livestock and global change: towards a sustainable and equitable livestock sector
DESCRIPTION
Presented by Mario Herrero at the ILRI ‘livestock live talk‘, Nairobi, 28 November 2012TRANSCRIPT
Production systems for the future: balancing trade-offs between food production,
efficiency, livelihoods and the environment
M. Herrero and P.K. Thornton
WCCA/Nairobi Forum Presentation21st September 2010 | ILRI, Nairobi
Livestock and global change: Towards a sustainable and equitable livestock sector
Mario Herrero
ILRI ‘livestock live talk‘, Nairobi, 28 November 2012
– 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)
Livestock – the big numbers
– 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
Livestock’s economic benefits
4
At least 600 million of the World’s poor depend on livestock
Thornton et al. 2002, revised 2009
– 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
10%
11%
5%
31%5%
1%
37%
Meat
Dairy
Fruit & Vegetables
Cereals
Roots & Tubers
Dryland crops
Others
Livestock and nutrition
SSA - 2000
3%
3%
4%
47%16%
3%
24%Meat
Dairy
Fruit & Vegetables
Cereals
Roots & Tubers
Dryland crops
Others
Herrero et al 2008a
6
FAO: SOFA2011
People want to eat chicken, pork and milk!
The ‘livestock revolution’: as people get richer they consume more meat
The demand for livestock products to 2050
Rosegrant et al 2009
Annual per capita consumption
Total consumption
year Meat (kg) Milk (kg) Meat (Mt) Milk (Mt)
Developing 20022050
2844
4478
137326
222585
Developed 20022050
7894
202216
102126
265295
Average projected % change in suitability for 50 crops, to 2050
Climate changeWhat will happen to feed resources? Diseases? Productivity?
Courtesy of A. Jarvis
FAO: SOFA2011
Prices volatile, impacts on the livestock sector and the poor?
A blip or an emerging trend?
Livestocksystems are not the same everywhere
Needs nuanced understanding and
action
Pros
Nutrition
Income
Risk management
Employment
Nutrients
LandscapeMaintenance
Land use unsuitable for
agriculture
Cons
Large users of resources
Polluters (in places)
Significant GHG
emissions
Less efficient than other
forms of food production
Zoonosis
The balancing act
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
Better feeds, breeds, management, incentives, policies and regulation
Global greenhouse gas efficiency per kilogram of animal protein produced
Large ineficiencies in the developing world – an opportunity?
Herrero et al PNAS (forthcoming)
What are recent assessments telling us about the future of food and livestock production?
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
FAO: SOFA2011
Business as usual will not stop hunger in the world
Food production
Cereals Production
4%14%
35%
2%
45%
AgroPastoral
Mixed Extensive
Mixed Intensive
Other
Developed countries
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)
Herrero et al 2009, 2010
Mixed systems in the developing World produce the food of the poor (Herrero et al 2009)
Maize Production3%
13%
28%
2%
54%
Millet Production
26%
48%
19%
1% 6%
AgroPastoral
Mixed Extensive
Mixed Intensive
Other
Developed countries
Rice Production3%
20%
66%
5%6%
Sorghum Production3%
44%
20%
2%
31%
7%
13%
17%
4%
59%
Mixed systems produce significant amounts of milk and meat
28%
18%
21%
5%
28%
AgroPastoral
Mixed Extensive
Mixed Intensive
Other
Developed countries
9%
15%
19%
7%
50%
beef milk lamb
Developed countries dominate global milk production, significant exports…but…Mixed systems produce 65% beef, 75% milk and 55% of lamb in the developing World
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
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)
Maize crop in Rajasthan, India during rainy season 2009
District Rainfall
(mm)
Yield (kg ha-1) CD (5%)FP FP + IC BN + IC
Tonk 288 1150 1930 3160 280
Udaipur 570 2530 3090 6320 509Mean (5 districts) 1810 2550 (41%) 4340 (141%)
Yield gaps still high in more extensive systems
FP=Farmers’ practice; IC=Improved cultivar; BN=Balanced nutrition
Courtesy of Peter Craufurd
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
Changing diets – consuming less meat or different types of meat could lower GHG emissions
Stehfest et al. 2009. Climatic Change
Range of GHG intensities for different livestock products
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Pig Poultry Beef Milk Eggs
kg C
O2
eq/k
g a
nim
al pro
tein
Source: DeVries & DeBoer (2008)
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?
