Sci-Tech -   

1

Eat less meat to help double world's food supply: study

Ground meat  (CTV)
Ground meat  (CTV)

View Larger Image

A A |  Email ThisEmail  | PrintComments (16) Facebook   

Date: Thursday Oct. 13, 2011 9:38 AM ET

MONTREAL — A newly published blueprint for doubling the global food supply includes a key suggestion about how everyone can contribute to this increasingly pressing ambition: eat less meat.

An international team of researchers has developed solutions to respond to what it calls one the greatest challenges of the 21st century — boosting food production while slashing the environmental impact of agriculture.

The research, which will be featured on the cover page of the Oct. 20 edition of the journal Nature, comes as international concern grows over how the planet will feed the rapidly expanding human population.

With the world's population expected to climb from 6.9 billion to 9 billion by 2050, the issue of food was put at the top of this year's G-20 agenda. The study, published online Wednesday, says there are already a billion people who don't have enough to eat.

McGill University's Navin Ramankutty, one of the team leaders on the paper, said the research is the first of its kind to quantify both food production and ecological consequences in the same analysis.

He added that it's also the first study to examine these factors while considering the specific environmental characteristics of different regions of the planet.

Ramankutty said limiting meat consumption is one of several ways to increase food production.

He estimates that simply dedicating prime cropland to growing food for humans — rather than growing biofuels or feed for animals — could spike the global output by nearly 50 per cent.

The study says that three-quarters of the world's agricultural land is devoted to raising livestock, either for grazing or for growing feed.

Ramankutty added that beef is the most resource-intensive animal product of them all.

"That doesn't mean we all have to become vegetarians and vegans, but even if you ... eat meat one or two days less a week, you can hugely contribute to the amount of food that's needed," Ramankutty, himself a meat-eater, said from Montreal.

"It would have a huge impact, but this also happens to be one of those things where people are much more personally attached to it."

He said that scientists in his field rarely raised diet as an issue in the past because they didn't want to infringe on a person's right to choose.

But Ramankutty said fewer researchers are staying quiet on this subject, particularly when the consequences have global environmental impacts.

Changes to the human diet are only one component of the study's strategy to double the global food supply.

The research also calls for improved crop management to increase yields; an end to deforestation to make way for farmland; and a cutback on food waste, which amounts for as much as half of the planetary food production.

The catch? Ensuring these strategies are adopted on a global scale.

Ramankutty was coy when asked about the likelihood of these tactics being implemented in his lifetime — though he did laugh at the question.

"To be honest, I'm probably pessimistic about it, but I always think that optimism is the only choice we have," the geographer said.

"It's not going to happen in a big, single step. Obviously, it's going to happen slowly."

Ramankutty continued by noting that some aspects included in the study are already being discussed politically and at the international level, such as plans to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions caused by deforestation.

He hopes the study will influence both policy makers and even personal dietary choices.

"Hopefully, people who had been thinking about these issues before (will) read this paper and say: 'Hey, this can make big changes; it's not just a small drop in the bucket,' " Ramankutty said.

Comments are now closed for this story

Ban Kool Aid !
said

With so many from the left worshiping their earth god Gaia we carnivores are in for a ride. Make mine a double Big Mac for lunch while we still can. Maybe we can double the common sense in our world if we stopped drinking so much Kool Aid... do ya think?.


Farmer Brown
said

Did you catch that Martha? ....."slashing the environmental impact of agriculture". Umm... do ya suppose they are talking about the methane gas from bovine excrement affecting climate change? Sounds like a pile of bovine excrement to me.


Munro - Brampton
said

The real answer is for oil companies to stop buying up land in Africa/Asia to grow corn for the darn ethanol junk they put in our gas. The people have no land to grow food for eating. I think it's just a way to increase the volume of gas cheaply. Regular is now up to 10% ethanol.


Prof. Pye Chartt
said

Anyone with a competent understanding of market economics, domestic and foreign land usage, governmental regulation, and international trade can appreciate why this perceived "solution" is goofy. Like money, food is not finite in quantity. (Lefties always struggle with this factual reality.) You cannot "engineer" an abundance of that which isn't free, and have-nots cannot afford and/or are incompetent to produce and sustain themselves.


twinter
said

How about stopping the population from growing? Why push the limits?


