Search

One of the technological responses to concern about the healthiness and sustainability of red meat consumption as well as growing global food insecurity has been the development of plant-based meats. While still niche industries, plant-based meats are increasing in diversity and visibility and are often accompanied by scientific claims about their potential contribution to sustainability, health and nutrition. In this paper we analyse these claims from the perspective of critical metrology, looking not only at the state of knowledge about plant- and animal-based beef but also how knowledge is being produced. Such research is vital in understanding not only what is known about a topic but also the limitations of that knowledge in terms of influences and gaps, to shape how research can be done better. The research is based on a scoping review of scientific papers that compare the sustainability and nutritional properties of plant- and animal-based beef, with a particular focus on the Australian context. Our analysis shows that there are some points of consensus, such as plant-based beef having lower greenhouse gas emissions than animal-based beef and that plant-based burgers have lower total fat and saturated fat than animal-based burgers. However, we also find points of difference due to variability in production systems, products and approaches to measurement. We discuss how a metrological regime is forming that bears the imprint and interests of the industries involved, influencing the metrics and geographies that are studied and creating critical absences in understanding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Research shows that livestock account for a significant proportion of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and global consumption of livestock products is growing rapidly. This paper reviews the life cycle analysis (LCA) approach to quantifying these emissions and argues that, given the dynamic complexity of our food system, it offers a limited understanding of livestock''s GHG impacts. It is argued that LCA''s conclusions need rather to be considered within a broader conceptual framework that incorporates three key additional perspectives. The first is an understanding of the indirect second order effects of livestock production on land use change and associated CO2 emissions. The second compares the opportunity cost of using land and resources to rear animals with their use for other food or non-food purposes. The third perspective is need—the paper considers how far people need livestock products at all. These perspectives are used as lenses through which to explore both the impacts of livestock production and the mitigation approaches that are being proposed. The discussion is then broadened to consider whether it is possible to substantially reduce livestock emissions through technological measures alone, or whether reductions in livestock consumption will additionally be required. The paper argues for policy strategies that explicitly combine GHG mitigation with measures to improve food security and concludes with suggestions for further research. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

• The environmental efficiency of pasture-based dairy farming is assessed. • Farmers can increase their environmental efficiency, producing more milk and less methane. • The abatement cost per tonne of methane was US $2,254. • GHG policy should take a precautionary approach regarding food security and nutrition. Increasing dairy farm productivity while simultaneously mitigating greenhouse gases emissions is a common policy goal in many countries. In this paper, we assess trade-offs and synergies between these goals for pasture-based dairy farms in Brazil. We apply stochastic frontier analysis within a translog hyperbolic distance function specification, including methane emissions as an undesirable output and accounting for annual climatic types. Our results indicate that on average, farmers can improve their production by 9.4% while simultaneously reducing methane emissions by 8.7%. The adoption of more productive cows and improved pastures have a positive effect on the environmental efficiency of the farms. Farmers operating in warmer and dryer climate types tend to have lower environmental efficiency. Calculating shadow prices for methane emitted on farms indicates that the mean abatement costs of methane are US $2,254 per tonne. Overall, by reducing inefficiency, dairy farmers can significantly increase farm production while simultaneously reducing emissions and thus contribute to national commitments to eradicate hunger and mitigate methane emissions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, food waste has received growing interest from local, national and European policymakers, international organisations, NGOs as well as academics from various disciplinary fields. Increasing concerns about food security and environmental impacts, such as resource depletion and greenhouse gas emissions attributed to food waste, have intensified attention to the topic. While food waste occurs in all stages of the food supply chain, private households have been identified as key actors in food waste generation. However, the evidence on why food waste occurs remains scattered. This paper maps the still small but expanding academic territory of consumer food waste by systematically reviewing empirical studies on food waste practices as well as distilling factors that foster and impede the generation of food waste on the household level. Moreover, we briefly discuss the contributions of different social ontologies, more particularly psychology-related approaches and social practice theory. The analysis reveals food waste as a complex and multi-faceted issue that cannot be attributed to single variables; this also calls for a stronger integration of different disciplinary perspectives. Mapping the determinants of waste generation deepens the understanding of household practices and helps design food waste prevention strategies. Finally, we link the identified factors with a set of policy, business, and retailer options. