IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i13p5466-d381307.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Potential Role for Consumers to Reduce Canadian Agricultural GHG Emissions by Diversifying Animal Protein Sources

Author

Listed:
  • James A. Dyer

    (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 122 Hexam Street, Cambridge, ON N3H 3Z9, Canada)

  • Raymond L. Desjardins

    (Science and Technology Branch, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Government of Canada, 960 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, ON K1A 0C6, Canada)

  • Devon E. Worth

    (Science and Technology Branch, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Government of Canada, 960 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, ON K1A 0C6, Canada)

  • Xavier P.C. Vergé

    (Science and Technology Branch, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Government of Canada, 960 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, ON K1A 0C6, Canada)

Abstract

The discussion of diversified protein sources triggered by the 2019 Canadian Food Guide has implications for Canada’s livestock industry. In response to this discussion, a scenario analysis is conducted on the potential impact of reducing red meat consumption on the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from Canadian livestock production. This analysis uses medical recommendations as a proxy for healthy servings of red meat. For simplicity, it was assumed that red meat is either beef or pork and that broilers are the only nonred meat choice. The medical scenario is combined with four livestock production scenarios for these three livestock types. Broiler consumption is allowed to expand to maintain national protein intake in all four scenarios. Under the medical scenario, red meat consumption in Canada would decrease from 2.5 Mt to 1.9 Mt of live weight. A feedlot diet for slaughter cattle, and a 50:50 split of the medically recommended red meat intake of beef and pork (Scenario 1), reduced GHG emissions by 3.9 Mt CO 2 e from the 20.6 Mt CO 2 e (carbon dioxide equivalent) for current consumption. Replacing the feedlot beef diet by grass fed beef (Scenario 2) increased GHG emissions by 1.5 Mt CO 2 e over Scenario 1. Halving the consumption of grass fed beef and increasing pork by 50% (Scenario 3) reduced GHG by 7.7 Mt CO 2 e. Reverting back to the feedlot diet, and the same 25:75 beef–pork ratio (Scenario 4), increased the GHG emissions reduction to 8.9 Mt CO 2 e. Without including the emission savings from the medical scenario, GHG reductions from Scenarios 3 and 4 dropped to 3.8 Mt and 5.0 Mt CO 2 e, respectively. No scenario exceeded the feed grain area required to meet the 2017 consumption of these commodities, but Scenario 2 required more forage area compared to consumption in 2017.

