The COP has not come out: it is time to tackle livestock production waste Climate Crisis

What comes to mind when you think of food waste? Waste in the kitchen bowl, sad-looking leftovers in the fridge, or maybe a counter with some rotten fruit? For the most part, when we think about waste, we don’t think beyond our homes. But waste occurs at every stage of the food supply chain.

2.5 billion tons of food is wasted every year worldwide, about 10 percent of greenhouse gas emissions. This wasted food takes about an area of ​​land the size of China and India to grow. Nowhere in our food chain is the amount of waste greater and more harmful than in the meat production industry. It is estimated that 153 million tonnes of meat are wasted every year at farm level. Among other factors, along with the extremely high mortality rates of livestock caused by poor livestock standards, these wastes represent not only a moral catastrophe but also an environmental catastrophe. And this is only part of the problem.

Waste of precious resources

Today, more than a third of the calories produced by the world’s crops are being used to feed animals, and only 12 percent of those calories contribute to the human diet (meat and other animal products). To produce 1 kg of cows, for example, you need about 8 kg of feed.

With such low returns, does it still make sense for humanity to invest in livestock production?

The livestock industry is devouring resources, damaging the environment and not yet providing us with adequate nutrition. Research has estimated that 400 million hectares of farmland produce animal feed, as it competes with food crop production. Basically, we are using large amounts of land to feed animals that can be used for human consumption. It is estimated that growing crops for human use alone could increase food calories by up to 70 percent, giving four billion more people. In other words, there is ample evidence that switching to plant-rich foods can help improve equitable food distribution and food security.

If food production were to provide the greatest nutritional product with minimal environmental impact, then industrial livestock would have no place in the food systems of the future.

An inherently effective method of food production

The livestock industry is vast: 23 billion chickens worldwide, 1.5 billion head of cattle, 1.2 billion sheep, 1 billion goats and 1 billion pigs live worldwide. This means that humans and the animals we raise for food make up 96 percent of the mammal’s biomass, and that wildlife accounts for only four percent.

Today, advertising campaigns try to convince us that most of our meat comes from small family farms that care about animal welfare and the environment. But this is not the case. About two-thirds of the livestock are raised on factory farms. A few large corporations dominate the livestock industry, and for the most part see the loss and waste of food as a cost to the business.

And even if large livestock companies were truly committed to reducing mortality and meat waste within their supply chains, they still could not reconcile the inherent inefficiencies of the industry; after all, 88 percent of the calories given to livestock are never intended to be obtained. contributing to the human diet.

The livestock industry continues to be viable because it is shifting costs to our planet by using large amounts of land and water to make a small profit in addition to shareholder returns. This method of extraction for food production is wasteful and ultimately unbearable; we just need to produce (eat) less meat.

“A Fair Transition to Livestock”

Today, there is an urgent need to change the way animals are produced and consumed. If enabled on time, a fair transition in livestock production It can not only help alleviate the climate crisis, it can also serve as a strong driver of job creation, social justice, poverty reduction and the improvement of public health.

Today, the demand for industrialized livestock products in the North and in developing countries is particularly detrimental to the Global South. The large amount of land needed to produce livestock on an industrial scale leads to the accumulation of large tracts of land in the south by large meat and feed producers (often headquartered or with large activities in the Global North), especially to the detriment of small farmers. women and indigenous peoples. This often jeopardizes land disputes, loss of livelihoods and food sovereignty.

Research shows that without measures to decarbonize food systems, even if all other sectors of the economy are decarbonized, we cannot meet our main climate goal of keeping global warming below 1.5 ° C. However, halving food waste, eating healthy calories and switching to sustainable diets could provide 88 percent of the total relief needed in the food system to limit heating to 1.5 ° C. For this transformation to happen, we need to stop thinking only of how waste ends up in our containers, and start thinking of it as a symptom of a dysfunctional food system.

To enable this transition, global multidisciplinary policy measures should be taken to promote the reduction and redistribution of animal protein production and consumption. Diverting public subsidies from industrial feed and livestock and adapting national food guidelines, public procurement rules and promotion campaigns should be part of the policy agenda. It is also essential to promote sustainable food production and consumption. As we saw at COP26 in Glasgow, there is a serious need to move food systems on the agenda of climate change to move much higher. 2022 may be the year when the link between food and climate becomes part of the negotiations. Therefore, the COP27 of Egypt must give priority to food equity, loss and waste.

Where possible, replacing animal-based foods with a more resource-efficient plant alternative can increase food availability by shifting production resources from feed to human food. With around 800 million people in the world suffering from hunger, we cannot afford to continue in food production, which only exacerbates food security, climate, environmental and health crises.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the editorial attitude of Al Jazeera.