The author's address is: The Old Schoolhouse, Stratfield Save (near Reading), RG7 2EJ, UK; fax: 0044 1734 756467; e-mail: [email protected].
Si l'�extensification� a un co�t moins lourd au niveau de
l'environnement, une intensification de la production animale est n�anmoins plus probable
d�s lors que la demande augmente. Il s'agit donc de ramener � un niveau acceptable et
durable les effets n�gatifs sur l'environnement.
Dans le domaine de la production animale, l'objectif de la
recherche-d�veloppement, vulgarisation comprise, devrait �tre d'accro�tre la
productivit� par t�te de b�tail, tout en pr�servant les ressources limit�es et en
minimisant la pollution, par exemple � travers l'am�lioration de la conversion des
aliments pour r�duire les d�chets.
La croissance de l'offre de produits animaux est all�e de pair
avec celle de la demande, malgr� les changements importants intervenus au niveau de la
structure de production. La question qui se pose est toutefois de savoir si cette
�volution acc�l�r�e de l'industrie animale mondiale peut s'inscrire dans le temps sans
porter atteinte � l'environnment, compte tenu, notamment, de l'augmentation des besoins
en c�r�ales fourrag�res et en l�gumineuses pour l'alimentation des animaux.
La �extensificaci�n� tiene menores costos ecol�gicos, pero es probable que se produzca intensificaci�n de la producci�n animal siempre que lo exija el crecimiento de la ganader�a. Por consiguiente, el objetivo debe consistir en limitar los efectos negativos para el medio ambiente a un nivel aceptable y sostenible. La investigaci�n sobre la ganader�a y su fomento, sin olvidar la extensi�n, debe orientarse a incrementar la productividad por animal, conservando al mismo tiempo los escasos recursos disponibles y reduciendo al m�nimo la contaminaci�n, por ejemplo mediante la mejora de la conversi�n de los piensos, de manera que se reduzca la cantidad de desechos. El crecimiento de la oferta de productos pecuarios ha mantenido el ritmo de aumento de la demanda, aunque se han registrado cambios importantes en la estructura de la producci�n. Sin embargo, se plantea la cuesti�n de si esta industria pecuaria mundial, que cambia y crece con rapidez, se puede mantener sin efectos adversos para el medio ambiente, particularmente teniendo en cuenta la mayor dependencia de los cereales y legumbres utilizados como pienso para la nutrici�n animal.
The FAO global study World Agriculture: Towards 2010 (FAO, 1995)
predicted that "structural change in the food consumption of the developing countries
towards more livestock products will continue with significant increases in per caput
consumption of meat in all regions except South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. However,
their per caput consumption of such products will still be below those of the high-income
countries in 2010."
These predictions are based on the knowledge that meat, milk and eggs are
favoured by consumers over other more basic food items, even though the cost per unit of
energy is much higher. Hence, as per caput incomes rise, so too does meat consumption as a
proportion of the normal diet and total household expenditure. (In economic terms the
income elasticity of demand, i.e. the percentage change in the quantity demanded for a 1
percent change in income, is high, often greater than unity.) South Asia is exceptional in
that meat consumption is limited for cultural reasons, although milk and egg consumption
is expected to grow. In sub-Saharan Africa the stagnation in the level of consumption is
related to the lack of growth in per caput income.
Growth in the demand for animal protein is influenced not only by rising
incomes but also by the increase in human population. When both factors are taken into
account, the predicted growth rate in demand for livestock products D is given by
the simple relationship:
D = p + ng
where p = rate of population growth, n = income elasticity
of demand for the product and g = rate of increase in per caput incomes. Given that
in most of the developing world all these variables are positive for livestock products,
the total demand is predicted to grow rapidly.
In fact, total demand worldwide is estimated to have risen by 4.8 percent
annually between 1970 and 1990, faster than the human population growth rate (FAO, 1995).
Overall, growth in the supply of livestock products has kept pace with
increases in demand, although there have been major changes in the structure of
production. Other livestock contributions, particularly draught power and manure, are of
importance to mixed farmers in many parts of the world. However, the structural changes
mentioned above are associated with a shift in emphasis to the production of meat, milk
and eggs. The question arises as to whether this rapidly changing and growing world
livestock industry can be sustained without adverse environmental impacts, particularly in
view of the increased reliance on feedgrains and legumes for animal nutrition.
In 1990, roughly 38 percent of the world's grain was fed to livestock
(Durning and Brough, 1991), while the figure for the United States was 70 percent.
International trade in feedgrains and legumes is relatively greater than
the trade in livestock products. Declining world prices of major feedgrains from the
mid-1970s to the early 1990s may have contributed to the rapid expansion of pig and
poultry production in developing countries. The sustainability of some of these systems is
now open to question in view of recent increases in the real price of grain.
