Feeding efficiency gains can increase the greenhouse gas mitigation potential of the Tanzanian dairy sector.

We use an attributional life cycle assessment (LCA) and simulation modelling to assess the effect of improved feeding practices and increased yields of feed crops on milk productivity and GHG emissions from the dairy sector of Tanzania’s southern highlands region. We calculated direct non-CO2 emissions from dairy production and the CO2 emissions resulting from the demand for croplands and grasslands using a land footprint indicator. Baseline GHG emissions intensities ranged between 19.8 and 27.8 and 5.8–5.9 kg CO2eq kg−1 fat and protein corrected milk for the Traditional (local cattle) and Modern (improved cattle) sectors. Land use change contributed 45.8–65.8% of the total carbon footprint of dairy. Better feeding increased milk yields by up to 60.1% and reduced emissions intensities by up to 52.4 and 38.0% for the Traditional and Modern sectors, respectively. Avoided land use change was the predominant cause of reductions in GHG emissions under all the scenarios. Reducing yield gaps of concentrate feed crops lowered emissions further by 11.4–34.9% despite increasing N2O and CO2 emissions from soils management and input use. This study demonstrates that feed intensification has potential to increase LUC emissions from dairy production, but that fertilizer-dependent yield gains can offset this increase in emissions through avoided emissions from land use change

Embedding stakeholders’ priorities into the low-emission development of the East African dairy sector

A growing body of evidence shows that more intensive dairy systems can be good for both nature and people. Little research considers whether such systems correspond with local priorities and preferences. Using a mixed methods approach, this study examined the effects of three intensification scenarios on milk yield and emission intensities in Kenya and Tanzania. Scenarios included (a) an incremental change to feed management; (b) adaptive change by replacing poor quality grass with nutrient-rich fodder crops; and (c) multiple change involving concurrent improvements to breeds, feeds and concentrate supplementation. These scenarios were co-constructed with diverse stakeholder groups to ensure these resonate with local preferences and priorities. Modelling these scenarios showed that milk yield could increase by 2%–15% with incremental changes to over 200% with multiple changes. Greenhouse gas emission intensities are lowest under the multiple change scenario, reducing by an estimated 44%. While raising yields, incremental change conversely raises emission intensities by 9%. Our results suggest that while future interventions that account for local priorities and preferences can enhance productivity and increase the uptake of practices, far-reaching shifts in practices are needed to reduce the climatic footprint of the dairy sector. Since top-down interventions does not align with local priorities and preferences in many situations, future low-emission development initiatives should place more emphasis on geographic and stakeholder heterogeneity when designing targeting and implementation strategies. This suggests that in low-income countries, bottom-up approaches may be more likely to improve dairy productivity and align with mitigation targets than one-size-fits-all approaches