Evans School Policy Analysis & Research Group (EPAR)

This literature review examines the environmental impacts of cattle in pastoral and mixed farming systems in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Cattle are frequently cited as having the most severe overall environmental impacts among livestock species due to: methane and nitrous oxide released from digestion and manure; land use and conversion; desertification; inefficient ratio of weight of feed and water consumed to weight of meat and dairy produced; conflicts between livestock herders and wildlife; the large volume of wastewater produced in meat and hide processing; and overgrazing of riparian areas. However, cattle have also been found to provide several environmental benefits such as keeping wildlife corridors open, preventing the spread of noxious weeds, and promoting the growth of local vegetative species. Mitigation strategies vary by category of environmental impact, but largely suggest improved productivity to reduce land conversion, modified management systems (e.g., biodiversity, water use and consumption, farm and pastures, grain and other feed, and waste), and the reduction of livestock numbers altogether. 

This literature review examines the environmental impacts of chickens in pastoral and mixed farming systems in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Compared to ruminant species (cattle, water buffalo, and goats), chickens produce lower carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide emissions, are a less significant driver of human expansion into natural habitat or of overgrazing, have lower impacts on the water cycle, and cause less destruction of natural habitats. Poultry’s major impacts on land degradation result from the production of their grain-intensive feed. Chicken production also poses a threat to avian biodiversity, as chickens are susceptible to viruses and act as vectors of disease transmission to avian wildlife. Chicken manure is widely viewed as a valuable fertilizer in developing countries, although transportation costs limit manure sales in local markets and the high nitrogen-phosphorous ratio can impact certain soils and water. Mitigation strategies vary by category of environmental impact, but largely suggest modified management systems (e.g., biodiversity, health, livestock feed efficiency, and waste).

This brief presents selected material from the Fourth African Agricultural Markets Program (AAMP) policy symposium, Agricultural Risks Management in Africa: Taking Stock of What Has and Hasn’t Worked, organized by the Alliance for Commodity Trade in Eastern and Southern Africa and the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa that took place in Lilongwe, Malawi, September 6-10, 2010.  We draw almost exclusively from Rashid and Jayne’s summary, “Risk Management in African Agriculture: A review of experiences.”  This article summarizes across the background papers, with major findings grouped into three broad categories: cross cutting, government-led policies, and modern instruments.

Agriculture and Climate Change: Part I

With estimated global emissions of 5,969-6,615 metric tons (Mt) of carbon dioxide (CO2) per year, agriculture accounts for about 13.5% of total global anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG). Deforestation contributes about 11.8% of total GHG emissions, releasing about 5,800 Mt CO2 per year. Developing countries are largely responsible for emissions from agriculture and deforestation, with the developing countries of South Asia and East Asia accounting for 17% and 25% of global agricultural emissions respectively. Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) accounts for about 13% of global emissions from agriculture and 15% of emissions from land use change and forestry. This report examines the biophysical and economic potential of mitigating agriculture and land use GHG emissions, and provides a summary on the current and projected impact of global carbon market mechanisms on emission reductions. 

Agriculture and Climate Change: Part II

This report covers two topics related to agriculture and climate change in developing countries. The first section discusses the role of agricultural offsets in mitigating greenhouse gas emissions. Recent negotiations around a post-Kyoto Protocol agreement have included debate about whether agricultural carbon sequestration projects should be eligible under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). We examine the reasons for supporting or opposing this type of CDM reform and how these reasons relate to impacts on development goals and smallholder farmers, scientific uncertainty about carbon sequestration, and philosophical disagreement about the use of emission offsets. The second section covers proposed agricultural adaptation activities in Africa and other developing countries. While the majority of developing countries have outlined immediate adaptation needs in National Adaptation Programs of Action (NAPAs), few have made progress in implementing adaptation activities. We find that issues related to financial resources, scientific and technical information, and capacity building continue to challenge developing countries in preparing for the impacts of climate change.