High mountain pastures in Kyrgyzstan, Central Asia, provide
essential summer grazing and help relieve pressure on pastures in the foothills close to
settlement areas
Les p�turages dans les hautes montagnes au Kirghizistan, Asie
centrale, fournissent l'essentiel des prairies pendant l'�t� et soulagent la pression
sur les p�turages des collines proches des zones habit�es
Las praderas de alta monta�a en Kirguist�n, Asia Central,
proporcionan el pasto esencial de verano y disminuyen la presi�n en las praderas de las
faldas de las monta�as cercanas a las zonas de los asentamientos humanos
Photo/Foto: R. Mearns
Intensive pig production in China
Production intensive de porcs en Chine
Producci�n porcina intensiva en China
Photo/Foto: FAO
Battery hens in Malaysia
Poulets de batterie en Malaisie
Bater�a de gallinas en Malasia
Photo/Foto: R.D. Branckaert
For the purposes of this discussion, production intensity is defined in
terms of the number of livestock units and quantities of associated inputs per unit of
land area. On this basis, industrial pig or poultry production qualifies as an intensive
system whereas pastoral herding on natural rangelands is viewed as being extensive.
Intensification then implies an increase in input use, with a corresponding increase in
output produced per hectare.
This measure of intensification excludes increases in the productivity
per livestock unit, resulting from improved breeding, feeding and management, although the
supply of livestock products may also be increased in this way. Despite the fact that the
majority of the world's livestock, of all species, also inhabit the developing countries,
most meat, milk and eggs are produced in the developed countries of Europe and America,
where more than four times as much beef and six times as much milk are produced per
animal. Clearly these differences in productivity are important but, for the purpose of
this paper, the alternative measure of intensity in terms of livestock units per hectare
is preferred.
The intensity of livestock production may be influenced by the
characteristics of the physical environment and also by product and input price levels
which, in turn, are affected by location in relation to the market or point of sale. Wint
and Bourn (1994) show that in most situations the intensity of production is closely
correlated with human population density and the share of land cultivated rather than with
the distribution of natural grazing resources.
Using the theoretical framework developed by von Th�nen (1826), it is
argued that the price received by the producer declines while costs of manufactured farm
inputs rise with increasing distance from the market, since transport costs are greater
(Figure 1). The overall effect is that the gross profit margins that can be earned fall
with increasing distance from the market.
Thus, the distance-decay function of Figure 1 applies to product price,
gross margin per livestock unit (LSU) and intensity of production. The most intensive
forms of production are found near the market (e.g. peri-urban livestock keeping) at the
"intensive margin", while the least extensive systems are found at the
"extensive margin" distance, OX, from the market in Figure 1. Beyond OX there
are no commercial profits to be made from meat production.
If the demand for meat increases without any corresponding change in
supply, then the price will increase, as shown by the broken line in Figure 2. There is a
corresponding increase in gross margins, leading to intensification of production.
Furthermore, meat production becomes profitable and is extended on to land between X and Z
km from the market. The main conclusion to be drawn from this analysis is that increased
demand provides incentives for intensification by all the existing suppliers, regardless
of their current levels of intensity, together with an extension of the supply area.
Intensification and extensification are not really alternatives, since both occur
concurrently.
In practice, further extension of the supply area may not be possible.
Land that is submarginal for one market may already supply other markets. The real
question is whether there remains any unused land on to which production can be extended.
While there may be some scope for extending the area dedicated to livestock production in
Africa and Latin America, this may be at the expense of forestry and wildlife reserves. In
Asia there is very little scope for any extension of cultivation or livestock production
(FAO, 1995).
Pigs and poultry are usually the most intensive industrial system, since
for economic reasons they are located nearest to markets (Figure 3).
Dairying is often the second most intensive system, as milk is a
perishable product with relatively high transport costs. However, it also depends on
supplies of bulky fodder which are more readily available in rural areas. The gross margin
per LSU is lower than that for pigs and poultry in the immediate vicinity of the market
but, since it declines less rapidly with distance, a boundary is reached where dairying
becomes more profitable (Figure 3).
In more remote areas, meat-producing ruminants yield a higher gross
margin per LSU (milk may be important for household subsistence but less so for the
market). For this system, few purchased inputs are used while the product is relatively
cheaply transported on the hoof (Figure 3). As a result, a series of "rings" of
different production systems of declining intensity may be observed around an urban market
centre (Figure 4).
