Carbon myopia: The urgent need for integrated social, economic and environmental action in the livestock sector

Abstract

Livestock have long been integral to food production systems, often not by choice but by need. While our knowledge of livestock greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions mitigation has evolved, the prevailing focus has been—somewhat myopically—on technology applications associated with mitigation. Here, we (1) examine the global distribution of livestock GHG emissions, (2) explore social, economic and environmental co‐benefits and trade‐offs associated with mitigation interventions and (3) critique approaches for quantifying GHG emissions. This review uncovered many insights. First, while GHG emissions from ruminant livestock are greatest in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMIC; globally, 66% of emissions are produced by Latin America and the Caribbean, East and southeast Asia and south Asia), the majority of mitigation strategies are designed for developed countries. This serious concern is heightened by the fact that 80% of growth in global meat production over the next decade will occur in LMIC. Second, few studies concurrently assess social, economic and environmental aspects of mitigation. Of the 54 interventions reviewed, only 16 had triple‐bottom line benefit with medium–high mitigation potential. Third, while efforts designed to stimulate the adoption of strategies allowing both emissions reduction (ER) and carbon sequestration (CS) would achieve the greatest net emissions mitigation, CS measures have greater potential mitigation and co‐benefits. The scientific community must shift attention away from the prevailing myopic lens on carbon, towards more holistic, systems‐based, multi‐metric approaches that carefully consider the raison d'être for livestock systems. Consequential life cycle assessments and systems‐aligned ‘socio‐economic planetary boundaries’ offer useful starting points that may uncover leverage points and cross‐scale emergent properties. The derivation of harmonized, globally reconciled sustainability metrics requires iterative dialogue between stakeholders at all levels. Greater emphasis on the simultaneous characterization of multiple sustainability dimensions would help avoid situations where progress made in one area causes maladaptive outcomes in other areas.

Current Perspectives on Achieving Pronounced Enteric Methane Mitigation From Ruminant Production

“…Most CH 4 mitigation strategies have been developed for intensive production systems in industrialized economies (Harrison et al, 2021), and a critical point to implementation at the farm level is that both chemical inhibitors of methanogenesis and bromoform-containing algae have demonstrated CH 4 mitigation effects when incorporated into the ration and supplemented to animals on a daily basis. Globally, 47% of total enteric CH 4 is produced by ruminants in grazing systems, with approximately one-half of grazing enteric CH 4 emissions coming from nondairy ruminants [calculated from FAO (2017)].…”

“…Carbon sequestration in soil is regarded as a tool to potentially offset enteric CH 4 emissions from grazing ruminants, especially in developing countries and locations with degraded soils. However, soil carbon content cannot increase indefinitely (Harrison et al, 2021) and therefore carbon sequestration in soil alone cannot offset raising emissions of greenhouse gases in the long term. Amelioration in the emissions of greenhouse gases from livestock can also be approached through the demand side by decreased consumption and waste.…”

Editorial: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Mitigation From Agricultural and Horticultural Systems

“…Using AWD can result in greater rice biomass production and this requires greater N fertilization, ensuing increase in N 2 O emissions (Christie et al, 2014). Such N 2 O increases may well offset any mitigation caused by reduced CH 4 emissions, underscoring the need to holistically explore multiple GHG emissions in a closed systems, using multiple metrics (Harrison et al, 2012(Harrison et al, , 2021.…”

“…However, to achieve deep cuts in emissions without adversely impacting productivity or agricultural economic prosperity, we call for more studies that transcend disciplinary boundaries. Such studies should focus on not just GHG emissions, but multiple sustainability metrics (environmental, social, economic, institutional) and across scales (plot, field, region, continent, global) allowing more comprehensively evaluation of the wider co-benefits and trade-offs associated with GHG emissions mitigation (Harrison et al, 2021).…”

Integrated Crop Management Practices Improve Grain Yield and Resource Use Efficiency of Super Hybrid Rice

“…Assuming that total global arable productive land used for rice production remains unchanged ( Faridvand et al, 2021 ; Raza et al, 2021 ; Rezaei-Chiyaneh et al, 2021a , b ), intensification of rice yields must be achieved to ensure food security. Such intensification must occur in sustainable, profitable, and socially-acceptable ways, without degrading natural resources, causing excessive nutrient losses or eutrophication, loss of biodiversity, or increasing greenhouse gas emissions ( Alcock et al, 2015 ; Liu et al, 2020a ; Harrison et al, 2021 ). It is also likely that climate change will incite more frequent extreme events such as droughts and flash flooding, which in many regions will seriously challenge the consistency of agricultural productivity from year to year ( Harrison et al, 2011 , 2012a , b ; Phelan et al, 2015 ).…”