Livestock: The good, the bad and . . .

Livestock: the good, the bad and … Mario Herrero, ILRI ILRI APM, Addis Ababa, April 2010

Why are we here today? ‘ Livestock are responsible for 51% of global GHG emissions’

To unravel what is behind the controversy, the polarised opinions, the misunderstanding, the facts…
To learn a bit
To think how we can make the most of this huge research opportunity!
Why are we here today?

Livestock – the goods (1) At least 600 million of the World’s poor depend on livestock Thornton et al. 2002, revised 2009

Livestock products have a huge value of production (i.e. milk)
Mixed systems responsible for close to 50% of the global crop output
A significant global asset: value of at least $1.4 trillion (excluding infrastructure that supports livestock industries) (Thornton and Herrero 2008)
Livestock industries organised in long market chains that employ at least 1.3 billion people (LID 1999)
Livestock – the goods (2)

Users of land not suitable for other livelihood activities
A key risk reduction strategy for vulnerable communities (Freeman et al 2007)
Livestock products contribute to 17% of the global kilocalorie consumption and 33% of the protein consumption (FAOSTAT 2008)
Providers of food for at least 830 million food insecure people (Gerber et al 2007)
Important for reducing child malnutrition
Livestock – the goods (3) Herrero et al 2008a

Land use
80% of global deforestation in LAC direct land conversion to pastures (20% soybean production)
33% of arable land used to plant crops for animals
Large exports of feed to EU, China
Water
31% of water used for agriculture
90% for the production of feed
Projected demand for livestock products is likely to double total agricultural water use by 2050 (CA 2007) due primarily to increased needs for feeds
The bads

Livestock and nutrients
(the good and the evil)
Manures provide 14%, 9% and 40% of N, P and K inputs for global crop production, respectively
Livestock important in smallholder systems as a source of fertiliser….. not enough manure available in places
… but at the same time concentration of nutrients in industrial system causes water pollution and waste disposal problems (lack of regulation)
Herrero et al. 2009

CO 2 CH 4 N 2 O Deforestation Enteric fermentation Manure mgt Chemical N. fert. production On-farm fossil fuel Deforestation OM release from ag. soils Pasture degradation Processing fossil fuel Transport fossil fuel Enteric fermentation Manure storage / processing N fertilization Legume production Manure storage / processing Manure spreading / dropping Manu indirect emissions Lives tock and GHG: 18% of global emis sions (varies between 13-18% depending on the source) FAO 2006

Consensus from science
Livestock are not bad everywhere…
Growth of the sector to meet demand may be unsustainable if trends continue
Significant opportunities to reduce environmental impact and increase efficiency in the developing world
Need to manage demand and increase regulation
Big differences between North and South

Personal take
Complex...but not a reason not to act
No free lunch – lots of trade-offs, need to think of simultaneous dimensions (NRM, livelihoods, GHG…)
Lots of counterfactuals
Difficult to negotiate for emissions reductions – different paradigms between North and South
Need carrots and sticks

Gaps
No real global integrated assessment of livestock in competition with other sectors.
Long Shadow good but not enough as it looks at the livestock sector in isolation of other sectors
Understanding the magnitude of the potential impacts of technological fixes
How to manage demand adequately (ethical issues)
Can we meet demand for livestock products under carbon constrained markets?
Who are the winners and losers?

Livestock: the good, the bad and … thanks! APM 2010 Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Livestock: The good, the bad and . . .

by ILRI on Apr 14, 2010

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

Statistics

Livestock: The good, the bad and . . . — Presentation Transcript