It is now possible to incorporate the notion that the scope for
increasing the productivity and intensity of production may differ between different
systems. Indeed, this is found to be the case. Whereas extensive ruminant grazing systems
have shown very little improvement in productivity over recent decades, that of the more
intensive industrial livestock systems has increased significantly. Furthermore, the
intensity of stocking, while fixed within narrow limits by the availability of grazing
under extensive systems, can be increased almost without limit for pigs and poultry.
FIGURE 1
The distance-decay function for prices, gross margins and intensity
La fonction distance-d�t�rioration pour les prix, les marges
brutes et l'intensit�
Funci�n de disminuci�n de la distancia en relaci�n con los
precios, los beneficios brutos y la intensidad
FIGURE 2
The effect of increased prices on productivity
L'effet de la croissance des prix sur la productivit�
Efecto del aumento de los precios en la productividad
FIGURE 3
The choice of livestock species and system
Le choix des esp�ces animales et des syst�mes d'�levage
Elecci�n de especies de ganado y del sistema
Intensive sheep production in Cyprus
Production intensive de moutons � Chypre
Producci�n intensiva de ganado ovino en Chipre
Photo/Foto: FAO
The intensive systems with which this article is concerned are those
involving the "industrial production" of the monogastric livestock, pigs and
poultry, as well as ruminant livestock for dairying or feedlot fattening. Links with the
agricultural land base are broken and feedstuffs produced elsewhere are transported to the
production site which is often peri-urban.
The environmental costs of such systems are often claimed to include the
large inputs of grain and legumes and the energy used in producing them. Conversion rates
of grain into meat are low - between 14.5 and 38.5 percent by weight in the United States
(Durning and Brough, 1991) - so more people could be fed per hectare if the crops were
consumed directly rather than being converted into livestock products.
The question of whether high income earners should consume less meat in
order to reduce the demand for feedgrains and allow for better nutrition of hungry people
and/or the conservation of energy reserves for future generations is an ethical issue open
to subjective judgement. It may be avoided if the international, interpersonal and
intergenerational distribution of income is taken as given. Then we may argue that,
provided consumers are willing to pay prices that cover the full costs of the purchased
feeds as well as the energy used in their production, the allocation of resources does not
need to be modified.
Until recently, however, industrial systems in many countries have
greatly benefited from policy distortions, such as subsidies on feedgrains, which reduce
the price consumers pay to less than the true cost of production. In such cases, excessive
input use, intensive livestock production and consumption will occur, with a consequent
loss of welfare to society (Figure 5). The effects are similar when prices are distorted
through price support, trade restrictions or maintenance of an overvalued currency. Policy
distortions, which promote overproduction from intensive livestock systems, have been
applied in the European Union, the former centrally planned economies and in many
countries of Africa and the Near East. It is highly desirable that such distortions be
eliminated.
The other environmental costs associated with intensive livestock
production are the disposal of manure and other waste products that may cause pollution
(Ap Dewi et al., 1994); the increased disease risks to animals and possibly humans,
for example, bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), salmonella and leptospirosis; and the
reduction in biodiversity as a result of concentration on a small number of specialized
breeds. Some of these are experienced as direct "internal" costs to livestock
producers, for instance the costs of manure disposal and disease control.
However, other environmental costs are "externalities" which
fall not on the producers but on other sectors of the public. These include the pollution
of soils, air and water supplies, resulting from the inadequate disposal or control of
waste products; greenhouse gas emissions; unsightly and smelly waste dumps; acid rain; and
possible human health hazards from zoonotic diseases or from pollution. The external costs
of the loss of biodiversity fall on future generations in terms of the loss of
"option value" associated with the reduction of the gene pool.
The basic analysis of the effects of externalities is similar to that for
subsidies illustrated in Figure 5. While, in that case, the gap between marginal private
cost and marginal social cost was due to the subsidy, it now reflects the external costs
(Figure 6). The analysis here shows that, since the external costs do not impinge on the
individual producer (who is motivated solely by private gain), an excessive use of inputs
and output of intensive livestock products will result. Again, there is a net loss in
social welfare, the losers being members of the public who suffer from the externalities.
Hence, controls are needed to reduce or avoid this loss in social welfare. It should be
noted, however, that at the socially acceptable level of production the external impacts
are not eliminated completely; there remains an external cost equivalent to AE (in the
figure) per unit of output.
There are many policy instruments that may be used to correct the pattern
of resource allocation in the presence of external costs, including:
In theory, all these methods could be equally effective. With reference
to Figure 6, public control or marketable permits could be applied to limit livestock
production, and the associated environmental costs to Qs. The same effect would
be achieved by charging a tax equal to the cost, AE, per unit of output, or paying a
subsidy for abatement equal to this "damage cost".
