This paper estimates the total global emissions of methane and nitrous oxide related to livestock in 2010, from 237 countries. It estimates that methane and nitrous oxide from livestock contribute to 9 % of total GHG emissions. The authors analysed a period from 1961-2010 and noted a total increase of emissions from livestock of 51%. Compared to chicken or pork, the paper estimates that beef has a 10 times higher GHG impact.

This report builds on the dialogue built during a workshop held by RISE in 2014 regarding the measurement of farming environmental performance so as to further refine the definitions of sustainable intensification and the subsequent implications that such definitions pose on policy making to progress it. In doing so, the report explores three different case studies: The first case study focuses on soil performance and resilience. It shows how achieving sustainable intensification is highly dependent on having sound measurement of the underlying conditions.

This ILRI blog post discusses a new US report from President Obama’s Global Change Research Program.

This interesting article, published by the International Leather Maker magazine takes a look at the often neglected non food-outputs of the livestock system, focusing in particular on leather.

Despite a focus on reducing fossil fuel consumption, cuts in these emissions by themselves will not sufficiently address climate change.

Since this is a complex but very interesting paper, we’ve put together a more detailed summary and explanation of the paper’s approach and findings, together with some comments in this document here.  Our summary and commentary draws upon some very helpful insights from Professor Pete Smith at the University of Aberdeen and includes some useful commentary from Dr Marco Springmann at the University of Oxford – thanks to both.

This open access article from Chalmers University, Sweden, argues that unless we reduce our consumption of meat and dairy, world temperatures will continue to rise and we will be unable to meet the goal of keeping global temperatures from rising more than 2˚C.

This very interesting paper essentially argues that policies designed to incentivise production efficiencies achieve greater GHG reductions than those focusing on consumption. Moreover they do so at lower calorie ‘cost’ than consumption side measures. The abstract is given below, but we’ve produced some further explanation of the paper’s approach and findings, together with some comments in Our summary and commentary (which you can also download as a PDF below) draws upon some very helpful insights from Professor Pete Smith at the University of Aberdeen and includes some useful commentary from Dr Marco Springmann at the University of Oxford – thanks to both.