Mario Herrero, Livestock and GHG emissions: mitigation options and trade-offs (presentation from Mitigation session at CCAFS Science Workshop, December 2010)

1. Livestock and GHG emissions:
mitigation options and trade-offs
Mario Herrero and Philip K. Thornton
CCAFS Science meeting
December 1st-2nd, 2010 | Cancun, Mexico

2. Structure of the presentation
– Background
– Livestock and livelihoods
– Livestock and GHG
– Estimates
– Key principles
– Mitigation options
– Researchable issues
– Conclusions

3. General context
• Population to reach almost 9 billion over the next quarter
of a century
• Getting richer and urbanised
• Increased demands for livestock products
• Lots of changes occurring: climate, economics,
technology, resource availability, intensification
• Systems are changing……

4. Revised demand for livestock products
to 2050
Annual per capita Total consumption
consumption
year Meat (kg) Milk (kg) Meat (Mt) Milk (Mt)
Developing 2002 28 44 137 222
2050 44 78 326 585
Developed 2002 78 202 102 265
2050 94 216 126 295
Rosegrant et al 2009

5. An example of the changing nature of livestock systems
Can we influence the next transition for the benefit of society and the
environment?
W. Africa 1966 – pastoral system 2004 – crop-livestock system

6. Key concerns for the future
– How to achieve food security
– How to maintain livelihoods
– Protection and maintenance of
ecosystems services
– Economic growth
– Reducing the environmental impacts for
the livestock sector

7. Livestock and livelihoods

8. Livestock and livelihoods (1)
– Livestock systems occupy 26% or the global land area (Reid
et al 2008)
– 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 key as a risk reduction strategy for vulnerable
communities (Freeman et al 2007)
– Important providers of nutrients and traction for growing crops
in smallholder systems (at least 60% of the global cropping
area receives manure applications – Herrero et al 2008a)
Herrero et al. (Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2009, 1: 111-120)

9. Livestock and livelihoods (2)
At least 600 million of the World’s poor depend on
livestock
Thornton et al. 2002

10. Livestock – high value produc
Milk has the highest value of production of all agricultural
commodities (FAOSTAT 2008)

11. Food production
Cereals Production
4%
14%
AgroPastoral
Mixed Extensive
45%
Mixed Intensive
Other
35% Developed countries
2%
Mixed systems in the developing World produce almost 50% of the
cereals of the World
Herrero et al. Science 327: 822-825

12. Livestock and livelihoods (3)
– Livestock products contribute to 17% of the global kilocalorie
consumption and 33% of the protein consumption (FAOSTAT
2008)
– Livestock provide food for at least 830 million food insecure
people (Gerber et al 2007)
– Significant global differences in kilocalorie consumption but…
highest rates of increase in consumption of livestock products in
the developing World
– . Europe - 2000 SSA - 2000
3%
3%
10% Meat Meat
24% 4%
11% Dairy Dairy
37% Fruit & Vegetables Fruit & Vegetables
5% Cereals
Cereals 3%
Roots & Tubers Roots & Tubers
47%
1% Dryland crops 16% Dryland crops
31% Others Others
5%
Herrero et al 2008a

13. Livestock and GHG emissions

14. Livestock’s long shadow
A food-chain perspective of GHG emissions
• Emissions from feed production
– chemical fertilizer fabrication and application
– on-farm fossil fuel use
– livestock-related land use changes
– C release from soils
– [Savannah burning]
• Emissions from livestock rearing
– enteric fermentation
– animal manure management
– [respiration by livestock]
• Post harvest emissions
– slaughtering and processing
– international transportation
Steinfeld et al 2006
– [national transportation]

15. Livestock and GHG: 18% of global
emissions
ProductionN. fert. production
Chemical fertilisants N
Energie fossile fuel
On-farm fossil ferme
Déforestation
Deforestation
N2O
Sol cultivé from ag. soils
OM release
Pasture degradation
Désertification pâturages
Transformation fuel
Processing fossil
Deforestation Transport fossil fuel
Transport
CO2
Fermentation ruminale
Enteric fermentation
Manure storage / processing
Effluents, stockage/traitement
N fertilization
Epandage fertilisants N
Enteric Legume production
Production légumineuses
fermentation Manure storage / processing
Effluents, stockage/traitement
Manure spreading / dropping
Effluents, épandage/dépôt
Manu indirect emissions
Effluents, emission indirecte
CH4
Prepared by Bonneau, 2008

16. Mitigation options
• Reductions in emissions: significant potential!
– Managing demand for animal products
– Improved / intensified diets for ruminants
– Reduction of animal numbers
– Reduced livestock-induced deforestation
– Change of animal species
– Feed additives to reduce enteric fermentation
– Manure management (feed additives, methane production,
regulations for manure disposal)
Herrero et al. (Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2009, 1: 111-120)

17. The world will require 1 billion tonnes of additional cereal
grains to 2050 to meet food and feed demands
(IAASTD 2009)
Grains
1048 million tonnes
more to 2050
human
Livestock
consumption
430 million MT
Monogastrics mostly
458 million MT
biofuels
160 million MT

18. Changing diets
Consuming less meat or different types of
meat could lower GHG emissions
Stehfest et al. 2009. Climatic Change

19. Changing diets
Consuming less meat or different types of
meat could lower GHG emissions
Less land needed
....but social and economic impacts?
....displacement of people?
Stehfest et al. 2009. Climatic Change

20. Mitigation 101 – intensification is essential
The better we feed cows the less methane per kg of milk they
produce
4.5
4
Chad - pastoral
3.5
3
CO2 eq / kg milk
2.5
Series1
2
1.5
1
India mixed
0.5 US/Europe - mixed
0
8 9 10 11 12
ME kg DM
Herrero et al (forthcoming)

21. Mitigation options – intensifying diets
Thornton and Herrero 2010 (PNAS 107, 19667-19672)

22. Systems shifts - some results from
the GLOBIOM model (IIASA-ILRI)
Simulation horizon: 2020
STICKY livestock production systems
- min 75% of LPS of 2000 following production trajectory to 2020
FLEXIBLE livestock production systems
- min 25% of LPS of 2000 still in the same place in 2020
- intensifing mixed crop livestock systems
22
Havlik, Herrero, Obersteiner et al, COP15, 2009

23. STICKY x FLEXIBLE
IF system change possible  shift to intensive production systems
23
Havlik, Herrero, Obersteiner et al, COP15, 2009

24. STICKY x FLEXIBLE
Adjustments in production systems help to keep commodity prices low24
Havlik, Herrero, Obersteiner et al, COP15, 2009

25. STICKY x FLEXIBLE
RED through livestock does not have negative effect on non-CO2 emissions.
25
Havlik, Herrero, Obersteiner et al, COP15, 2009

26. Can we untap the potential for carbon sequestration
in rangeland systems?
Largest land use system
Potentially a large C sink
Could be an important
income diversification
source
Difficulties in:
Measuring and
monitoring C stocks
Establishment of
payment schemes
Potential for carbon
Dealing with mobile sequestration in rangelands
pastoralists (Conant and Paustian 2002)

27. Some conclusions
• Complex issue: livestock’s livelihood benefits and
environmental impacts largely dependent on location,
systems, intensification level and others
• Reducing livestock’s impact on the environment requires
the fundamental recognition that societal benefits need to
be met at the same time as the environmental ones
(current studies: too much focus on the environment, less
so on livelihoods)
• Understanding trade-offs requires a ‘multi-currency’
approach: energy, emissions, water, nutrients, incomes,
etc along value chains (life cycles)
• Well placed to make global inventories

28. Some key trade-offs
• Biomass uses for food, feed, fuel and fertiliser
• Intensifying systems to increase production efficiency
while balancing environmental protection and
providing livelihoods for poor people
• Cheap food vs sustainable food for consumers?
Herrero et al 2009 Current Op Env Sust

29. Researchable issues
• Social and economic impacts of mitigation
• More needed on scenarios of consumption
• Mechanisms for implementing mitigation schemes
(policies: carrots, sticks, institutions, etc): need to
increase adoption rates!
• What is sustainable intensification? Limits?
• Support on inventory development for developing
countries
• Need to refine LCA analyses

30. Thank you!