An Argument for Managing the World’s Meat Consumption
Some of the greatest concerns of our time is the overuse of resources, global warming and the great increase in the human population. In spite of that 50% of the Earth’s terrestrial surface is used for crop-production and grazing areas (Kareiva et al. 2007) we will not be able to feed our soon to be 9 billion people ( Godfray et al. 2010). In addition to this, it is in human interest to reduce the land used for agriculture due to exhaustion and conservation of areas. It is important that we start using our resources more efficiently, and in a more sustainable way before it is too late.
Around 30% of the Earth’s surface, or 80% of all land used by humans, is used to support livestock for meat production (Stehfest et al. 2009). A big part of this could be used to create food on a lower tropical level, which means more energy (food) on the same amount of area, which could in turn feed more people. Only about 10 percent of the energy stored in the primary producers (greens) is transferred to the consumer. Not to forget- meat production is one of our biggest climate concerns, because of emissions from livestock of methane, nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide, and stands for around 18% of our total greenhouse gas emissions (Stehfest et al. 2009).
To be able to reach a more sustainable way of agriculture, we do not only need a to change the way we do things, but we also need a drastic change in the way the richer part of the world thinks about food (Walsh, 2013). If we were forced to cut down our consumption of meat, it could have major effects on reducing the rate of the global warming, we could sustain the population growth, at least for some time, not to mention the effect it could have on our private health. A more balanced diet than what you often find in the western world today will be economically positive, where many people have a high fat- and sugary diet, and their health issues cost the state a lot of money (Godfray et al. 2010).
This does not mean that we should quit all husbandry and meat production, and that we all should be vegetarians. Meat and other animal products is an important source of proteins and nutrients. In addition, parts of the human livestock are grazing animals who use landscape that could not be used for crop production anyway (Godfray et al. 2010). But it means that it’s time to realize that our earth, which is the only earth we will ever have, needs us to start thinking more long-term, and start using our land so that it can keep feeding us for the years to come. It needs us to realize that we cannot keep consuming in this way, when there is not enough food for the rest of the world.
For every 100 kg of proteins in ruminant meat, we require 60 m2, while beans, peas, lentils and chickpeas only require 25m2 to create the same amount of proteins (Stehfest et al. 2009). This means that we could sustain over twice as many people in proteins by a change in land use. And according to PETA’s (People for the ethical treatment of animals) website, as of February 2016; it takes about 20 times as much land to support a meaty diet, than a fully plant based diet.
The average American eats 122 kg of meat per year; this is 334 grams a day, or 2.3 kg a week (Walsh, 2013). For comparison, the average Norwegian eats 65.4 kg a year (Barclay, 2014), which is just above half the American consumption. The country to score highest on meat consumption per person is Luxembourg with as much as 301.7 kg of meat per year, which equals to 375 grams a day. This is a ridiculous amount of meat, and this amount of beef requires 75m2 of land use per person each day of the year (Barclay, 2014). Of course, the amount of meat is shared between poultry, pork, beef and other meat, where beef requires the biggest amount of land.
Having a meat consumption that would be devastating for the world if adopted by other nations, should be reason enough to manage the meat-culture down to sustainable levels. It is to be expected that developmental countries to increase their meat consumption as they become wealthier (Begon et al. 2014). Reducing the American, and other first world countries’ meat consumption to the levels of India (3.2 kg a year), or Bangladesh (3.6 kg a year) (Barclay, 2014) seems unrealistic, but to reduce it by some, (or even half) should be possible. In fact a declaration called the “Barsac Declaration” were put forth by a group of biologist in 2009, saying that no-one should get more that 35- 40% of their protein from meat, which would reduce the American and other first world countries’ consumption of meat by half. Not only would this do the world so much good in the means of emissions, and the amount of food, but it is also the upper limit recommendation in a healthy diet. (Begon et al. 2014).
By Åsne Brede
References
Kareiva P., S. Watts, R. McDonald, T. Boucher (2007) “ Domesticated Nature: Shaping Landscapes end Ecosystems for Human Welfare” Science 316: 1866-1869.
Stehfest E., L. Bouwman, D.P. van Vurren, M.G.J. den Elzen, B. Eickhout, P.Kabat (2009)
“Climate benefits of changing diet”. Climatic Change. 95:83-102
Godfray H.C.J., J. R. Beddington, I.R. Crute, L. Haddad, D. Lawrence, J.F. Muir, J. Pretty, S.
Robinson, S. M. Thomas, C. Toulmin (2010) “Food: Security: The Challenge of
Feeding 9 Billion People”. Science. 327: 812-818
Walsh B. (2013) “The Triple Whopper Environmental Impact of Global Meat Production”. TIME. Available: http://science.time.com/2013/12/16/the-triple-whopper-environmental-impact-of-global-meat-production. Last accessed 23/02/16
Barclay E. (2014) “A Nation Of Meat Eaters: See How It All Adds Up“. The Salt. Available: http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2012/06/27/155527365/visualizing-a-nation-of-meat-eaters. Last accessed 24/02/16
Begon M., R.W. Howarth, C. R. Townsend. (2014). The ecology of human population growth, disease, and food supply. United States of America: Wiley. p. 406- 440
PETA “Meat and the environment” Available: http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-food/meat-environment/ Last accessed 25/02/16
Image taken from www.freeimages.com
Very important topic! We obviously need to grow enough food for everyone on the planet, but at the same time make sure we’re not sacrificing our future well-being.
I’m a skeptic when it comes to popular diets that keep cropping up, but a balanced diet is definitely the way to go, where we get enough of the protein, lipids, carbohydrates, minerals and vitamins that our body needs to grow, fight off infections, and for general well-being.. a typical Mediterranean diet is supposed to be a good example, as it provides a nice mix of vegetables, meat, carbohydrates, and «healthy oils» (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3916858/). But like you say, in many Western diets, we eat way too much meat for it to be sustainable or healthy. So what specific things should we do to convince people eating around 300g meat per day to lessen the amount? Perhaps creating info posters to put up in the doctor’s office or in grocery stores, like those classic «an apple a day keeps the doctor away», could raise awareness to the general public of both the health and environmental benefits of eating less meat and more of e.g. lentils?
However, in regards to the amount of food we produce, I read a while ago that we actually do produce enough for the world today, despite there being so many malnourished and undernourished people. One reason is that food isn’t distributed properly…many people are too poor to provide everything they need, or perhaps there isn’t enough of a certain food in their area (did you hear about the Golden Rice project that aims to provide enough Vitamin A through readily available rice to people that suffer from Vit-A malnutrition?). Another important fact is that a lot of food is thrown away (http://www.nationalgeographic.com/foodfeatures/feeding-9-billion/)! Food distribution should be something international panels like the UN should help with, through the FAO, but food waste is something we can all do much better with.