8% of water used by humans goes into livestock production
18% of global green gas emissions are generated by the livestock sector
20% of terrestial animal biomass is livestock
20% of pastures and rangelands are degraded by livestock
26% of ice-free land is occupied by livestock
30% of land once home to wildlife is now occupied by livestock
33% of cropland produces feed for livestock
37% of anthropogenic methane emissions are generated by the livestock sector
37% of pesticides are used in livestock production
50% of antibiotics are used in livestock production
65% of anthropogenic nitrous oxide emissions comes from the livestock sector
70% of agricultural land is occupied by livestock
70% of deforested land is converted to pastures

Livestock facts and figures (Source: UN Food and Agriculture Organization)

Cows, pigs, sheep and poultry have been awarded the dubious honour of being among the world’s greatest environmental threats, according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).

The report, entitled Livestock’s long shadow, says the livestock industry is degrading land, contributing to the greenhouse effect, polluting water resources, and destroying biodiversity. In summary, the sector is “one of the top two or three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems at every scale”.

The authors say the demand for meat is expected to more than double by 2050 and therefore the environmental impact of production must be halved in order to avoid worsening the harmful impacts of the industry.

Perhaps the report’s most striking finding is that the livestock sector accounts for 18% of global greenhouse gas emissions – more than transport, which emits 13.5%.

Entire cycle

The FAO’s estimate of livestock emissions surpasses previous ones because this time researchers looked at the entire production cycle. This includes emissions generated by fertiliser and feed production, deforestation to open up pastures, manure management, and emissions from the livestock themselves and from transporting them and their feed.

Livestock require a lot of land, occupying 26% of Earth’s ice-free land. Their pastures account for 70% of deforested areas in the Amazon, and their feed occupies one-third of global cropland.

Not only does deforestation increase greenhouse gas emissions by releasing carbon previously stored in trees, it is also a major driver in the loss of biodiversity. The report goes so far as to say that the livestock sector, which accounts for about 20% of terrestrial animal biomass, “may be a leading player in the reduction of biodiversity”.

Livelihoods in livestock

Encouraging the global population to become vegans is not a viable solution, however. For starters, says the lead author of the FAO report, Henning Steinfeld, it is quite simply not an option for many of the one billion people whose livelihoods rely on livestock production. [GreenVeg - Hmm, that’s like saying people should continue to fly because we need to keep the jobs the aviation industry provides. Maybe when the problems get so bad there are no alternatives, Mr Steinfeld will feel it is the right time to advocate veganism - it is this continued ‘in the box thinking’ that means real progress will be slower than it could be.]

Moreover, vegetable production is not devoid of environmental problems either. And recent studies have shown that global fish stocks are not sustainable at current levels of exploitation (see No more seafood by 2050?).

Steinfeld says the crux of the livestock problem is the sheer bulk of land the sector occupies: “We need to discourage indiscriminate deforestation for pasture, a large part of which takes place because of land speculation.”

Convenient occupation

In the Amazon, where governments struggle to enforce legal systems, settlers occupy swathes of “no-man’s land” and wait 15 years, after which time practice, though not law, dictates that they own the land. Using the land for pasture is simply a convenient tool to occupy the land, explains Steinfeld.

Ultimately, the authors argue, environmental services such as sustainably managed land and clean water, need to be given a price.

“Most frequently, natural resources are free or underpriced, which leads to overexploitation and pollution,” write the authors, concluding that “a top priority is to achieve prices and fees that reflect the full economic and environmental costs”.

Steinfeld says negotiations of the next step of the Kyoto Protocol might be a good opportunity to do this.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS