This document discusses balancing trade-offs in the livestock sector between food production, efficiency, livelihoods, and the environment. It notes that livestock occupy a large amount of global land and water resources and account for a significant portion of greenhouse gas emissions. However, livestock also provide important economic and nutritional benefits globally. Going forward, more sustainable and equitable livestock systems will be needed to meet increasing demand for livestock products while minimizing environmental impacts. Intensification of production could allow for higher output with fewer animals and less land expansion, but trade-offs would need to be carefully considered.

1. Livestock and global change:
Production systems for the future:
Towards a sustainable and equitable livestock sector
balancing trade-offs between food production,
efficiency, livelihoods and the environment
Mario Herrero
M. Herrero and P.K. Thornton
WCCA/Nairobi Forum Presentation
ILRI ‘livestock live talk‘, 21 September 2010 | ILRI, Nairobi
st
Nairobi, 28 November 2012

2. Livestock – the big numbers
– 17 billion domestic animals globally! (SOFA 2009)
– 30% of the Earth’s ice-free surface occupied by
livestock systems (Reid et al 2008)
– 1/3 of global cropland used for feed production
– 14-18% of global greenhouse gas emissions (FAO
2006)
– 32% of global freshwater consumption (Heinke et al,
forthcoming)

3. Livestock’s economic benefits
– Livestock are 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 GDP: 20-40% of agricultural GDP
– Incomes for producers (more constant than crops)
– Livestock as a risk management tool, especially for the
poor

4. At least 600 million of the World’s poor depend on
livestock
Thornton et al. 2002, revised 2009
4

5. Livestock and nutrition
– Livestock products contribute to 17% of the global kilocalorie
consumption and 33% of the protein consumption (FAOSTAT
2008) – Africa 8% of calories
– Providers of food for at least 830 million food insecure people
(Gerber
– Significant global differences in kilocalorie consumption but…
highest rates of increase in consumption of livestock products in
the developing World
– . Europe - 2000
3%
SSA - 2000
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

6. The ‘livestock revolution’: as people get richer they consume more meat
People want to eat chicken, pork and milk!
FAO: SOFA2011
6

7. The 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

8. Climate change
What will happen to feed resources? Diseases? Productivity?
Average projected % change in suitability for 50 crops, to 2050
Courtesy of A. Jarvis

9. Prices volatile, impacts on the livestock sector and the poor?
A blip or an emerging trend?
FAO: SOFA2011

10. The balancing act
Pros Cons
Nutrition Large users
Livestock of resources
Income
systems are not the Polluters
Risk same everywhere (in places)
management
Significant
Employment GHG
Needs nuanced emissions
Nutrients understanding and
Less efficient
Landscape action than other
Maintenance forms of food
production
Land use
unsuitable for Zoonosis
agriculture

11. LIVESTOCK = problem or opportunity?
Share of livestock in global GHG emissions
Steinfeld et al. (2006)
Livestock in the developing world have a high mitigation potential
11
Better feeds, breeds, management, incentives, policies and regulation

12. Global greenhouse gas efficiency per kilogram of animal protein produced
Large ineficiencies in the developing world – an opportunity?
Herrero et al PNAS (forthcoming)

13. What are recent assessments telling
us about the future of food and
livestock production?

14. Will we be able to feed 9 billion people?
 Maybe, depends on what we do.
 Different scenarios = Different resource use
implications
 Different social, economic and environmental costs
 it all depends how the world reacts

15. Business as usual will not stop hunger in the world
FAO: SOFA2011

16. Food production Herrero et al 2009, 2010
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
Most production coming from intensive systems (irrigation, high
potential, relatively good market access)

17. Mixed systems in the developing World produce
the food of the poor (Herrero et al 2009)
Maize Production Millet Production
3%
13% 1% 6%
26%
19%
54% AgroPastoral
28%
Mixed Extensive
Mixed Intensive
Other
2% Developed countries
48%
Rice Production Sorghum Production
6% 3% 3%
5%
20%
31%
44%
2%
66% 20%

18. Mixed systems produce significant amounts of
milk and meat
beef milk lamb
9% 7%
13% 28% 28%
15%
50% AgroPastoral
Mixed Extensive
17%
59% 5% Mixed Intensive
19% Other
18% Developed countri
4%
7% 21%
Developed countries dominate global milk production,
significant exports
…but…
Mixed systems produce 65% beef, 75% milk and 55% of lamb
in the developing World

19. Mixed intensive systems in the developing World
are under significant pressures
 2.5 billion people…3.4 by 2030, predominantly in
Asia
 150 million cattle increasing to almost 200 million by
2030
 Most pigs and significant numbers of poultry,
increasing by 30-40% to 2030
 Crop yields stagnating: wheat, rice
 Others increasing: maize (East Asia)
 All in the same land!
 Severe water constraints in some places
 Soil fertility problems, shrinking farm sizes in others

20. Important productivity gains could be made in the
more extensive mixed rainfed areas
 Less pressure on the land Population density*
(people/km2) 2000 2030
agro-pastoral 8 14
mixed extensive 79 112
mixed intensive 273 371
other 28 41
Yield gaps still large
Public investment required to reduce transaction costs, increase
service provision and improve risk management
These systems could turn in ‘providers’ of agro-ecosystems
services to other systems (i.e. fodder for the mixed intensive
systems)

21. Yield gaps still high in more extensive systems
Maize crop in Rajasthan, India during rainy season 2009
District Rainfal Yield (kg ha-1) CD
l FP FP + IC BN + IC (5%)
(mm)
Tonk 288 1150 1930 3160 280
Udaipur 570 2530 3090 6320 509
Mean
(5
districts) FP=Farmers’ practice; IC=Improved2550 (41%)
1810 cultivar; BN=Balanced nutrition
4340 (141%)
Courtesy of Peter Craufurd

22. To eat or not to eat…..meat?
 A duality
 Health problems in the developed world but need for
nourishment in the developing world
 How can we differentiate this message?
 Most assessments show that reducing meat
consumption could have a very positive impact on
the environment
 ….but no assessment has shown what the social and
nutritional impacts would be, especially in the
developing world

23. Changing diets – consuming less meat or
different types of meat could lower GHG
emissions
Stehfest et al. 2009. Climatic Change

24. Range of GHG intensities for
different livestock products
200
kg CO2 eq/kg animal protein
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Pig Poultry Beef Milk Eggs
Source: DeVries & DeBoer (2008)

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

26. Projected land use changes to 2050 in several
integrated assessments (Smith et al 2010)
Cropland Rangeland Natural habitats
+10 to 20% avg = 10% 0 to -20%
Cropland area increasing at a faster rate than rangelands
Faster expansion of monogastric production and intensification of
ruminant production with grains

27. Stover deficits likely to occur in the future
Herrero et al. 2009

28. ‘Moving megajoules’: fodder markets are likely to
expand in areas of feed deficits as demand for milk
and meat increases
India
quotes from M Blummel
‘Stovers transported more
than 400 km to be sold’
‘Price has doubled in 5
years, now 2/3 of
grain value of sorghum’
‘Farmers paying for stover
quality’
Herrero et al. 2009

29. Intensification of ruminant production could lead to lower
land requirements
Land cover change 2000-2030
Havlík et al. Crop Productivity and the Global Livestock Sector: Implications for LUC and GHG Emissions 29
AAEA Annual Meeting, Seattle, August 12-14, 2012

30. Is sustainable intensification a win – win
solution for livelihoods, food security and the
environment?
The thrust of the ILRI - IIASA collaboration

31. Livestock production
Higher production of milk if systems intensified
31
Havlik, Herrero et al PNAS (forthcoming)

32. Livestock numbers
With less animals!
32
Havlik, Herrero et al PNAS (forthcoming)

33. Net cumulated land use change over 2000-2030
Intensification could lead to land sparing
A little bit more cropland
Lower land expansion
33
Havlik, Herrero et al PNAS (forthcoming)

34. Annual average GHG emissions over 2020-2030
And to reduced emissions, primarily CO2 from land use changes
Havlik, Herrero et al PNAS (forthcoming)
34

35. Price changes 2000-2030
Intensification could dampen livestock product
price increases
Havlik, Herrero et al PNAS (forthcoming) 35

36. How can we translate the results of
global assessments into actionable
points at the farm level?

37. complex !
different oppotunities

38. Approach: Solution-driven R4D to achieve impact
Value chains and institutions
R4D integrated to transform selected value chains
In targeted commodities and countries.
Consumers
Major intervention with development partners
Value chain development team + research partners
Strategic CRP 3.7 Cross-cutting Platforms
• Technology Generation
• Market Innovation
• Targeting & Impact
INTERVENTIONS TO GLOBAL RESEARCH
SCALE OUT REGIONALLY PUBLIC GOODS

39. Integrated assessment of farming systems
essential – at all levels – from global to local!
Herrero et al, Science 2010

40. Trade-offs and synergies
income
1
0.5
external inputs food security
0
water use GHG
mixed
pastoral

41. A few unresolved things….

42. Land consolidation vs growth and
intensification of the smallholder sector
 Large commercial farms pro-efficiency (foreign
capital investment)
 Smallholder development possibly more pro-
poor
 Smallholders: low opportunity cost of labour
 Do diversified smallholder farms promote more
biodiversity and better management of
ecosystems services?
 Smallholder sector fragmented: what actors
are needed to support it?

43. What role for rangelands?
Largest land use system
Increasingly fragmented
Potentially a large C sink
PES: 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)

44. How much land is available for
agricultural expansion?
 Essential to understand the magnitude of
technological change!
 Widely different estimates in the literature
(300 – 800 million hectares)
 What types of land are suitable? Rangeland vs
forest? Opportunity costs?
 What kinds of incentives will be required to
develop them?
 Can their development be pro-poor?
 What is the magnitude of the investment
required?

45. Breakthroughs and surprises
 Biotechnology: how much can we really alter
technological change through biotechnology?
 Information technology
 Communications
 others

46. Moving between scales
From noble global goals (food security, poverty
erradication and a sustainable world)
 to the grand diversity of farming and livelihood
systems
and viceversa!

47. Some conclusions
 Can we feed 9 billion people: yes, we can by doing
the right things
 We need to change investment paradigm and also
start investing in the systems of the future (not only
in the what were the high potential areas)
 Livestock research could have an enormous role
 Infrastructure and market development essential
 Incentives: Technology could play a key role but we
need investment in provision of services

48. 2002 Poverty mapping in the developing world
2006 Mapping vulnerability to climate change in Africa
2007 Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture
2007 IPCC AR4 report – inputs in the adaptation chapter
2008 Human Development Report
2009 IAASTD – contributing authors
CGIAR Assessment of drivers of change in mixed crop-livestock
2009
systems
Sustainable livestock
2009 IPCC Greenhouse Gas Emissions Task Force
futures team 2009 Livestock in a Changing Landscape
2010 Science food security issue – invited review
some contributions to 2010 World Development Report – Climate Change
2010 UK Foresight report – contributing authors
the global change 2011 UNEP Ecosystems Services Assessment
agenda 2011 State of the World Report – Livestock Chapter lead
2011 WWF Global deforestation outlook
2011 Vulnerability of food systems to climate change (for CCAFS)
2013 PNAS Special Issue on Livestock and Global Change (Guest Editors)
2013 IPCC AR5 report contributing authors adaptation/mitigation chapters

49. Thank you!
Thank you!