The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Carbon Footprint of Beef Cattle
Open accessAbstract
The carbon footprint of beef cattle is presented for Canada, The United States, The European Union, Australia and Brazil. The values ranged between 8 and 22 kg CO2e per kg of live weight (LW) depending on the type of farming system, the location, the year, the type of management practices, the allocation, as well as the boundaries of the study. Substantial reductions have been observed for most of these countries in the last thirty years. For instance, in Canada the mean carbon footprint of beef cattle at the exit gate of the farm decreased from 18.2 kg CO2e per kg LW in 1981 to 9.5 kg CO2e per kg LW in 2006 mainly because of improved genetics, better diets, and more sustainable land management practices. Cattle production results in products other than meat, such as hides, offal and products for rendering plants; hence the environmental burden must be distributed between these useful products. In order to do this, the cattle carbon footprint needs to be reported in kg of CO2e per kg of product. For example, in Canada in 2006, on a mass basis, the carbon footprint of cattle by-products at the exit gate of the slaughterhouse was 12.9 kg CO2e per kg of product. Based on an economic allocation, the carbon footprints of meat (primal cuts), hide, offal and fat, bones and other products for rendering were 19.6, 12.3, 7 and 2 kg CO2e per kg of product, respectively.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Using life cycle analysis (LCA), several studies have concluded that grass-finished beef systems have greater GHG intensities than feedlot-finished (FL) beef systems.”
From Impacts of soil carbon sequestration on life cycle greenhouse gas emissions in Midwestern USA beef finishing systems (2018) · cites this paper as Desjardins et al., 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, there remains substantial uncertainty about soil C change over time in managed grasslands”
From Impacts of soil carbon sequestration on life cycle greenhouse gas emissions in Midwestern USA beef finishing systems (2018) · cites this paper as Desjardins et al., 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Climate change 2007: the physical science basis
Solomon, S., Qin, D., Manning, M., Marquis, M. C., Averyt, K. B., Tignor, M., Miller, H. L., & Chen, Z. (2007) · Cited by 23,398
Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis.
Schiavon, S., & Zecchin, R. (2007) · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · Cited by 16,994
Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — Requirements and guidelines
International Organization for Standardization. Geneva (2006) · doi:10.5555/iso14044:2006 · Cited by 889
Carbon footprint: current methods of estimation
Pandey, D., Agrawal, M., & Pandey, J. S. (2010) · Environmental Monitoring and Assessment · doi:10.1007/s10661-010-1678-y · Cited by 764
Pelletier, N., Pirog, R., & Rasmussen, R. (2010) · Agricultural Systems · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2010.03.009 · Cited by 419
Schwartzkopf-Genswein, K. S., Faucitano, L., Dadgar, S., Shand, P. J., González, L. A., & Crowe, T. G. (2012) · Meat Science · doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.04.010 · Cited by 402
Beauchemin, K. A., Henry Janzen, H., Little, S. M., McAllister, T. A., & McGinn, S. M. (2010) · Agricultural Systems · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2010.03.008 · Cited by 397
Scenario-based environmental assessment of farming systems: the case of pig production in France
Basset-Mens, C., & van der Werf, H. M. G. (2004) · Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment · doi:10.1016/j.agee.2004.05.007 · Cited by 380
System expansion and allocation in life cycle assessment of milk and beef production
Cederberg, C., & Stadig, M. (2003) · The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment · doi:10.1007/bf02978508 · Cited by 338
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Johnson, D.E., Phetteplace, H.W., Seidl, A.F., Schneider, U.A., and McCarl, B.A. (2003, January 17-21). Management Variations for U.S. Beef Production Systems: Effects on Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Profitability. Proceedings of the 3rd International Methane and Nitrous Oxide Mitigation Conference, Beijing, China.
- (2009). Environmental/Ecological Impact of the Dairy Sector: Literature Review on Dairy Products for an Inventory of Key Issues. List of Environmental Initiatives and Influences on the Dairy Sector.
