Re-framing the climate change debate in the livestock sector: mitigation and adaptation options

Livestock play a key role in the climate change debate. As with crop-based agriculture, the sector is both a net greenhouse gas emitter and vulnerable to climate change. At the same time, it is an essential food source for millions of people worldwide, with other functions apart from food security such as savings and insurance. By comparison with crop-based agriculture, the interactions of livestock and climate change have been much less studied. The debate around livestock is confusing due to the coexistence of multiple livestock farming systems with differing functions for humans, greenhouse gas (GHG) emission profiles and different characteristics and boundary issues in their measurement, which are often pooled together. Consequently, the diversity of livestock farming systems and their functions to human systems are poorly represented and the role of the livestock sector in the climate change debate has not been adequately addressed. In this article, building upon the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fifth Assessment Report (IPCC 5AR) findings, we review recent literature on livestock and climate change so as better to include this diversity in the adaptation and mitigation debate around livestock systems. For comparative purposes we use the same categories of managerial, technical, behavioral and policy-related action to organize both mitigation and adaptation options. We conclude that different livestock systems provide different functions to different human systems and require different strategies, so they cannot readily be pooled together. We also observe that, for the different livestock systems, several win-win strategies exist that effectively tackle both mitigation and adaptation options as well as food security

The effects of season and level of concentrate on the voluntary intake and digestibility of herabage by outdoor sows

The intake and the digestibility of herbage, and the effect of level of supplementary concentrate food, were measured in late spring and late summer in two studies, each with eight multiparous, pregnant sows. In the spring study sows were nose rung to prevent rooting but only four nose-rung sows were available for the summer study; the remaining four were unrung. In both cases, sows had access to a plentiful (>2·5 t organic matter (OM) per ha) ryegrass/clover sward in a paddock of 1922 m2. After a week of adaptation to the herbage in the experimental paddock, sows were offered 1·5 or 3·0 kg/day concentrate for consecutive 2-week periods in a change-over experimental design with four sows on each treatment in each period. Samples of herbage were also taken to measure the sward density, chemical composition and n-alkane content. Herbage intake and digestibility estimates were calculated using the n-alkanes technique, with the marker dosed on small food pellets. In the spring study, the herbage intake ranged from 0·9 to 1·8 kg OM per day in the first period (herbage neutral-detergent fibre(NDF) content 439 (s.e.41·6) g/kg OM) and 0·2 to 1·4 kg in the second (475 (s.e.29·3) g NDF per kg OM). The intake was affected by the level of concentrate only in the second period. The results obtained during the summer study with the rung and unrung sows showed an intake between 0·9 and 2·4 kg OM per day in the first period (524 (s.e. 16·0) g NDF per kg OM) and between 1·3 and 4·8 kg in the second (526 (s.e. 21·8) g NDF per kg OM). A high intake estimation for certain unrung individuals appeared to reflect their frenzied feeding behaviour and possible loss of some marker pellets. There were no differences between level of concentrate treatments in either period. Digestibility of the diet was affected by the intake of herbage and the level of fibre consumed (P < 0·01). These herbage intakes equated to proportionately 0·50 (s.e. 0·05) and 0·66 (s.e. 0·1) (or 0·49 (s.e. 0·07) excluding problem sows) of the maintenance energy requirement in each season. Faeces of unrung sows indicated a high ingestion of soil or stones by some individuals: one of the sows produced a bulked faeces sample containing 450 g/kg fresh weight of stones, whilst another sow had a faecal ash content of 937 g/kg DM. The results indicate that the intake of nutrients from herbage by grazing sows is highly variable between seasons and individuals.Peer reviewe

Recognising ignorance in decision-making: Strategies for a more sustainable agriculture

Establishing a sustainable agricultural system able to feed the growing human population requires a careful and profound analysis of uncertainties and unknown hazards

Food Sovereignty

Despite decades of policies aiming to address hunger and rural poverty, these two challenges are still among the most acute problems that humanity is facing today and will face in the near future. Decades of official work on poverty reduction without major results led to the recognition and consensus that policies aimed at effective poverty reduction must address the needs of people in rural areas. But what are those needs and how are they met? Different worldviews and paradigms exist that propose different options to address the problem of hunger and rural poverty (Rivera-Ferre 2012), which result in different, often opposite, models. At the two extremes, we find a market-oriented dominant model of large-scale, capitalist, industrial, and export-based agriculture (Friedman and McMichael 1989) and the so-called alternative food systems and people-centered emergent models,...Peer reviewe

Climate change responses benefit from a global food system approach

A food system framework breaks down entrenched sectoral categories and existing adaptation and mitigation silos, presenting novel ways of assessing and enabling integrated climate change solutions from production to consumption.Peer reviewe