Suggested Citation

  • James A. Dyer & Raymond L. Desjardins & Devon E. Worth & Xavier P.C. Vergé, 2020. "Potential Role for Consumers to Reduce Canadian Agricultural GHG Emissions by Diversifying Animal Protein Sources," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-15, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:13:p:5466-:d:381307
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/13/5466/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/13/5466/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fredrik Hedenus & Stefan Wirsenius & Daniel Johansson, 2014. "The importance of reduced meat and dairy consumption for meeting stringent climate change targets," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 124(1), pages 79-91, May.
    2. James A. Dyer & Xavier P.C. Verge & Raymond L. Desjardins & Brian G. McConkey, 2011. "Implications of Biofuel Feedstock Crops for the Livestock Feed Industry in Canada," Chapters, in: Marco Aurelio Dos Santos Bernardes (ed.), Environmental Impact of Biofuels, IntechOpen.
    3. Martin C. Heller & Gregory A. Keoleian, 2015. "Greenhouse Gas Emission Estimates of U.S. Dietary Choices and Food Loss," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 19(3), pages 391-401, June.
    4. Emilio Sabia & Sarah Kühl & Laura Flach & Christian Lambertz & Matthias Gauly, 2020. "Effect of Feed Concentrate Intake on the Environmental Impact of Dairy Cows in an Alpine Mountain Region Including Soil Carbon Sequestration and Effect on Biodiversity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-14, March.
    5. Vergé, X.P.C. & Dyer, J.A. & Desjardins, R.L. & Worth, D., 2008. "Greenhouse gas emissions from the Canadian beef industry," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 98(2), pages 126-134, September.
    6. Verge, X.P.C. & Dyer, J.A. & Desjardins, R.L. & Worth, D., 2007. "Greenhouse gas emissions from the Canadian dairy industry in 2001," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(3), pages 683-693, June.
    7. Raymond L. Desjardins & Devon E. Worth & Xavier P. C. Vergé & Dominique Maxime & Jim Dyer & Darrel Cerkowniak, 2012. "Carbon Footprint of Beef Cattle," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(12), pages 1-23, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jennifer A. Jay & Raffaella D’Auria & J. Cully Nordby & David Andy Rice & David A. Cleveland & Anthony Friscia & Sophie Kissinger & Marc Levis & Hannah Malan & Deepak Rajagopal & Joel R. Reynolds & We, 2019. "Reduction of the carbon footprint of college freshman diets after a food-based environmental science course," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 154(3), pages 547-564, June.
    2. Raymond L. Desjardins & Devon E. Worth & Xavier P. C. Vergé & Dominique Maxime & Jim Dyer & Darrel Cerkowniak, 2012. "Carbon Footprint of Beef Cattle," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(12), pages 1-23, December.
    3. Li, Xiaogu & Jensen, Kimberly L. & Clark, Christopher D. & Lambert, Dayton M., 2016. "Consumer willingness to pay for beef grown using climate friendly production practices," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 93-106.
    4. Nijdam, Durk & Rood, Trudy & Westhoek, Henk, 2012. "The price of protein: Review of land use and carbon footprints from life cycle assessments of animal food products and their substitutes," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 760-770.
    5. Pedro Henrique Presumido & Fernando Sousa & Artur Gonçalves & Tatiane Cristina Dal Bosco & Manuel Feliciano, 2018. "Environmental Impacts of the Beef Production Chain in the Northeast of Portugal Using Life Cycle Assessment," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-19, October.
    6. Hadjikakou, Michalis, 2017. "Trimming the excess: environmental impacts of discretionary food consumption in Australia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 119-128.
    7. Dyer, J.A. & Kulshreshtha, S.N. & McConkey, B.G. & Desjardins, R.L., 2010. "An assessment of fossil fuel energy use and CO2 emissions from farm field operations using a regional level crop and land use database for Canada," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2261-2269.
    8. Thanh-Lam Nguyen & Do Huu Tai & Lam Thanh Hien & Doan Manh Quynh & Phan Ngoc Son, 2020. "A Novel Model to Predict Plant-Based Food Choice-Empirical Study in Southern Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-25, May.
    9. Saidi Kais & Ben Mbarek Mounir, 2017. "Causal interactions between environmental degradation, renewable energy, nuclear energy and real GDP: a dynamic panel data approach," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 51-67, March.
    10. Bazoche, Pascale & Guinet, Nicolas & Poret, Sylvaine & Teyssier, Sabrina, 2023. "Does the provision of information increase the substitution of animal proteins with plant-based proteins? An experimental investigation into consumer choices," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    11. Menrad, K. & Emberger-Klein, A. & Schops, J., 2018. "Factors influencing consumers behavioral intention towards climate-friendly food consumption in Southern Germany," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277108, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. David Bryngelsson & Fredrik Hedenus & Daniel J. A. Johansson & Christian Azar & Stefan Wirsenius, 2017. "How Do Dietary Choices Influence the Energy-System Cost of Stabilizing the Climate?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-13, February.
    13. Lucile Marty & Laura Arrazat & Gaëlle Arvisenet & Sophie Nicklaus & Stephanie Chambaron, 2021. "Protocol and statistical analysis plan - impact of environmental labelling on food choices: a randomized controlled trial in a virtual reality supermarket," Working Papers hal-03270668, HAL.
    14. Helen Harwatt & Joan Sabaté & Gidon Eshel & Sam Soret & William Ripple, 2017. "Substituting beans for beef as a contribution toward US climate change targets," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 143(1), pages 261-270, July.
    15. Brent F. Kim & Keeve E. Nachman & Roni A. Neff & Marie L. Spiker & Raychel E. Santo, 2016. "Concerns re: interpretation and translation of findings in Energy use, blue water footprint, and greenhouse gas emissions for current food consumption patterns and dietary recommendations in the US," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 104-105, March.
    16. Karin Höijer & Caroline Lindö & Arwa Mustafa & Maria Nyberg & Viktoria Olsson & Elisabet Rothenberg & Hanna Sepp & Karin Wendin, 2020. "Health and Sustainability in Public Meals—An Explorative Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-16, January.
    17. Bonnet, Céline & Bouamra-Mechemache, Zohra & Réquillart, Vincent & Treich, Nicolas, 2020. "Viewpoint: Regulating meat consumption to improve health, the environment and animal welfare," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    18. Matt Biggar, 2019. "Unpacking the influence of social norms and past experience on commute mode choice," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 2(1).
    19. Shen Wang & Guohe Huang & Yurui Fan, 2018. "A Multistage Distribution-Generation Planning Model for Clean Power Generation under Multiple Uncertainties—A Case Study of Urumqi, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-30, September.
    20. White, Robin R. & Brady, Michael & Capper, Judith L. & Johnson, Kristen A., 2014. "Optimizing diet and pasture management to improve sustainability of U.S. beef production," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 1-12.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:13:p:5466-:d:381307. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.