In this report, WWF explores what would happen if the UK were to feed livestock only on “low opportunity cost” feed sources such as grass, food waste and industrial byproducts. It argues that pressures on arable land could be reduced while producing more food overall than in a completely vegan food system; that a reduced livestock population would free up land for nature restoration; that the UK’s impacts on ecosystems in other countries would be reduced; and that space would be made for more extensive forms of grazing and mixed farming, such as agroecological farming using crop rotations. For comparison, see the Sustainable Food Trust report Feeding Britain from the ground up for a similar vision for the UK’s food system (albeit with a non-zero level of grain-fed livestock production).

This investor briefing by the Changing Markets Foundation surveyed over 200 respondents from the investment community on their perceptions of how climate change may affect the meat and dairy industry. 82% agreed that climate change presents risks to the industry. 84% are concerned that a lack of climate mitigation could lead to stranded assets (investments or resources that become unprofitable, in this case due to water shortages or temperature increases; the term is commonly used to refer to fossil fuel resources that cannot be burned). 94% think that reducing methane as well as carbon dioxide emissions is important.

TABLE community member Matthew Jordon has co-authored this study, which finds that two practices linked to regenerative agriculture are linked to higher productivity: rotational grazing, where animals are frequently moved around pastures to allow areas to recover from grazing, and herbal leys, where multiple species of perennial flowering plants are grown as part of the pasture. The study focuses on sheep and cattle in temperature climates, and analyses data from 84 articles identified in the literature.

This paper assesses the extent to which national dietary recommendations for animal products could be met by livestock fed with low opportunity cost biomass (LOCB) such as food waste, grass and by-products. It finds that animal products fed with domestically available LOCB could provide between 22% (Netherlands) and 47% (Switzerland) of nationally recommended protein intakes.

This paper reviews the evidence linking different types of livestock production systems to the emergence of new infectious diseases. It concludes that there is not currently enough evidence to show whether extensive or intensive systems would better protect against future pandemics. Both systems present different types of risk: low-yield farms generally have a higher risk of interspecies contact, but tend to keep more diverse livestock at lower stocking densities; while high-yield farms have a lower risk of livestock picking up a disease in the first place as the animals are often kept indoors, but the risk of any disease being spread is higher because of greater stocking densities, lower livestock diversity and sometimes poorer health and welfare.

The concept of “less but better” meat (sometimes preferentially called less and better) has become influential in discussions about health, sustainable diets, particularly in higher-income countries. Definitions of both “less” and “better”, however, are still diverse. This paper reviews the definitions and interpretations of “less but better” meat used in 35 peer-reviewed journal articles.

This book makes the case against “speciesism” - i.e. discrimination against nonhuman animals. It considers both wild and domesticated animals, and discusses how we can live without exploiting animals.

This policy briefing from the Changing Markets Foundation argues that it will be very difficult for the European Union to meet its 2030 methane reduction targets without bringing in extra measures in the meat and dairy industries. 36% of the EU’s methane reductions could come from the agricultural sector, it estimates.

This paper analyses how over 100 European think tanks talk about the links between animal-sourced foods and climate change, seeking to understand how they have influenced policymakers’ attitudes to the issue. It argues that the failure of many think tank documents to link the two issues contributes to a wider lack of attention to the environmental impacts of diets.