By Frank Mitloehner

Political leaders, industry workers, activists and academics gathered in Dubai in the United Arab Emirates recently for the United Nations’ annual climate change conference – COP28 – an event where big climate ideas were championed, and smaller ones were reinforced.

This year’s summit put a bright light on our food system, exploring at length how we can improve the climate footprint of the meals that end up on plates around the world.

I had the pleasure of speaking at COP28, and I was on the ground as the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization released its latest report, Pathways towards lower emissions – A global assessment of the greenhouse gas emissions and mitigation options from livestock agrifood systems. A good deal of press leading up to COP28 reported the FAO planned to call for reductions in consumption of animal-source foods in developed regions as a way to limit emissions from our livestock sector.

That doesn't make sense, and for what it’s worth, this report doesn’t say that at all – though other reports may. More about all of that in a minute.

By way of background, the global population is climbing rapidly, especially in Africa and other developing regions. Consequently, the demand for food is growing along with it. In fact, the report states we can expect about a 20% increase in the demand for animal-source foods by 2050, pushing emissions from livestock production from its present level of 6 gigatons (GT) of CO2eq to 9.1 GT CO2eq if we make no changes in the way in which we produce food.

Given that we are focused on reducing methane emissions from today’s level, we certainly aren’t looking to pile on 50% more methane from animal agriculture. We don’t want to see emissions continue to creep, which they surely will do if we stay with business as usual, particularly when we’re seeing growth in regions where animals are less efficient than they are in the United States and other developed nations.

The good news is, we have the power and the knowledge to change the trajectory. We can produce nutritious calories with less inputs and less greenhouse gas emissions. U.S. farmers have been doing it for decades.

For example, American growers produce 18% of the world’s beef with 6% of the global herd, the carbon footprint of a glass of milk is today two-thirds smaller than it was 70 years ago, and animal herds are at a historic low in the United States without a corresponding decrease in output. It's a similar story for American swine and poultry. We have improved the outputs while holding inputs steady.

But there is more that must be done. We must take a bite out of emissions from livestock. The FAO reports that it makes up 12 to 16% of global emissions, depending on how you calculate the data. This is less than what we’ve seen in years past – and that’s commendable – but we need to do more.

But how?

Kudos to the FAO and the authors of the report, who emphasize there is no magic potion to attack the issue of methane emissions. We need a toolkit of solutions to effectively reduce emissions from animal agriculture. Furthermore, we’re going to need tools that work in different regions, on varying scales and with diverse production systems. After all, this is a global issue.

Perhaps it bears repeating that as important as it is to put the brakes on methane emissions, of arguably equal weight is our need to feed an unprecedented number of people. Balancing the scales is not easy.

There is no single solution that can reduce emissions enough to dramatically lessen the climate impact of animal agriculture. Although many animal rights activists would love to see a reduction in the consumption of animal sourced foods, it’s not a practical solution.

Let’s be very clear: Less animals may lead to less emissions. But it’s not that easy to remove the “may” in my previous sentence. If we reduce herds in developed regions, we’d be losing some of the most efficient animals in the world. The ones that produce more food with less environmental impact. Neither does it make sense to cut back on animal agriculture in developing regions, where population is growing faster, and where nutrition and livelihoods are at stake.

Reducing greenhouse gas emissions must be the goal. We have tools to do that, with more coming online all the time.

The FAO report is clear in its statement that reducing emissions on farms is our biggest opportunity to lessen the climate footprint of animal agriculture. Increasing productivity and focusing on animal welfare are two good and proven tools in our box. Both can help us to improve livestock’s global emissions. That means helping animals produce more with less inputs and ensuring a better quality of life for them. Improving productivity alone could reduce emissions by 30%, while improved animal welfare can reduce emissions by double-digit percentages in certain regions.

And it doesn’t stop there. We are working on rumen manipulations with feed additives, carbon sequestration, manure management and better nutrition. This work is exciting, promising and ongoing. Scientists around the world are studying ways to have cows produce less methane so that we can curtail global warming without cutting back on our food supply. In the history of the world, have we ever been faced with two more critical goals?

Thanaway Tiensen, director of the FAO’s animal production and health division, states it beautifully in a video message. “Sustainable livestock systems can contribute to climate action in several ways. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions, improving resource efficiency, enhancing carbon sequestration and minimizing environmental impacts … Sustainability is imperative [but] it is equally essential to recognize the role of livestock in meeting our dietary needs.”

There are massive opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from livestock globally, and that’s the goal we must keep in mind – not changing diets and/or reducing herds, but reduce emissions.

That’s the mindset that will allow us to build our tool kit.

The report ends with a subtle call to action. “In conclusion, collaborative efforts from all industry stakeholders are critical to successfully mitigate the anticipated increase in sectoral GHG emissions. Based on the presently available data, this path appears both viable and effective.”

Those who know me understand I am not so subtle, so I’ll say it my way.

We need the public and private sectors to step up to support climate solutions in livestock. We have one pathway that can help us do that.

Let’s be sure to use it.