Cited by 414Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental ImpactAgriculture and Rural Development ResearchAgricultural and Food Production Studies

Defining a land boundary for sustainable livestock consumption

Open access
Van Zanten, Hannah H. E., Herrero, Mario, Van Hal, Ollie, Röös, Elin, Muller, Adrian, Garnett, Tara, Gerber, Pierre J., Schader, Christian +1 more·2018·Global Change Biology

Abstract

The need for more sustainable production and consumption of animal source food (ASF) is central to the achievement of the sustainable development goals: within this context, wise use of land is a core challenge and concern. A key question in feeding the future world is: how much ASF should we eat? We demonstrate that livestock raised under the circular economy concept could provide a significant, nonnegligible part (9–23 g/per capita) of our daily protein needs (~50–60 g/per capita). This livestock then would not consume human‐edible biomass, such as grains, but mainly convert leftovers from arable land and grass resources into valuable food, implying that production of livestock feed is largely decoupled from arable land. The availability of these biomass streams for livestock then determines the boundaries for livestock production and consumption. Under this concept, the competition for land for feed or food would be minimized and compared to no ASF, including some ASF in the human diet could free up about one quarter of global arable land. Our results also demonstrate that restricted growth in consumption of ASF in Africa and Asia would be feasible under these boundary conditions, while reductions in the rest of the world would be necessary to meet land use sustainability criteria. Managing this expansion and contraction of future consumption of ASF is essential for achieving sustainable nutrition security.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/gcb.14321

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • For organic production to be a viable option for feeding the world, production and consumption of animal-source foods must be both significantly reduced and transformed to reduce the use of feeds which compete with food.

    “in order for organic production to be a viable option for feeding the world, production and consumption of animalsource foods must be both significantly reduced and transformed to reduce the use of feeds which compete with food (Muller et al. 2018; van Zanten et al. 2018; Willett et al. 2019).”

    From Delivering “less but better” meat in practice—a case study of a farm in agroecological transition (2022) · cites this paper as van Zanten et al. 2018

    The Abstract says that livestock production and consumption should be bounded by available feeds that do not compete with human food, and that ASF consumption must fall in some regions. The Conclusion likewise calls for feeding livestock biomass unsuited for human consumption. Neither passage establishes that these changes are conditions for organic production to feed the world; the paper addresses sustainable livestock and land use, not the viability of organic production. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • It is undesirable to increase meat production from a sustainability perspective.

    “As it is undesirable to increase meat production from a sustainability perspective (Röös et al. 2017; van Zanten et al. 2018; Willett et al. 2019)”

    From Delivering “less but better” meat in practice—a case study of a farm in agroecological transition (2022) · cites this paper as van Zanten et al. 2018

    The Conclusion (page not provided) says sustainable livestock production is limited by available leftover biomass and low-opportunity-cost grassland, and that most regions need substantial reductions in animal-source-food consumption. But it also says consumption could increase in Africa and Asia while remaining within the proposed land boundary. The source therefore supports limits on increased production, not a blanket claim that any increase in meat production is undesirable. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Ruminant livestock can play a positive role by transforming inedible biomass into highly nutritious food, but only when limited to land unsuitable for cropping or fed waste streams from food production.

    “Ruminant livestock can play a positive role in this regard by transforming inedible biomass into highly nutritious food, but only when limited to land that is unsuitable for cropping (so that arable land can be used for direct food production) or fed waste streams from food production (Mottet et al. 2017; van Zanten et al. 2018).”
  • Ruminants can graze pastureland unsuitable for growing crops for human consumption, contributing to food security without competing for cropland.

    “Hence, ruminants can graze pastureland that is unsuitable for growing crops for human consumption, thus contributing to food security without competing for cropland (Van Zanten et al., 2018).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Garnett, T. (2014). What is a sustainable healthy diet?. A Discussion Paper. Oxford, UK: Food Climate Research Network (FCRN).
  2. Parker, R. (2012). Review of life cycle assessment research on products derived from fisheries and aquaculture: A report for Seafish as part of the collective action to address greenhouse gas emissions in seafood. Edinburgh, UK: Sea Fish Industry Authority.
  3. Picard, M., & Cuca, M. (1986). Chapter 4: Better utilization of crop resi- dues and by-products in animal feeding: research guidelines. 2. A practical manual for research workers. In T. Preston, (Eds.), FAO ani- mal production and health paper. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Retrieved from http:// www.fao.org/docrep/003/x6554e/x6554e00.htm

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Van Zanten, H. H. E., Herrero, M., Van Hal, O., Röös, E., Muller, A., Garnett, T., Gerber, P. J., Schader, C., & De Boer, I. J. M.
Affiliations
  • Animal Production Systems Group Wageningen University & Research Wageningen the Netherlands
  • Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU)
  • Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SE)
  • Research Institute of Organic Agriculture Frick Switzerland
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (IT)
  • Forschungsinstitut für Biologischen Landbau (CH)
Venue
Global Change Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-06-11
Volume
24
Issue
9
Pages
4185-4194
ISSN
  • 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2486
OpenAlex
W2804166887
Cited by
406
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 51 · 2025: 57 · 2024: 51 · 2023: 54 · 2022: 65 · 2021: 63 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 7
FWCI
3.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Global Change Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Epsilon Open Archive (Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet biblioteket (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences)) (acceptedVersion)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • ETH Zürich Research Collection (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Agriculture and Rural Development Research
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Agricultural and Food Production Studies
Keywords
animal source foods, livestock consumption, sustainable land use, circular economy, arable land, protein requirements, Sustainable Development Goals
MeSH terms
Animals, Animal Feed, Animal Husbandry, Cattle, Diet, Food Supply, Livestock

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review