Livestock and resource use in the context of climate change


Published on

Presentation made in the Inter-agency Donor meeting on livestock in Washington DC on April 17th 2012.

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Livestock and resource use in the context of climate change

  1. 1. Livestock at the Crossroads: new Directions for Policy, Research and Development CooperationLivestock, climate change and resource use: present and future Andy Jarvis, Caitlin Peterson, Phil Thornton, Polly Ericksen, Mario Herrero, Michael Peters CCAFS Theme Leader
  2. 2. Livestock products: Developing countries are hungry for more. •Growth in animal product consumption has increased more than any other commodity group.1 •Greatest increases in S and SE Asia, Latin America. -Overall meat consumption in China has quadrupled since 1980 to 119 lbs/person/yr. 2 •Economic and population growth, rising per capita Photo by: CGIAR incomes, urbanization
  3. 3. 2 Livestock consumption patterns •Between 1961 and 2005 milk consumption in developing countries doubled, meat consumption tripled, and egg consumption increased by a factor of five. 1
  4. 4. 3 Livestock consumption patterns Past and projected consumption of livestock products •As incomes grow, expenditure on livestock products increases rapidly .3 -GDP growth in E Asia from 1991-2001 was 7% per year, compared to 2.3% in other developing countries and 1.8% in developed countries. •Consumption is leveling off in developed countries, but more than doubled since 1980 in developing countries (from 31 lbs. to 62 lbs. in 2002). -Rapid growth led by Source: FAO (2006a) and FAO (2006b). China, India, & Brazil projected to continue.
  5. 5. The livestock sector has a substantial GHG “hoofprint.” Livestock Gigatons CO2 Emissions Source equivalent Land use and 2.5 land-use change Feed production 0.4 Animal 1.9 production Manure 2.2 management Processing and 0.03 Photo by: CGIAR transport Source: FAO•Responsible for 50% of all land use change emissions, 80% of all agricultureemissions.3
  6. 6. 2 Livestock and GHG •10-18%3 of all global anthropogenic GHG -Other estimates as high as 51%4,5 •Range arises from methodological differences -Inventories vs. life cycle assessments -Attribution of land use to livestock -Omissions, misallocations Range of GHG intensities for livestock commodities 200 180 •Highest variation occurs for kg CO2 eq/kg animal protein 160 beef, due to variety of 140 120 production systems. 100 80 •Ruminants require more 60 fossil energy use, emit more 40 20 CH4 per animal.6 0 Pig Poultry Beef Milk Eggs Source: de Vries and de Boer (2009)
  7. 7. Which system is more sustainable?
  8. 8. 3 Livestock and GHG •30-45% of earth’s terrestrial surface is pasture - 80% of all agricultural land •1/3 arable land used for feed crop production •70% of previously forested land in the Amazon = pasture Source: Erb et al. (2007)
  9. 9. 4 Livestock and GHG Contribution of extensive (pastoral) and intensive (feed-supplemented, including feed-lot) livestock systems to greenhouse gas emissions. •Only 3% of total global GHG emissions produced by ruminants in Sub-Saharan Africa (which supports 166 million poor livestock keepers)9 •Most emissions come from industrialized countries practicing factory farming •The least emissions come from family farms in developing countries… IPCC default methane producing potential (BO) values for developed and developing countries. -But emissions per animal are higher (usually due to poor diet)
  10. 10. African livelihoods continue to depend on livestock. Source: FAO 2011•E Africa: 40-50% meat comes from pastoralsystems, but transitioning to mixed crop-livestock•Concentrated in arid/semi-arid zones•Use of animals for draft power has increased overmost of Africa: from 350,000 to 2 million oxen in thepast 50 yrs in W Africa alone Photo by: Neil Palmer
  11. 11. 2 Africa and livestock •Demand for livestock products in Sub-Saharan Africa projected to double, from 200 kcal/person/day in 2000 to 400 kcal/person/day in 2050.7 -Population growth a huge factor •Estimated to contribute 30% to Africa’s agricultural GDP in 2003 •Africa is a growing net import region (US $2,258 million in 2003) Net trade in livestock products in Africa Source: FAO 2005
  12. 12. 3 Africa and livestock Rwanda’s “One Cow per Poor Family” Program (Girinka) demonstrates power of livestock to alleviate poverty. •Family either receives donation of cow or bank loan to buy one. •Calf is shared with other members of community RESULTS: •Reduced malnutrition risk •Income from sale of milk and offspring •Manure for croplands •Community solidarity Photo by: ILRI
