GHG emissions (beef failures that encourage environmental and sheep meat) to products with lower degradation. For example, subsidies emissions (poultry, vegetable protein) that directly or indirectly promote can reduce total global GHG emissions. overgrazing, land degradation, Increasing the consumption of livestock deforestation, overuse of water or products by poor consumers with no GHG emissions should be reduced or or limited access to them can provide eliminated. Market-based policies, important human health benefits, but such as taxes and fees for natural- reducing high levels of consumption resource use, should cause producers to could help lower emissions with no internalize the costs of environmental adverse health effects (McMichael et al., damages caused by livestock production. 2007). v Some negative environmental consequences from livestock production Constraints on adaptation and stem from problems associated with mitigation open-access common-property resources. There are still many gaps in our knowledge Clarifying property rights and promoting about how climate change will affect mechanisms for cooperation are vital to livestock production. In particular, we need sustainable management of common to understand better how climate affects property. pasture and range composition and the v The application of technologies that consequences for livestock production. It improve the efficiency of land use and has been predicted that climate change feed use can mitigate the negative will bring with it new animal diseases. The effects of livestock production on World Organisation for Animal Health biodiversity, ecosystems and global (OIE) estimates that, to date, 70 percent warming. Technologies that increase of all newly emerging infectious human livestock efficiency include improved diseases originate in animals (OIE, 2008a). breeds, improved grazing-land What is more uncertain is to exactly what management, improved herd-health degree heat affects the of animals management and silvipastoralism. and the promotion of new diseases. We v Payments from public or private sources have quite good understanding of how for environmental services can be an climate change affects broad regions but effective means to promote better are much less certain on its impacts at local environmental outcomes, including levels, on localities and poor households. , conservation of The way climate change alters the fragile and landscapes and carbon relationship between livelihoods and sequestration. production dependent on natural resources v The livestock sector has enormous is particularly fraught with uncertainty. potential to contribute to climate change mitigation. Realizing this potential will require new and extensive initiatives at Key messages of the chapter the national and international levels, including: the promotion of research v There is an urgent need for governments on and development of new mitigation and institutions to develop and enact technologies; effective and enhanced appropriate policies, at the national and means for financing livestock activities; international levels, that focus more on deploying, diffusing and transferring and account for livestock–environment technologies to mitigate GHG emissions; interactions. Continued growth in and enhanced capacities to monitor, livestock production will otherwise exert report and verify emissions from enormous pressures on ecosystems, livestock production.