Seré and Steinfeld (1996) developed a global livestock production system classification scheme. A method was devised for mapping the classification based on agro-climatology, land cover, and human population density (Kruska et al. 2003). The classification system can be applied in response to different scenarios of climate and population change to give very broad-brush indications of possible changes in livestock system distribution in the future. This method was recently revised by Thornton et al. (2006) and this study uses those modifications. Below is a brief outline of the data sets and methods used.
The livestock production system proposed by Seré and Steinfeld (1996) is made up of the following types of systems: landless monogastric, landless ruminant, grassland-based, mixed rainfed, and mixed irrigated systems. The grassland- based and mixed systems are further categorized on the basis of climate: arid/semi-arid (with a length of growing period < 180 days), humid/sub-humid (LGP > 180 days), and tropical highlands-temperate regions. This gives 11 categories in all. This system has been mapped using the methods of Kruska et al. (2003).
This classification has been used previously in poverty and vulnerability analyses (Thornton et al. 2002, 2006), for prioritizing animal health interventions (Perry et al. 2003) and for studying systems changes in West Africa (Kristjanson et al. 2004). It is used in this study for disaggregating methane emissions by production systems, which have different land areas, population densities, number of livestock, diets for ruminants and may evolve at different rates.
The Seré and Steinfeld livestock system classification says little about the location of intensive and/or industrial agricultural systems. This breakout is, however, very important for several reasons: systems exist that may be expected to undergo rapid technological change, or exhibit rapid uptake of technology, or be particularly susceptible to the diseases of intensification and/or the emergence of new disease risks.
We therefore implemented a classification that includes a measure of intensification potential.
Agropastoral and pastoral systems, in which natural resources are constrained and people and their animals adopt 1.
adaptation strategies to meet these constraints.
Mixed crop–livestock systems, in which natural resources are most likely to be extensively managed. 2.
Mixed crop–livestock systems, in which natural resources can be managed to intensify the productivity of the 3.
system.
Others, which includes an amalgamation of all the others, e.g. urban, forest-based and landless systems. 4.
The agropastoral/pastoral systems correspond to the three rangeland-based categories (LGA, LGH, LGT) of Seré and Steinfeld where simultaneously less than 10% of the total land area is covered by crops (according to the crop layers from You and Wood 2004).
The crop–livestock systems correspond to the six mixed rainfed and mixed irrigated (MR and MI, both by arid/semi- arid, humid/sub-humid, and temperate/highland) categories of Seré and Steinfeld together with all the areas that have more than 10% of the area under crop (according to the crop layers from You and Wood 2004).
To derive the mixed ‘intensifying’ systems, we added two indicators, one to do with relatively high agricultural potential, and another one related to market access, on the basis that mixed systems that are in high-potential areas and are close to large population centres and markets, will have a high potential of intensifying production. Areas with high agricultural potential were defined as being equipped with irrigation (as in Seré and Steinfeld) or having a length of growing period of more than 180 days per year (according to the LGP layers of Jones and Thornton). Good
market access was defined using the time required to travel to the nearest city with a population of 250,000 or more. We applied a threshold of eight hours. We used the travel time to urban centres with a population of more than 250,000 inhabitants. The distinction between extensive and intensive systems presented here is looking at potential intensification.
The flow chart below (Figure 28) shows the process of deriving the different production system categories starting from Seré and Steinfield.
5 Results
5.1 Farming systems and the distribution
of human population
The distribution of farming systems, as classified for this study, can be observed in Figure 29. Table 20 also shows the area and human population by system and region.
Figure 29. The distribution of farming systems, as classified for this study, for 2000 and 2030
Grazing systems occupy the largest area on earth. Relative to crop–livestock systems, they occupy more than double the land. SSA, West Asia and North Africa have the largest areas of pastoral and agropastoral systems but these are mostly in arid regions of very low or low productivity. Their carrying capacities are inherently low. Central and South America have important cattle producing areas based on grasslands of moderate potential.
Mixed intensive systems have the lowest land area but they contain more than half of the world’s population (2.6 billion). This very high population will increase by almost a billion people by 2030 while remaining virtually with the same amount of land. Population growth elsewhere will also increase significantly to the point that people living in
mixed systems (both intensive and extensive) will comprise roughly 80% of the global population. The large population densities in these systems place, and will keep on doing so, a very high pressure on agro-ecosystem services, notably on food production, water resources, and biodiversity. Although larger in area, agropastoral systems will also become more densely populated, possibly leading to increased land fragmentation and the subsequent loss of traditional livelihood strategies, especially in SSA. These aspects have been documented by Reid et al. (2008).