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ‘4 per mille Soils for Food Security and Climate’ was launched at the COP21 with an aspiration to increase global soil organic matter stocks by 4 per 1000 (or 0.4 %) per year as a compensation for the global emissions of greenhouse gases by anthropogenic sources. This paper surveyed the soil organic carbon (SOC) stock estimates and sequestration potentials from 20 regions in the world (New Zealand, Chile, South Africa, Australia, Tanzania, Indonesia, Kenya, Nigeria, India, China Taiwan, South Korea, China Mainland, United States of America, France, Canada, Belgium, England & Wales, Ireland, Scotland, and Russia). We asked whether the 4 per mille initiative is feasible for the region. The outcomes highlight region specific efforts and scopes for soil carbon sequestration. Reported soil C sequestration rates globally show that under best management practices, 4 per mille or even higher sequestration rates can be accomplished. High C sequestration rates (up to 10 per mille) can be achieved for soils with low initial SOC stock (topsoil less than 30 t C ha − 1 ), and at the first twenty years after implementation of best management practices. In addition, areas which have reached equilibrium will not be able to further increase their sequestration. We found that most studies on SOC sequestration only consider topsoil (up to 0.3 m depth), as it is considered to be most affected by management techniques. The 4 per mille number was based on a blanket calculation of the whole global soil profile C stock, however the potential to increase SOC is mostly on managed agricultural lands. If we consider 4 per mille in the top 1m of global agricultural soils, SOC sequestration is between 2-3 Gt C year − 1 , which effectively offset 20–35% of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. As a strategy for climate change mitigation, soil carbon sequestration buys time over the next ten to twenty years while other effective sequestration and low carbon technologies become viable. The challenge for cropping farmers is to find disruptive technologies that will further improve soil condition and deliver increased soil carbon. Progress in 4 per mille requires collaboration and communication between scientists, farmers, policy makers, and marketeers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ruminant production systems are important producers of food, support rural communities and culture, and help to maintain a range of ecosystem services including the sequestering of carbon in grassland soils. However, these systems also contribute significantly to climate change through greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, while intensification of production has driven biodiversity and nutrient loss, and soil degradation. Modeling can offer insights into the complexity underlying the relationships between climate change, management and policy choices, food production, and the maintenance of ecosystem services. This paper 1) provides an overview of how ruminant systems modeling supports the efforts of stakeholders and policymakers to predict, mitigate and adapt to climate change and 2) provides ideas for enhancing modeling to fulfil this role. Many grassland models can predict plant growth, yield and GHG emissions from mono-specific swards, but modeling multi-species swards, grassland quality and the impact of management changes requires further development. Current livestock models provide a good basis for predicting animal production; linking these with models of animal health and disease is a priority. Farm-scale modeling provides tools for policymakers to predict the emissions of GHG and other pollutants from livestock farms, and to support the management decisions of farmers from environmental and economic standpoints. Other models focus on how policy and associated management changes affect a range of economic and environmental variables at regional, national and European scales. Models at larger scales generally utilise more empirical approaches than those applied at animal, field and farm-scales and include assumptions which may not be valid under climate change conditions. It is therefore important to continue to develop more realistic representations of processes in regional and global models, using the understanding gained from finer-scale modeling. An iterative process of model development, in which lessons learnt from mechanistic models are applied to develop ‘smart’ empirical modeling, may overcome the trade-off between complexity and usability. Developing the modeling capacity to tackle the complex challenges related to climate change, is reliant on closer links between modelers and experimental researchers, and also requires knowledge-sharing and increasing technical compatibility across modeling disciplines. Stakeholder