A recent report by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) estimates that: 34% of the protein consumed in the world comes from here cows, chickens or pigs. It is expected that this rate will continue to increase due to the improvement of economic conditions, especially in developing countries, and that by 2027, each person will eat an average of 38 kilograms per year.
This pace is ecologically unsustainable. The reason for this lies in the production of large quantities to meet the increasing demand as quickly and cheaply as possible. Because, If all livestock farms were managed according to sustainability criteria, meat itself would not need to be a problem and gain environmental awareness. It’s the exact opposite of the philosophy practiced by macro farms.
In fact, many studies suggest that: Traditional method could be ally in fight against climate change. Experts in the FAO text conclude: “If a given production system, region and climate adopted the technologies and practices currently used by the 10 percent of producers with the lowest emissions intensity, it would be possible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 30 percent.”
The document cites techniques aimed at improving efficiency, using better quality feed, managing manure to recycle nutrients, and definitively leading to energy efficiency throughout the supply chain. In addition, transportation is another activity that is at the top of the list of most pollutants.
And it’s not just the environment that benefits from these sustainable practices. From a business perspective, farmers can make more profit from their business.Because when fewer resources are used, competitiveness increases rapidly. At the same time, in the context of the 2030 Agenda and with governments focused on achieving Paris Agreement targets, manufacturers are likely to benefit from public subsidies that reward initiatives with an environmental seal.
As if that wasn’t enough, there is still much to be done to bring about a real shift in consumption patterns. The population increasingly values spending its money on quality, local meat. Moreover, the welfare of animals on conventional farms is much higher than on industrial farms, and there are constant complaints about this. At first glance, they are all advantageous.
But, Achieving the ‘sustainable label’ is no easy task. It means not wasting resources, ensuring that inputs are local, and using energy efficiently. Likewise, the size of farms should always be appropriate to their environment and their production should be sufficient only for local markets. In this regard, local breeds should be given priority and pastures should be managed rationally.
Macrofarms: much to improve
Images of chickens or pigs being stacked in large warehouses in conditions far from minimum animal welfare standards have caused great damage to the industry’s reputation. However, although it may seem contradictory, the macro farms They may also have one of those switches that will slow down the heating. spherical. And this is precisely because of more than just the wide margin of room for improvement.
«Animal husbandry, which was ‘traditionally’ practiced until the middle of the last century, was quite common based on grazing. From that moment on, intensive or industrial production began to develop, based on the stabling of animals and the conversion of the feed produced thanks to the great development of international trade in raw materials,” says Clemente Mata from the University of Córdoba, professor Ildefonso Caballero, Chair of Organic Production at Ecovalia.
don’t forget this too the intense produces “completely outside nature”: «It is based on grain trade, long-distance transportation of animals between farms, to slaughterhouses and dairy industries, concentration of samples in minimum areas. It is therefore associated with significant carbon emissions.
Specifically, recent research estimates that this practice will be responsible for 14.5 percent of worldwide greenhouse gas production. Methane is one of the gases emitted by animals and has great power to warm the atmosphere. This is not the only wound that animal agriculture leaves on the environment. Globally, according to the UN More than 90 percent of destroyed forest areas are used for livestock. The most obvious consequences of this are loss of biodiversity and deforestation.
Improve grazing
Grazing is an ancient activity that evolved in parallel with humankind itself. It is characterized by the mobility of animals and the shared use of natural resources, as stated by the FAO. It is also associated with the preservation of biodiversity (due to its inherent capacity to adapt to the environment) and the improvement of soils. This helps reduce the risk of bushfires, among other things, Eliminates flammable plant mass.
«Today, extensive livestock farming has more value and importance in terms of the environmental and socioeconomic services it provides rather than the volume of food it produces. However, these are of very high quality. Most of these are covered by indications of origin, protected geographical indications and other figures of differentiated quality,” emphasizes Caballero.
……………………
REPORT. David Yáñez, CSIC scientist.
“We are looking for ways to reduce livestock emissions”
Although conventional grazing has nothing to do with macro farms, the sector as a whole has a lot of room for improvement. This is what David Yáñez-Ruiz, senior scientist at CSIC’s Zaidín Experimental Station (EEZ) and member of the Re-Livestock project, is dedicated to. The initiative uses European funds (€13.5 million distributed across 13 countries) and its aim is to reduce greenhouse gases from livestock systems.
-Has traditional animal husbandry been demonized due to intensive industry?
-I think it’s the opposite. Intensive is demonized without knowing that this term refers to efficiency in optimizing resources. Many species fit this name, and many have widely varying environmental consequences. Livestock farming in Spain operates in systems that are highly dependent on region, build populations, respect animal welfare and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
-Many reports claim that sustainable livestock farming could help stop the climate crisis.
-On the whole, livestock farming, including animal feed production, represents a very significant portion of greenhouse gas emissions (14.5% globally). Therefore, any measures to reduce them will make a significant contribution to reducing the effects of global warming. But for changes to be truly effective, they need to be global.
-Can productivity be increased and emissions reduced?
-This is undoubtedly one of the ways that creates the most impact.
-Like?
-Improving the quality of food, using additives that reduce methane emissions, or selecting animals to live longer. If they have more lactation when it comes to milk production, emissions from their first year of life are diluted.
-What does the Re-Livestock project include?
-The aim is to facilitate the implementation of livestock practices that will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and also contribute to the adaptation of animals to heat waves. The project covers the beef and pork sectors and cow milk production.
– Have you already achieved some results?
-With the technology and knowledge we have today, we can reduce emissions by 10% to 30%, but the biggest challenge is to implement this on a large scale. Heat waves will affect animal production, which will require restructuring of facilities or diet. The digital technology we have developed to detect signs of stress may be one of the most effective measures.
-Which areas have the greatest development potential?
-Developing additives to reduce methane production, using by-products from the food industry to promote circularity, or genetic selection of more productive animals.