1.
Role of Livestock Sector in Global
Sustainability
Ermias Kebreab
Professor, Sesnon Endowed Chair
University of California, Davis
Rome, 21 Sept. 2017
1

2.
Outline
 General background
 Global demand/consumption
 Sustainability
 SDG and planetary boundaries
 Social considerations
 Contribution of livestock to diet
 Environmental considerations (LCA)
 Economic considerations
 Path forward/summary
2

3.
21st Century
Challenge: Can we
stay on trend in food
& agriculture?
Relative certainties:
(1) population exceeding 9 billion
around 2050
(2) Rising average incomes
(3) Resource competition and
scarcity
(4) Environmental change
Godfray and Garnett (2014)
Many big uncertainties, such as:
• climate change and compounded
uncertainties on yields, water
supply, invasive pests and diseases
• policy responses to climate change
...or are we facing
tightening global
food supply –
demand balance?
… reversal of the
favorable trend in
food supply per
capita?
… increasing risk of
food price spikes?
3

4.
Global Demand/Consumption
Alexandratos and Bruinsma, 2012
4
2017
2050

5.
Sustainability – What Does it Mean?
5

6.
Sustainability – A Wicked Problem?
One way is to frame sustainability is as a
‘wicked problem’ that cannot be
solved, only managed
Animal Frontiers
6

7.
Sustainable Development Goals
7

8.
Planetary Boundaries
8
Steffen et al., 2015

9.
Social Considerations
9

10.
Social Considerations
Developing
 Food security
 Poverty alleviation
 Reduce environ.
Footprint
 Preserve social
and cultural value
Developed
 Food security
 Priority to protect
environment
 Trust
 Misinformation/
Advocacy
10

11.
11
Dietary Gaps (Cameroon)
Kuyper et al., 2017

12.
12
Dietary Gaps (U.S.)
http://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/chapter-2/current-eating-patterns-in-the-united-states/#figure-2-1

13.
13
Evaluation of Livestock’s Contribution
 Calorie? Protein?
 Literature mostly
based on protein
supply
 Too simplistic in
accounting the
variety of easily
available
nutrients in
animal products
Drewnowski et al., 2015

14.
14
Carbon Footprint of Foods
Drewnowski et al., 2015

15.
15
Carbon Footprint of Foods
Drewnowski et al., 2015

16.
Efficient use of Biomass
Mottet et al., 2017
16

17.
Food vs Feed
Average values from Baldwin, 1984 and CAST, 1999 for U.S.
17

18.
Environmental Sustainability
18

19.
Direct Agricultural GHG Emissions
19
US-EPA, 2011,
www.ccafs.cgiar.org/bigfacts

20.
Challenges in Quantification
20
Thoma et al., 2013

21.
Challenges in Quantification
21
Appuhamy, France & Kebreab, 2016

22.
Potential GHG Reduction
Caro, Kebreab & Mitloehner, 2016
2012
2050
22

23.
GHG not the Only Concern
UN, 2000
23
Estimated total
reactive nitrogen
deposition
from the atmosphere
early 1990s, and
projected for 2050

24.
Trade-off - N excretion and CH4
Tier 3 model Dijkstra et al. (2011)
24

25.
Land Use per Unit Protein
25
Westhoek et al., 2011

26.
Water Use per Unit Nutrient
26
Mekonnen and Hoekstra, 2012

27.
Holistic Assessment
 Climate change
 Global Warming Potential
 Air, Soil and Water Quality
 Eutrophication
 Acidification (fish mortality,
forest decline, biodiversity)
 Energy and resource
efficiency
 Primary Energy Demand
 Land use
 Water use efficiency 27

28.
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
 Becoming the gold standard in the
emissions measurement
 Methodological choices and
assumptions may be subjective and
affect the results
 such as system boundary delineation,
 functional units, and
 allocation techniques
28

29.
LCA on Specialty Feed Ingredients
Kebreab et al., 2016
29

30.
Land Use Change - Europe
30
Kebreab et al., 2016

31.
Emissions Sources – China vs EU
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Feed production Feed Mill Animal Housing Enteric Methane Manure storage Manure Field
Application
kgCO2eq/1tonofLW
Emission sources
China
Europe
31

32.
Economic Considerations
 Are economic and environmental sustainability
complementary?
100
200
300
400
500
600
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Net GHG emission (T eqCO2/kg LW)
Gross margin (€/cow)
r=0.64
Veysset et al., 2013 Von Keyserlingk et al., 2013
32

33.
Cost-Mitigation Trade-off
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
Relativeexcretionorcosts
(base=100%)
N excretion
Diet costs
CH4 -10%CH4 base CH4 -5% CH4 -14%
Linear programming minimum cost diet model Moraes et al., 2012, 2015
33

34.
Pathway for Sustainable Livestock
Sector?
 Policy dialogue through multi-
stakeholders initiative e.g. the global
agenda for sustainable livestock
 enables discussion with all stakeholders
involved in livestock supply chains to build
common knowledge and solutions.
 Policies that support the adoption of
best practices and mitigations options
34

35.
Summary
 Demand will drive increased
production of ASF so sustainable
production is a must
 There is no one shoe fits all solution
 Redesigning sustainable livestock
farming systems is a challenge
balancing multiple and changing
objectives
35

36.
Summary
 The aim is for more sustainable system
as sustainability is not a fixed state
 To evaluate sustainability (at least
environmental), we need to have a
standard system of accounting
36

37.
Acknowledgments
37