However, they have rather different effects on the distribution of
income. A pollution tax, for instance, would both reduce the price obtained by livestock
producers (from Pp to Pe in Figure 6) and raise that paid by
consumers (from Pp to Ps in Figure 6), the overall result being a
transfer of income from both producers and consumers to the government. A subsidy would
transfer income in the opposite direction.
A serious problem in applying any of these policy instruments is that of
measuring the external environmental impact and evaluating the cost. Given these
difficulties, the best that may be achieved is to establish "safe minimum
standards", for animal waste generation for instance. If quotas are allocated to
producers and these quotas are allowed to be marketed, a value will be established through
the market. Safe minimum standards may be based on scientific measurements, but they are
also likely to be influenced by the relative political power of producers, consumers and
those affected by the externalities.
If controls are to be imposed on pollution from solid, liquid and gaseous
wastes, the establishment of safe minimum standards and marketable quotas may be
appropriate. The abatement of disease risks to humans and loss of biodiversity requires
public sector investment.
An alternative approach to reducing external environmental costs is to
inform and educate consumers. International workshops may contribute to this process. The
effect may be to reduce the demand for intensively produced meat, milk and eggs or to
increase the pressures for the control and abatement of environmental damage. In response,
some producers may turn to extensive methods of production.
FIGURE 4
Concentric rings of decreasing intensity around a central market
Cercles concentriques d'intensit� d�gressive autour d'un march�
central
Anillos conc�ntricos de intensidad decreciente alrededor de un
mercado central
Intensive cattle production in Kenya
Production intensive de b�tail au Kenya
Producci�n intensiva de ganado vacuno en Kenya
Photo/Foto: FAO
FIGURE 5
The effect of a subsidy on production and welfare
L'effet d'une subvention sur la production et le bien-�tre
Efecto de una subvenci�n sobre la producci�n y el bienestar
FIGURE 6
External costs and the need for control
Co�ts externes et n�cessit� d'un contr�le
Costos externos y necesidad de control
Extensive land-based livestock production is generally more
environmentally friendly than intensive systems. This may explain why producers, motivated
by the need for environmental conservation, tend to adopt less intensive systems such as
organic farming, and free-range pig or poultry keeping. Extensive systems also include
rangeland-based pastoral ruminant-livestock keeping.
Most of the external environmental costs associated with intensive
industrial production are reduced or avoided: there are fewer problems in acquiring or
producing balanced feed rations, disposing of waste products and controlling disease, and
many consumers believe that there are fewer human health risks from food produced
extensively. Moreover, a better maintenance of biodiversity is assured if environmentally
adapted breeds are retained.
One environmental cost, however, which can be greater under extensive
livestock systems is the emission of greenhouse gases, particularly methane. Produced as a
by-product of food digestion, mainly by ruminants, methane emissions are highest when feed
quality and the level of production are low (Steinfeld, de Haan and Blackburn, 1996).
These conditions prevail in extensive rangeland production of the arid and humid tropics
and subtropics. Pigs and poultry cannot digest fibrous grasses and other bulky forage so
their emissions are relatively low. However, methane emissions from manure stored under
anaerobic conditions are associated with high levels of productivity and intensity.
External environmental costs may arise from attempts to intensify
rangeland-based production at the expense of virgin forest and wildlife reserves.
Although, by increasing the stocking rate, intensification might cause rangeland
degradation, the extent of such damage in practice has been greatly exaggerated. Climatic
variation has a much greater impact on the condition of the rangelands, while recovery
after drought is quite rapid (Behnke, Scoones and Kerven, 1993).
The external costs of degradation may be felt by other livestock owners
who suffer from declining feed resources. Overexploitation of natural grazing resources
may result from "open access" and the so-called "tragedy of the
commons", owing to the fact that no individual has an incentive to conserve these
resources. There is a widespread view that under traditional, communal forms of tenure,
rangeland resources were effectively conserved. Restoring communal rights and
responsibilities to the pastoralists may prevent any further degradation. However, if
pastoralists manage the resources at their disposal efficiently, there would be little
scope for further intensification, unless grazing resources are supplemented with crop
by-products from agropastoral systems.
The spread of extensive livestock production is only one of many causes
of deforestation. Only in Latin America, where the annual rate of deforestation is less
than 1 percent, does conversion to pasture represent a significant cause. In Asia and
Africa, the spread of shifting cultivation and other forms of crop production are much
more important (Amelung and Diehl, 1992). In Brazil, and probably elsewhere in Latin
America, deforestation to allow for the spread of agriculture has been encouraged through
subsidies, price exemptions and land title regulations which provide strong financial
incentives. Without these incentives it is unlikely that extensive livestock husbandry
would provide sufficient returns to justify the costs of forest clearing.