Grains1048 million tonnes
more to 2050
humanconsumption
458 million MT
Livestock430 million MT
Monogastrics mostly
biofuels160 million MT
Projected land use changes to 2050 in several integrated assessments (Smith et al 2010)
Cropland+10 to 20%
Rangeland avg = 10%
Natural habitats0 to -20%
Cropland area increasing at a faster rate than rangelands
Faster expansion of monogastric production and intensification of ruminant production with grains
Stover deficits likely to occur in the futureHerrero et al. 2009
‘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 morethan 400 km to be sold’
‘Price has doubled in 5 years, now 2/3 of grain value of sorghum’
‘Farmers paying for stoverquality’
Herrero et al. 2009
Havlík et al. Crop Productivity and the Global Livestock Sector: Implications for LUC and GHG EmissionsAAEA Annual Meeting, Seattle, August 12-14, 2012
29
Land cover change 2000-2030
Intensification of ruminant production could lead to lower Intensification of ruminant production could lead to lower land requirementsland requirements
Is sustainable intensification a win – win solution for livelihoods, food security and the environment?
The thrust of the ILRI - IIASA collaboration
31
Livestock productionHigher production of milk if systems intensified
Havlik, Herrero et al PNAS (forthcoming)
32
Livestock numbersWith less animals!
Havlik, Herrero et al PNAS (forthcoming)
33
Net cumulated land use change over 2000-2030Intensification could lead to land sparing
Havlik, Herrero et al PNAS (forthcoming)
Lower land expansion
A little bit more cropland
34
Annual average GHG emissions over 2020-2030And to reduced emissions, primarily CO2 from land use changes
Havlik, Herrero et al PNAS (forthcoming)
35
Price changes 2000-2030Intensification could dampen livestock product
price increases
Havlik, Herrero et al PNAS (forthcoming)
How can we translate the results of global assessments into actionable points at the farm level?
complex !different oppotunities
Strategic CRP 3.7 Cross-cutting Platforms• Technology Generation• Market Innovation• Targeting & Impact
Consumers
R4D integrated to transform selected value chains In targeted commodities and countries.
Value chain development team + research partners
GLOBAL RESEARCH PUBLIC GOODS
INTERVENTIONS TO SCALE OUT REGIONALLY
Value chains and institutions
Major intervention with development partners
Approach: Solution-driven R4D to achieve impact
Integrated assessment of farming systems essential – at all levels – from global to local!
Herrero et al, Science 2010
0
0.5
1income
food security
GHGwater use
external inputs
mixed
pastoral
Trade-offs and synergies
A few unresolved things….
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?
What role for rangelands?
Potential for carbonsequestration in rangelands(Conant and Paustian 2002)
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
Dealing with mobile pastoralists
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?
How much land is available for agricultural expansion?
Biotechnology: how much can we really alter technological change through biotechnology?
Information technology
Communications
others
Breakthroughs and surprises
From noble global goals (food security, poverty erradication and a sustainable world)
to the grand diversity of farming and livelihood systems
and viceversa!
Moving between scales
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
Sustainable livestockfutures team
some contributions to the global change agenda
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
2009 CGIAR Assessment of drivers of change in mixed crop-livestock systems
2009 IPCC Greenhouse Gas Emissions Task Force
2009 Livestock in a Changing Landscape
2010 Science food security issue – invited review
2010 World Development Report – Climate Change
2010 UK Foresight report – contributing authors
2011 UNEP Ecosystems Services Assessment
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
Thank you!
Thank you!