Table 20. Farming systems: area and human population for different regions of the world under alternative scenarios to 2030
Farming system Region Area 2000 (106 km2) Area 2030 (106 km2) Population 2000 (106 people) Population 2030 (106 people)
(Agro-) pastoral CSA 5.4 5.4 40.5 65.8
EA 5.5 5.5 41.3 53.6 SA 0.5 0.5 19.2 34.8 SEA 0.2 0.2 2.2 3.0 SSA 13.4 12.5 80.2 140.8 WANA 10.2 10.1 111.7 199.3 Total 35.2 34.3 295.1 497.3
Mixed extensive CSA 3.5 3.6 100.7 155.2
EA 1.7 1.9 195.4 264.6 SA 1.6 1.6 371.9 543.6 SEA 1.2 1.0 85.3 92.0 SSA 5.1 5.8 258.7 484.8 WANA 0.9 0.9 87.2 129.9 Total 14.0 14.9 1099.2 1670.0
Mixed intensive CSA 2.4 2.4 221.2 286.3
EA 2.3 2.1 938.5 1020.5 SA 1.8 1.8 844.6 1248.9 SEA 1.1 1.3 347.2 499.1 SSA 1.5 1.7 168.2 327.1 WANA 0.6 0.6 154.4 257.6 Total 9.8 9.8 2674.0 3639.5 Other CSA 8.8 8.8 125.8 174.0 EA 1.5 1.5 104.2 111.7 SA 0.4 0.4 69.5 103.4 SEA 1.9 1.9 40.4 57.9 SSA 4.1 4.1 109.2 190.3 WANA 0.2 0.2 31.3 45.0 Total 16.9 16.8 480.3 682.3
There are large differences between regions and systems. These reflect the variability in agricultural potential, population densities and access to markets of the different regions. On the one hand, mixed intensive systems in fertile areas with suitable lengths of growing period and relatively low population densities abound in Central and South America, while in South and East Asia, land availability per capita is a constraint. SSA has suitable land for increased intensification but constraints like lack of investment, markets and service provision prevent better utilization of these resources. It is essential to acknowledge these structural differences, as options and opportunities for sustainable growth in productivity and poverty reduction are largely dependent on them.
Other systems, such as forests, occupy significant land areas, notably in Latin America and SSA. As demand for food, feed, and energy increase, these areas, usually with very high agricultural potential but somewhat poor market access, become under significant pressure to convert to agriculture and livestock to satisfy the needs of people living in other rural systems or in the increasingly populated urban areas.
5.2 World food prices
World food prices are presented in Table 21 and are taken directly from IAASTD.
With the exception of milk, the prices of crops and livestock products will increase significantly to 2030 as a result of competing demands (e.g. food, feed and fuel), and production factors (e.g. lack of water, nutrients and low animal productivity in some regions).
The largest price increases are observed in cereals, some oil crops, and tubers like sweet potato where demand comes from multiple sources, notably from the feed industry and the energy sector (first generation biofuels). For example, the prices of maize, wheat, sorghum, sweet potato and oil grains is likely to more than double by 2030. It is important to note that all mandate crops for the CGIAR are the ones experiencing the largest price increases. At the same time these are the ones with potential for developing dual or triple purpose crop varieties.
Under the biofuel scenario, with increasing demands for grains for energy production, some of these prices, notably maize and oil grains, increase dramatically. This will have serious repercussions for poor consumers whose food security will be compromised as they will not have the ability to purchase basic staples.
The prices of animal products are also likely to increase but less so, as a result of less sources of competing demands, in this case only a fraction of the increasing human population, and the relative change in demand relative to the change in supply. Livestock breeds that are more efficient in converting feeds to animal products will experience lower price increases since they buffer the increased needs for feeds through increasing productivity per animal. This is particularly true for poultry and pigs, and for milk production, all of which can be produced in larger volumes by relatively modest modifications in the quality of diet. In the case of small ruminants, an increased supply from pastoral and mixed systems will lower price increases relative to other products.
Even though the relative price increases of animal products are lower, with the exception of milk, the baseline prices are higher. Although incomes are increasing, this also has important repercussions for the poorer communities which, apart from milk and perhaps eggs and poultry, will have difficulty in accessing other sources of animal protein. Beef and lamb, with their inefficient production and substantial use of natural resources (water and land), will become almost niche markets for the rich in developing countries.
Even though the relative price increases of animal products are lower, with the exception of milk, the baseline prices are higher. Although incomes are increasing, this also has important repercussions for the poorer communities which, apart from milk and perhaps eggs and poultry, will have difficulty in accessing other sources of animal protein. Beef and lamb, with their inefficient production and substantial use of natural resources (water and land), will become almost niche markets for the rich in developing countries.
Table 21. World food prices by scenario
US Census Bureau (2010).