1. Livestock: the good, the bad and Mario Herrero, ILRI ILRI APM, Addis Ababa, April 2010

2. Why are we here today? Livestock are responsible for 51% of global GHG emissions 3.

To unravel what is behind the controversy, the polarised opinions, the misunderstanding, the facts

To learn a bit

To think how we can make the most of this huge research opportunity!

Why are we here today? 4. Livestock the goods (1) At least 600 million of the Worlds poor depend on livestock Thornton et al. 2002, revised 2009 5.

Livestock products have a huge value of production (i.e. milk)

Mixed systems responsible for close to 50% of the global crop output

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 the goods (2) 6.

Users of land not suitable for other livelihood activities

A key risk reduction strategy for vulnerable communities (Freeman et al 2007)

Livestock products contribute to 17% of the global kilocalorie consumption and 33% of the protein consumption (FAOSTAT 2008)

Providers of food for at least 830 million food insecure people (Gerber et al 2007)

Important for reducing child malnutrition

Livestock the goods (3) Herrero et al 2008a 7.

Land use

• 80% of global deforestation in LAC direct land conversion to pastures (20% soybean production)

• 33% of arable land used to plant crops for animals

• Large exports of feed to EU, China

• Water

• 31% of water used for agriculture

• 90% for the production of feed

• Projected demand for livestock products is likely todoubletotal agricultural water use by 2050 (CA 2007) due primarily to increased needs for feeds

The bads 8.

Livestock and nutrients

(the good and the evil)

• Manures provide 14%, 9% and 40% of N, P and K inputsfor global crop production, respectively

• Livestock important in smallholder systems as a source of fertiliser.. not enough manure available in places

• but at the same time concentration of nutrients in industrial system causes water pollution and waste disposalproblems (lack of regulation)

Herrero et al. 2009 9. CO 2 CH 4 N 2 O Deforestation Enteric fermentation Manure mgt Chemical N. fert. production On-farm fossil fuel Deforestation OM release from ag. soils Pasture degradation Processing fossil fuel Transport fossil fuel Enteric fermentation Manure storage / processing N fertilization Legume production Manure storage / processing Manure spreading / dropping Manu indirect emissions Lives tock and GHG: 18% of globalemis sions(varies between 13-18% depending on the source) FAO 2006 10. Consensus from science

Livestock are not bad everywhere

Growth of the sector to meet demand may be unsustainable if trends continue

Significant opportunities to reduce environmental impact and increase efficiency in the developing world

Need to manage demand and increase regulation

Big differences between North and South

11. Personal take

Complex...but not a reason not to act

No free lunch lots of trade-offs, need to think of simultaneous dimensions(NRM, livelihoods, GHG)

Lots of counterfactuals

Difficult to negotiate for emissions reductions different paradigms between North and South

Need carrots and sticks

12. Gaps

No real global integrated assessment of livestock in competition with other sectors.

Long Shadow good but not enough as it looks at the livestock sector in isolation of other sectors

Understanding the magnitude of the potential impacts of technological fixes

How to manage demand adequately (ethical issues)

Can we meet demand for livestock products under carbon constrained markets?

Who are the winners and losers?

13. Livestock: the good, the bad and thanks! APM 2010 Addis Ababa, Ethiopia