October 2017
Last week’s Extinction and Livestock conference comes at a moment of intense debate about the impact of livestock production and its future. The conference began by reminding us of the problems associated with livestock production globally, including its impact on climate change, pollution, water use as well as animal welfare and human health concerns. In addition speakers pointed out that global meat consumption is set to increase this century as diets change in Asia and Africa. The conference also usefully highlighted the impacts of livestock on biodiversity (the “Extinction” of the title). Intensive livestock production is not just a potential problem at the point where large numbers of animals are confined, but brings with it the problems associated with feeding these animals. This requires huge quantities of crops including soy, palm oil and maize, much of which is grown in highly biodiverse regions of the world such as the Amazon or Indonesia and is responsible for huge swathes of these habitats being lost.
So what is the way forward? Should people simply make the choice to eat less, or zero, meat and dairy? For many this is the most obvious step to take, and various vegan and vegetarian food companies were on hand to show what this future might taste like. A different approach is to look to companies within the food sector, which can improve their supply chains, reformulate food to be less meat-heavy, or encourage their customers to eat more plant-based foods. Businesses represented at the conference included McDonalds and catering giants Sodexo and Compass. When you hear the number of meals per day these companies serve, it is tempting to think that they hold the key, or at least one of them, to a brighter future.
Alternatively we could focus on policy and governance. For many, the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are a useful framework for this, with the future UK agriculture policy, or policies, offering similar leverage points. However, given the extent of the problems associated with intensive livestock production, several speakers, including Tim Lang and Raj Patel felt that none of these strategies were enough. They called for society to focus not on individual choices or nudges to the status quo but system change. People need to be involved, but as citizens and members of a mass movement, rather than as mere consumers. Those with power (businesses, governments, consumers and producers) will need to be pressured and persuaded to change policy and practice.
The delegates were many and varied, but if one thing united them it was that they were trying to communicate something about food and the environment. We need to improve the way we tell that story.
One way to talk about a complex system is through telling stories about what is happening on the ground. One example among many at the conference was Yorkshire hill farmer Chris Clark and the RSPB’s Pat Thompson setting out how they see the balance between food, farming and nature in the UK uplands. They highlighted the key role that livestock grazing can have in the conservation of important species and habitats in the uplands as well as producing a quality product for meat eaters to enjoy. This High Nature Value farming is critical to maintaining upland hay meadows and pastures and the important plant species within them. They also support populations of birds like the lapwing, redshank, curlew and snipe – species undergoing major declines in the wider countryside.
So in answer to the potentially overwhelming list of problems stemming from intensive livestock farming I think we can start to talk more about what good farming, including good livestock production, looks like. This chimes with the message of the Eating Better coalition, which is to eat less meat, but also to ensure that the meat we do eat is produced in the most environmentally sensitive and high welfare way. We can weave this into a narrative and vision about what we want the food system to look like and push for policies that deliver this and support nature-friendly farmers like Chris. We can work to ensure that businesses produce and sell food produced in ways that don’t damage nature or society. And we can encourage people to think more about where their food comes from and the impact this has had, not merely so that they can buy food that supports their values (though this is an added benefit) but so that they can engage with the food system and push to improve it.
Harry Greenfield
Land Use Policy Officer, RSPB
Follow @HarryGreenTweet and @Natures_Voice
The opinions expressed in this blog are the author’s and not necessarily those of the wider Link membership.
Latest Blog Posts