  13. 13. Livestock systems face a number of climate change related challenges.•Disease and pest distributions•Quantity, quality, and composition offeed•Increased cost of housing and feed•Water availability and quality•Decreased productivity due to heatstress•Impaired reproduction/increasedmortality Livestock production system in areas projected to undergo over 20 per centreduction in Length of Growing Period to 2050 Source: ILRI
  14. 14. 3 Climate change effects •Greatest impacts will be felt in grazing systems in arid/semi-arid areas •Changes in range-fed livestock numbers directly proportional to change in annual precipitation8 -Several GCMs predict precipitation decrease of 10-20% in semi-arid zones of Africa Areas in East Africa where a) rain per rainy day may increase by more than 10 per cent and b) rain per rainy day may decrease by more than 10 per cent Photo by: Neil Palmer Source: Ericksen et al. 2011
  15. 15. Developing country productions systems that are eco-efficient B1 scenario shown though the pattern is similar for all SRES scenarios Smith P et al. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 363:789-813 (2008) Source: ILRI
  16. 16. Potential for reduced CH4 and CO2 emissions from livestock and pasture management in the tropics Table: Mitigation options in rangeland-based humid-subhumid systems in Central and South America Option Kg CH4/t milk Kg CH4/t meat Cerrado 78 1552 100% adoption† of 31 713 Brachiaria pasture 30% adoption† of 64 1300 Brachiaria pasture The adoption of improved Brachiaria pastures would reduce the methane emissions by more than half compared to production on the natural cerrado vegetation. †“Adoption” refers to the proportion of total milk and meat production in 2030 that comes from implementing the option analyzed. Source: Philip K. Thornton and Mario Herrero (2010), Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107 (46):19667-19672
  17. 17. Agosto 15, 2008 Silvopastoral systems: A mini-revolution in Colombia and Central America Piedemonte llanero 13 meses Octubre 22, 2008Estado inicial: Julio 17, 2007 15 meses
  18. 18. MAC curve showing the potential CO2e capturefor the implementation of SSPi in differentregions of Colombia
  19. 19. It’s all about the livestock…..either improve it’s efficiency, or get out of it! Carbon capture (CO2eq) for agricultural sector (fruits, livestock and rice) in Colombia
  20. 20. The hoofprint means there is plenty to do!•Livestock IS a major contributor to climate change, and arguably has thelargest ecological footprint on the planet (certainly in terms of area).•Trend is that things can only get worse – greater demand for livestockproducts. Likely to have a larger and larger share of global greenhouseemissions.•Developing countries are where it’s at! Biggest potential for mitigation,and plenty of opportunities out there for major system transformations•There are still big knowledge gaps that research can and should fill,starting with better estimates of emissions•Good policies accompanied by the right technologies could transformthe hoofprint and put developed nations to shame
  21. 21.
  22. 22. 1 The state of food and agriculture: Livestock in the balance. Rome: United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, 2009, 9.2 FAOSTAT 2010, cited in: Skillful means: The challenges of China’s encounter with factory farming. New York: Brighter Green, 2011, 1.3 Steinfeld et al. (2006). Livestock’s long shadow: Environmental issues and options. Rome: United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization.4 Goodland, R., and Anhang, J. 2009. Livestock and climate change: What if the key actors in climate change were pigs, chickens and cows? WorldWatch November/December 2009, p10-19, WorldWatch Institute, Washington DC5 Herrero, M. et al. 2011. Livestock and greenhouse gas emissions: The importance of getting the numbers right. Animal Feed Science and Technology 166-167: 779-782.6 de Vries, M., and de Boer, I.J.M., 2009. Comparing environmental impacts for livestock products: A review of life cycle assessments. Livestock Science 128(1): 1-11.7 Thornton, P. 2010. Livestock production: Recent trends, future prospects. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of Biology 365: 2853-2867.8 Working group II: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability, Africa, Livestock. Geneva: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2001.9 Climate, livestock and poverty: Challenges at the interface. Nairobi: International Livestock Research Institute, 2009.