Intensive meat production

There is an immediate need for all the UK livestock sectors to demonstrate their ambition to reduce negative environmental impacts. They must do so in an evidence-based manner that both allows progress to be benchmarked and to be better communicated to stakeholders. The choice of measurement system(s) must ensure transparency and allow comparison with other sectors and markets.

However, only using greenhouse gas emissions to differentiate between livestock systems or products ignores other important factors in the provision of sustainable food. These include, for example, consumer preferences, land use and feed sourcing. Over-simplification may also ignore important differences in the relative nutritional content of foods (e.g. meat vs. salad) or the ‘opportunity cost’ of producing different foods from specific resources.

Despite the Committee on Climate Change (2019) report advocating a series of changes to UK milk, meat and egg production and consumption, it is crucial to acknowledge the multiple benefits of livestock farming, including food and fibre production, soil health, biodiversity and landscape maintenance.

Livestock farming provides a range of benefits over and above food production. These include by-products (e.g. leather or pharmaceuticals), ecosystem enhancement and wider landscape management. The livestock sector forms an essential part of the circular economy in terms of converting human-inedible forages and feeds into high quality protein (milk, meat and eggs).

Cutting direct UK emissions from food supply by eliminating livestock production or importing milk, meat and eggs from overseas is possible but is inherently unsustainable, threatening both national food security and farm economic stability, and encouraging ‘emissions transfer’. It is therefore essential to identify practices and tools which will enable UK producers to mitigate emissions.

A considerable amount of media coverage is dedicated to vegetarianism and veganism, with concurrent social pressure on consumers in the Western world to reduce their consumption of animal products, despite increasing demand in low- and middle-income countries.

The increasing popularity of ‘flexitarianism’ (i.e. making a conscious decision to reduce meat consumption) may be a challenge to the sector, yet it may also offer opportunities if it leads to an increase in local (national) ‘quality meat’ consumption relative to imported products, for which the environmental or animal welfare credentials may be less transparent.

Options for livestock decarbonisation

Precision livestock farming systems can help to curb inefficiencies and waste. Better data collection and its use will facilitate assessment of variations related to operations, species or breeds. Environmental monitoring and sensors can improve livestock health management, particularly in intensively stocked environments, reducing the use of antibiotics that have equivalents in human medicine.

While there is a need to curb emissions from grazed livestock, this also applies to more or less intensive monogastric livestock, including the design of feed rations, use of methane-curbing additives/ techniques and installation of covered slurry stores sized for reduced spreading windows.

Improved livestock management and efficient manure/fertiliser use is key to decarbonisation. Development of on-farm bioenergy generation potential from bio-wastes (e.g. slurries) must therefore be a priority. This will reduce environmental impacts whilst providing a sustainable on-farm source of power and fuel. The failure of UK bioenergy policy to boost farm energy supply from crop and manure residues represents a major failure that needs urgent attention.

Although marginal gains can and should be achieved in terms of transport, processing, retail and consumption, the greatest opportunities for livestock sector decarbonisation occur at the farm through better husbandry and management, with underlying recognition that significant greenhouse gas mitigation is essential and achievable at all points in the production and supply chain.

Sheep and beef

There is a need to curb emissions from all grazed livestock, not just those farmed under more intensive conditions, which includes from hill farms that are a vital part of the management of remote and upland areas. In addition to climate, commodity market prices and farm income pressures, family hill farmers are subject to a range of other challenges. These include keeping younger workers on the farm and addressing the increasing demands of countryside users wanting to access, protect and enhance upland habitats across the UK.

More than 60% of UK land is grassland, best suited to intensive and extensive livestock grazing and the supply of high-grade protein. Grazing livestock need to remain part of UK agricultural production.

Hill farming in particular needs ongoing support not only to become more profitable and resilient but also to protect biodiversity. A high percentage of a hill farm’s income derives from subsidy support – and this must be at the forefront when determining the level of subsidy being planned under ELMS in England and other support schemes being developed in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales.

Subsidy support needs to include attention to livestock numbers as well as costs. Buying in external feed inputs increases costs, while limiting stocking densities can have environmental benefits. For example, boosting soil health to lock in carbon and enhancing the ability of upland to absorb heavy rain, which reduces flooding risk lower in the catchment by holding back floodwaters.