Climate Smart Livestock
Interventions
Polly Ericksen
Programme Leader, Livestock Systems and Environment
Climate Smart Agriculture Technologies in SEA
Manila, 2 June2015

GHG intensity of livestock production
(Herrero et al., 2014)

Sources of GHG emissions during livestock
production(Dickhoefer et al., 2014)

Feasibility of LEDs in the Livestock Sector?
• Hoping for “win-win”: better fed animals have
lower emissions intensities
• Get accurate livestock system numbers and
typologies/ spatial distribution
• Update emissions factors
• Apply different models for quantification
• Dairy sector EA; Rice –based systems SEA

Livestock holdings Vietnam
Regional variation in
livestock holding
• North‐South decline in the share of
livestock‐derived income in total
income
• Dominance of pig‐derived income in
all
regions, but less so in poorest regions
• Cattle relatively important in CH and
SCC

Ruminant CH4 emissions during livestock production
in OECD countries versus SSA
• OECD states: Strong and linear
relationship between intake
and digestibility & enteric
methane production
• SSA: Livestock often at sub-
maintenance
?
cold
dry season
hot
dry season
Early rainy
season
rainy
season
post
rainy
season
Lack of knowledge on ruminant CH4
emissions in SSA
wrong GHG inventories
, no data, relevant
ranges unexplored
200
100
90
80
150
Maintenanance
level(%)

CH4 and N2O emissions due to manure management
Lack of knowledge on manure
management assosiated GHG
emissions in SSA
wrong GHG inventories
• IPCC guidelines: 2% of added feces or urine N lost
as N2O
• Our data: 0.2 - 0.8% of added N lost as N2O

Preserve nutrients: About 75%-90% of the nutrient intake of
production animals is excreted via dung and urine
Protect health and safety: prevent transmission of zoonotic
diseases that be transmitted through manure.
Reduce detrimental environmental effects: Poor manure
handling leads to higher greenhouse gas emissions and
pollution of groundwater and surface water.
Economic viability: Good manure management  better
organic fertilizer  less synthetic fertilizers  lower
production costs.
Capturing methane as biogas, provides cooking fuel and
lighting that can replace firewood and charcoal.
Benefits of Integrated Manure Management
1 M3
biogas will be equivalent to:
5.5 kg of firewood
1.6 kg of charcoal
0.75 liter of kerosene
0.45 kg of LPG
1.5 to 1.7 kWh of electricity
One biogas plant has potentials for:
GHG emission mitigation:
4.0 [tons CO2 eq/plant/yr]
Deforestation reduction:
0.3 [ha of forest/plant/yr]
Soil nutrificaton:
2.7 [t (DM) bio‐slurry/plant/yr]

emissions
Soil
Animals
Excretions
N
utrients
&
O
rganic
m
atter
Anim
alFeed
N
utrients
Crops
Manure
 outputs
inputs 
inputs 
Increase efficiency
 reduces emissions
 reduces need inputs
Nutrient Cycle principle

10
Overview of the manure management
manual
1. Introduction to
integrated manure
management
5. Anaerobic digestion
of manure to produce
biogas
2. Livestock housing
systems and manure
types
6. Management of bio-
slurry and liquid
manures
3. Management of solid
manure
7. Special management
options for manure
4. Composting manure

Adaptation and livestock
• Climate change will affect livestock production
directly
–Heat stressed animals digest less efficiently
–Feed and fodder availability will be affected
as climate patterns change
–Pest and disease distributions will change
–Resource governance arrangements will
need to adapt

Livestock and Climate Change in East Africa:
Exploring Combinations of Adaptation and Mitigation Options
1. Select livestock systems (contribution to
emissions + vulnerability)
2. Select suitable options with adaptation and
mitigation potential
3. Model the impacts of options through the
FAO Global Livestock Environmental
Assessment Model (GLEAM)
Improved animal husbandry and
health
•improve fertility
•reduce mortality rate
Improved feed quality
•processing crop residues and
adding maize to the ration
Improved grassland management
•improved grazing management
•increase legumes in grasslands
Emissions
potential
Silvestri et al.,2014

Targeting FS pillar of CSA
Market options,
intensification,
diversification,
crop-livestock integration
Crop intensification,
increase market options
Increase production,
off-farm opportunities
61%
households
food insecure
Households

CSA and livestock: tradeoffs
• CSA introduces new objectives: adaptation
and mitigation
• If climate risk management increases as a
priority, it will affect production goals
• If mitigation becomes profitable, this will
affect production goals
• Livestock systems will adjust, differently by
context
• …. Don’t forget nutrition!