Just wonderin'
said

I get it, really. But if I only eat one hamburger this week instead of two, how is that going to help get the meat from my second hamburger to the starving folks in Ethiopia or wherever? Will these starving people even eat meat? Has anyone looked at the "normal" dietary habits of the world's starving population9s)? ie, what would their food choices be if there was plenty of food? Then investigte, and report, on how we can help them!


Alexis in Victoria
said

There are enough fish in the sea to provide a healthier diet than eating meat. If we all became pescetarians/vegetarians/vegans, and left the meat out, we'd all be healthier and that would solve alot of other issues in the long run!


Manotick Fats
said

So we eat only half of what we have and watch what we haven't eaten rot and mold in a warehouse. Good plan. The rats will love it.


A farmer
said

The sky is falling. Why don't they actually ask a farmer for once? What they fail to mention is that large livestock are raised by and large on dry land that is unsuitable for grain, fruits, veggies, etc. IE cheap land. The good land is raising the crops. And then there are intensive livestock like a chicken barn, where piles of meat is produced on a tiny "footprint". Sure, these animals eat grains, but it is often poorer quality, high yielding crops. Also, as of right now, there is no shortage of food worldwide. It is the distribution that is all screwed up, with the west having excess, and the poor countries unable to afford it because of idiots that run those countries, and who spend the countries money on weapons rather than food.It really isn't an issue that it is being made out as... I am a farmer, and they have been saying we are running out of food for the entire history of western Canada. Yet technology keeps up. There will be a crunch no doubt, but it is farther away than these chicken littles think. But how are city slickers to know that? The only hear one side of the story and have no way of knowing; they are so far removed from the farm, they think food comes from their nearest walmart supercenter!


Jim McB
said

Just another bunch of researchers jumping to conclusions without thinking about the collateral issues. If the world eats healthier, life expectancy will increase, thus population will increase faster than predicted and the problem will remain or may even be more acute.Our academics need to come out into the sun once in a while to see the real world!


Intelligent Liberal
said

I completely agree with this study. If Canadians could cut their consumption of meat by 1/2, for example have a single quarter pounder rather than a double, then the availability of food will DOUBLE!


Dave, Ottawa
said

I think we should be focused on capping our population. Food supply is but one concern for a planet with 9 billion people.


Oils Not Well
said

Of course, this is assuming oil and other fossil fuels never run out... The only reason we can produce as much food as we do today is because of easy, cheap energy. We will never get to 9 billion people, we don't have enough cheap energy left. There are 10 calories of hydrocarbon energy in every calorie of food we consume...think about it.


Jaid in Toronto
said

All about supply and demand, and this study will only give businesses a reason to jack up meat prices because they cannot "supply" the population.


PEI Fella
said

Makes sense. We should be better to our planet and our bodies. I love meat but I'm sure I'd be a lot healthier if I ate less of it. Its nice to hear it would not only impact my life but also the health of our planet.


Colleen
said

I see this as a very easy choice, given the seriousness of the issue. Restaurants need to get on board as well and come up with some great vegetarian choices on their menus. People may be able to give up meat twice a week, but they won't want to give up eating out, and we don't want the restaurant industry to suffer either.


Share with your social Network:

Facebook DIGG Newsvine Delicious Twitter StumbeUpon Reddit Yahoo! Buzz

 

Advertisement

Contest

Today's Sci-Tech Stories

keyboard generic; computer; online crime

Researchers discover massive new cyberweapon

More    Comments    1 Video(s) 1

Models display a Samsung Galaxy S III, the latest smartphone in the company's Galaxy lineups, during its launching for media in Jakarta, Indonesia, Tuesday, May 22, 2012. Samsung said the phone, that has emerged as the biggest competitor to the iPhone, will go on sale in 145 countries with 296 phone companies, making it the company's biggest launch so far. (AP Photo/Dita Alangkara)

Samsung releases latest Galaxy smartphone in Europe

More

Cows are shown grazing on an organic dairy farm in Jordan, Minn., in a May 31, 2006 file photo. (AP / Jim Mone)

Massages and waterbeds boost milk output in cows

More