It is concluded, therefore, that the environmental costs of extensive
livestock production systems are much lower. Unfortunately, there is little scope for
expanding the area under such systems other than at the expense of virgin forest and bush,
or by conversion of the crop cultivation areas essential to feed production for intensive
systems.
Intensification involves a greater reliance on crop products in
agropastoral or mixed farming systems. As argued elsewhere (Steinfeld, de Haan and
Blackburn, 1996), such systems allow for the exploitation of crop-livestock interactions
and the establishment of a nutrient balance between plants and animals.
It would be wrong to assume that intensity of livestock production is
associated with the national level of economic development. A broad spectrum of
intensities is found in both developed and developing countries. However, there are marked
differences in other respects. Generally the ratio of livestock to humans is higher in the
developed world, where productivity per animal and meat consumption are much higher.
Extreme examples are the United States where the average annual consumption of all meats
per person is 115.2 kg, while that for India is 2.2 kg (FAO, 1994). The pressures of
livestock keeping on the environment are therefore greater in the developed countries. The
problems of waste disposal are most severe in countries such as the Netherlands, where
much of the livestock feed is imported.
Moreover, in developed countries there is hardly any growth in the demand
for livestock products, with little or no increase in human populations, while public
concerns are growing over the health effects of consuming livestock products. Tastes are
changing towards low cholesterol diets, vegetarianism, and organically produced food. In
response, some producers have shifted to less intensive methods such as organic farming
and free-range livestock keeping. However, price supports for animal products and
concentrate feeding continue to encourage the adoption of intensive livestock production
systems, while organic farmers and free-range livestock keepers need to charge higher
prices and have difficulties in competing with the majority of "intensive
producers".
At the same time there is increasing public awareness and concern over
the external costs of pollution. For example, European Union directives limit the number
of animals kept per hectare to avoid excessive manure deposits. There is a ban on the
direct discharge of waste into surface waters, and tradable manure quotas have been
introduced in the Netherlands (FAO, 1996).
In developing countries, expansion of peri-urban intensive production has
been rapid, often supported by direct or indirect (overvalued exchange rate) subsidies.
This expansion has not always been sustainable, economically or environmentally. Economic
costs have been a continuing drain on scarce resources. Existing waste disposal and
pollution abatement facilities may be inadequate for the increased demands placed on them.
Also public pressure for the control of polluting waste materials is likely to be weak,
since environmental concerns have a lower priority in poor societies, unless public health
and other problems become acute.
The most promising option for sustainable growth in livestock production
is integrated mixed farming, which exploits crop-livestock interactions. These include the
feeding of livestock on crop by-products, the use of animal manure to fertilize the crops,
the use of animal draught power and the supplementation of human diets and household
income.
Amelung, T. & Diehl, M. 1992. Deforestation of tropical rain
forests: economic causes and impact on development. Kieler Studien 241. T�bingen,
Germany, Mohr (Paul Siebeck).
Ap Dewi, I., Axford, R.F.E., Fayez, I., Marai, M. & Omed, H.M.,
eds. 1994. Pollution in livestock production systems. Wallingford, UK, CAB
International.
Behnke, R, Scoones, I. & Kerven, C., eds. 1993. Range ecology
at disequilibrium: new models of natural variability and pastoral adaptation in African
savannas. London, Overseas Development Institute.
Durning, A.B. & Brough, H.B. 1991. Taking stock: animal
farming and the environment. Worldwatch Paper No. 103, Washington, DC, Worldwatch
Institute.
FAO. 1994. FAOSTAT (computerized database). Rome.
FAO. 1995. World Agriculture: Towards 2010. Edited by N.
Alexandratos. Chichester, UK, FAO & John Wiley.
FAO. 1996. Environmental impact of animal manure management. Edited
by P.J. Brandjes, J. de Wit, H.G. van der Meer & H. van Keulen. FAO Consultancy Report
for Livestock and Environment Study, Rome.
Steinfeld, H., de Haan, C. & Blackburn, H. 1996. Livestock-environment
interactions. Issues and options. EU (European Commission Directorate-General for
Development, Development Policy, Sustainable Development and Natural Resources).
von Th�nen, J.H. 1826. Der isolierte Staat in Beziehung auf
Landwirtschaft und National�konomie. Rostock, Germany, Verlag von Gustav Fischer.
Wint, W. & Bourn, D. 1994. Anthropogenic and environmental
correlates of livestock distribution in sub-Saharan Africa. Oxford, UK, Oxford
Environmental Research Group.