engagement throughout the process of model development and application is vital for the creation of relevant models, and important in reducing problems related to the interpretation of modeling outcomes. Enabling modeling to meet the demands of policymakers and other stakeholders under climate change will require collaboration within adequately-resourced, long-term inter-disciplinary research networks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Recently increasing studies suggest that a comprehensive assessment of cropping practices impacts on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions at yield-scale will benefit cropping technique innovation and policy selection for higher-yield with less-emissions. In this paper, we conducted a meta-analysis to quantify the impacts of rice cropping practices on the global warming potential (GWP) of GHG emissions at yield-scale rather than area-scale in China. The results showed that the yield-scaled GWP of Chinese major rice cropping systems during rice growing season was in the order: double rice cropping system (1188.9kg CO2 equiv.Mg−1)>rice-upland crop rotation system (777.0kg CO2 equiv.Mg−1)>single rice cropping system (346.7kg CO2 equiv.Mg−1). Nitrogen fertilization (50–300kgNha−1) significantly increased rice yield with slight increments in the GWP of CH4 and N2O emissions, resulting in significant reductions in the yield-scaled GWP. The greatest reduction occurred at the application rate of 150–200kgNha−1 by 37% as compared to the non-fertilization control. For organic amendments, biogas residue application had no significant effect on the yield-scaled GWP, while manure application and straw recycling significantly increased the yield-scaled GWP by 54% and 154%, respectively. Intermittent irrigation significantly reduced yield-scaled GWP by 59% largely because of a significant reduction in CH4 emission and a significant increment in rice yield. No-tillage showed lower CH4 emission with similar rice yield in comparison with the conventional tillage, resulting in a reduction in yield-scaled GWP by 20%. These results indicate that there is a great potential to meet the new objective of higher-yield with less-GHG emissions through innovating rice cropping technique. More efforts should be paid on the field observations of GHG emissions during non-rice growing season, so as to perform a life-cycling assessment of GHG emissions from rice fields at yield scale under different cropping systems. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Worldwide, many nations impose blending of their transport fuels with biofuels, approximating 10% globally by 2020, to contribute to energy security while reducing emission of green house gasses (GHG). Food riots, scientific insights that question the GHG benefits and raised concern about the loss of biodiversity, have lead to the formulation by various governments of sustainability criteria for biofuels to comply with. In this paper, we assess this conditionality and argue that large-scale biofuels production will be unable to comply with these criteria in 2020, and can therefore not be qualified as sustainable. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Livestock contribute directly (i.e. as methane and nitrous oxide (N2O)) to about 9% of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and around 3% of UK emissions. If all parts of the livestock production lifecycle are included (fossil fuels used to produce mineral fertilizers used in feed production and N2O emissions from fertilizer use; methane release from the breakdown of fertilizers and from animal manure; land-use changes for feed production and for grazing; land degradation; fossil fuel use during feed and animal production; fossil fuel use in production and transport of processed and refrigerated animal products), livestock are estimated to account for 18% of global anthropogenic emissions, but less than 8% in the UK. In terms of GHG emissions per unit of livestock product, monogastric livestock are more efficient than ruminants; thus in the UK, while sheep and cattle accounted for 32% of meat production in 2006, they accounted for ~48% of GHG emissions associated with meat production. More efficient management of grazing lands and of manure can have a direct impact in decreasing emissions. Improving efficiency of livestock production through better breeding, health interventions or improving fertility can also decrease GHG emissions through decreasing the number of livestock required per unit product. Increasing the energy density of the diet has a dual effect, decreasing both direct emissions and the numbers of livestock per unit product, but, as the demands for food increase in response to increasing human population and a better diet in some developing countries, there is increasing competition for land for food v. energy-dense feed crops. Recalculating efficiencies of energy and protein production on the basis of human-edible food produced per unit of human-edible feed consumed gave higher efficiencies for ruminants than for monogastric animals. The policy community thus have difficult decisions to make in balancing the negative contribution of livestock to the environment against the positive benefit in terms of food security. The animal science community have a responsibility to provide an evidence base which is objective and holistic with respect to these two competing challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]