Table Of ContentsNext Page

COMMENT/COMMENTAIRE/COMENTARIO

Livestock and human needs: conflict or compatibility?

B.S. Hursey

Senior Officer (Insect-borne diseases)
Editor,
World animal Review
FAO Animal Production and Health Division

BESOINS DE L'�LEVAGE ET DES �TRES HUMAINS: CONFLIT OU COMPATIBILIT�?

Dans le secteur de la production animale, les processus de production connaissent une croissance et une intensification rapides. Les syst�mes de production animale concentr�s et sans terre que l'on rencontre aujourd'hui dans de nombreuses parties de l'Europe occidentale en sont de bons exemples. Toutefois, s'ils permettent de r�pondre efficacement � la demande humaine de produits ad�quats � des prix �conomiques, on ne peut ignorer les co�ts cach�s de ces syst�mes. Ils vont des cons�quences que peut avoir une demande d'importation massive de produits d'alimentation animale en provenance des pays en d�veloppement, � la d�gradation de l'environnement, au bien-�tre des animaux et aux nouvelles maladies susceptibles d'affecter les hommes et le b�tail. Ils soul�vent une question d'une extr�me importance: doit-on continuer � encourager globalement ce type de production ou doit-on rechercher d'autres solutions? La pression sur les terres s'accentuant, la concurrence pour les terres agricoles situ�es � proximit� des zones urbaines et des march�s ira croissant. La Division de la production et de la sant� animales s'est donn� pour t�che de traiter ces questions fondamentales afin de contribuer au d�veloppement futur du secteur de l'�levage permettant de r�pondre aux d�fis du si�cle prochain.

LA GANADER�A Y LAS NECESIDADES HUMANAS: �CONFLICTO O COMPATIBILIDAD?

En el mundo de la producci�n animal, se puede observar un crecimiento y una intensificaci�n r�pidos del proceso de producci�n. Un ejemplo de ello son los sistemas de producci�n animal concentrados y sin tierras que existen ahora en muchas partes de Europa occidental. Sin embargo, aunque consiguen satisfacer la demanda humana de productos ajustados a las necesidades a precios econ�micos, no se pueden ignorar los costos subyacentes de estos sistemas. Estos van desde las consecuencias de la necesidad de importar cantidades enormes de piensos procedentes de pa�ses en desarrollo hasta la degradaci�n del medio ambiente, el bienestar de los animales y las enfermedades que surgen y que pueden afectar a las personas y al ganado. Esto plantea una cuesti�n de la m�xima importancia: �se debe seguir fomentando este tipo de producci�n pecuaria en todo el mundo o deben buscarse alternativas? Con el aumento de la presi�n sobre la tierra, habr� m�s competici�n por la destinada a uso agr�cola en las proximidades de las zonas urbanas y los mercados. La Direcci�n de Producci�n y Sanidad Animal de la FAO se ha encargado de abordar estas cuestiones fundamentales, a fin de contribuir al futuro fomento del sector pecuario.

Modern pressures towards "civilization" and "development" are largely driven by rich nations. The materialistic demands of the affluent result in a growing proportion of human society exploiting, and in many cases plundering, the earth's natural resources. The rate of this "progress" in the developed world is such that less fortunate communities are left behind and become more and more disadvantaged. This discrepancy in the distribution of wealth and opportunity is evident in the commercial and industrial sectors but is perhaps even more pertinent to the more fundamental agricultural sector, in particular the livestock subsector. It is probably here that the divide between the rich and the poor and the intrinsically related resource management problems are most prominent and deserve greater consideration.

In the world of animal production we observe a rapid growth and intensification of production processes. The concentrated and landless animal production systems now established in many parts of western Europe are good examples. Although successful in meeting human demand for tailored products at economic prices, the hidden costs of such systems cannot be ignored. They extend from the consequences of demanding huge feed imports from developing countries, to environmental degradation, animal welfare and the emerging diseases that may affect humans and livestock. They raise an all important question: Should this type of livestock production continue to be encouraged globally or should alternatives be sought?
Examples of the real threats posed by this "modernization" of livestock production are the recent slaughter of millions of poultry in Hong Kong, owing to fears about avian influenza, the outbreak of classical swine fever in the Netherlands, which temporarily devastated the pig industry, and the crisis caused by bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in the United Kingdom. The crowding of animals into intensive units coupled with a sharp rise in international trade will no doubt exacerbate the risks of new emerging diseases, food-borne diseases and zoonoses.
The problems which intensive livestock production may cause through the growing need for feed imports are equally alarming. Feed production requires land and water resources which are becoming particularly scarce in densely populated developing countries. With land pressures increasing there will be more competition for agricultural land in proximity to urban areas and markets. Pastoral and other rural societies that are unable to compete with this intensification may well become marginalized. Subsistence level livestock keepers and producers are already being gradually driven out of areas that are potentially agriculturally productive and forced towards more remote and often harsh environments where support and extension services do not reach because of the remoteness, the lack of infrastructure and the absence of economic incentives. A vicious circle of poverty and misery is thus created and sustained.
An additional complication is that created by vector-borne diseases such as malaria, trypanosomiasis and those carried by ticks, all of which are becoming increasingly difficult to control because of the lack of investment in sustainable disease management programmes. The increasing contrast between more densely populated and economically productive areas and the relatively uninhabited marginal areas where rural people seek to survive at subsistence level offers diminishing economic justification to pursue such schemes. Often it is more economically attractive to protect only the more intensive production units in the proximity of markets. The collapse of cattle dipping infrastructures for tick control in eastern and southern Africa and the disappearance of significant mosquito and tsetse control programmes may serve as examples. The dilemma is that the pastoral and rural societies most in need of assistance have virtually no opportunity to translate any assistance into the self-supporting sustainable systems needed to improve their livelihood. A further contributing factor to the resurgence of disease results from the environmental concerns that may preclude or restrict application of insecticide-based control methods. This is also a controversial issue which space does not permit us to debate fully here.
This is the background against which this edition of World Animal Review examines more closely the ongoing trend towards the intensification of livestock production. We may take, as an extreme example, the intensive animal production in the Netherlands, with some 20 million pigs and cattle on a confined land area of about 33 000 km2 and where milk output alone is similar to that of the whole of developing Africa. Perhaps we should welcome the decision by the Netherlands Government to reduce the number of the country's pigs by 25 percent by the year 2000. It should be acknowledged, though, that the main reasons for this decision were the local health and degradation risks presented by manure disposal, groundwater pollution and the general impact on other living creatures and plants. There are reasons for concern when we consider that the same intensive livestock production systems are now being widely adopted by the developing countries, as reported in this issue by M�ki-Hokkonen and Steinfeld.
From these and other contributions to this edition there is perhaps one apparent conclusion: Livestock are an invaluable resource for many people, in particular the rural societies living in more remote environments, and yet at the same time livestock may be manipulated, perhaps unnaturally, to meet the specific and sophisticated demands of the higher-income classes and, in the process, contribute to inequality, to environmental degradation and to public health problems. The FAO Animal Production and Health Division has tasked itself with addressing such fundamental issues in order to contribute to the future development of the livestock sector in view of the challenges of the next century.
The Editor welcomes readers' views on the issues raised in this comment.

Table Of ContentsNext Page