- Annual Survey of Manufacturers, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010. Data gathered from American FactFinder. Available online:http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml/.
- Wu, 2011, Characterication of provincially inspected slaughterhouse wastewater in Ontario, Can. Biosyst. Eng., 53, 6.9
- Arcand, Y., and Boye, J. (2012). Green Technologies in Food Production and Processing, Springer Science and Business Media.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–124 of 124
Gilreath, J., Wickersham, T. A., & Sawyer, J. E. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su142417017 · Cited by 1
Howard, A., Chipanshi, A. C., Davidson, A., Desjardins, R. L., Колотій, А. В., Kussul, N., McNairn, H. E., Skakun, S. V., & Шелестов, А. Ю. (2018) · Agronomy monograph/Agronomy · doi:10.2134/agronmonogr60.2014.0056.5 · Cited by 1
Self-citationVargas, L. P., & Silveira, V. C. P. (2016) · Revista em Agronegócio e Meio Ambiente · doi:10.17765/2176-9168.2016v9n2p415-430
Wang, S., Huang, G., & Fan, Y. (2018) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su10093263
Bieńkowski, J., Dąbrowicz, R., Holka, M., & Jankowiak, J. (2018) · Zeszyty Naukowe SGGW w Warszawie - Problemy Rolnictwa Światowego · doi:10.22630/prs.2018.18.3.63
Vargas, L. P., & Silveira, V. C. P. (2015) · Archivos Latinoamericanos de Producción Animal
Virgillito, S. (2019) · Lincoln (University of Nebraska)
On the Road to the Carbon Neutral Leather
Janardhanan, S. K., & Zugno, L. A. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-99-9754-1_17
Oni, F. E., & Baiyegunhi, L. J. S. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5379803
Life cycle assessment of raw beef meat production in Argentina: from farm to butcher shop
Colli, G. G., Torres, M. G., Andrés, S. C., Nagai, N. F., & Lorenzo, G. (2025) · EUREKA Life Sciences · doi:10.21303/2504-5695.2025.003880
Machado, T. M. P., Filho, A. L. S., Daros, R. R., Farley, J., Sinisgalli, P. A. D. A., & Kazama, D. C. D. S. (2025) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-6436369/v1
Cottle, D., & Pitchford, W. S. (2014) · CSIRO Publishing eBooks · doi:10.1071/9780643109896.ch18
Enhancing Carbon Emission Decisions in Livestock with CarbonSECO’s Service Suite
Silva, P. H. A., Braga, R. M. M., David, J., Neto, V. V. G., Arbex, W., & Ströele, V. (2025) · Lecture notes in business information processing · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-08570-2_17
Advanced methodology for the inventory on greenhouse gas emissions in tropical livestock farming
Malafaia, G. C., de Abreu, U. G. P., Ruviaro, C. F., Biscola, P. H. N., Dias, F. R. T., Feijó, G. L. D., Gomes, R. D. C., & de Azevedo, D. B. (2025) · Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira · doi:10.1590/s1678-3921.pab2025.v60.04130
Namee, A. M., McGee, M., O’Riordan, E. G., Crudden, D. M., & Crosson, P. (2026) · Agricultural Systems · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2026.104827
Competitiveness of the polish beef market - economic and environmental aspects
Kowalska, A., Olszańska, A., & Soukal, I. (2026) · Economics and Environment · doi:10.34659/eis.2026.97.2.1112
Fifty years of progress for beef cattle production in the United States
Rotz, C. A., Castaño-Sánchez, J. P., Kniffen, D. M., Buyers, M., & Werth, S. J. (2026) · Journal of Animal Science · doi:10.1093/jas/skag169
Beef and animal protein consumption as major sources of urban food related carbon emissions
Fatmah, Fitrinitia, I. S., & Gao, L. (2026) · Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems · doi:10.3389/fsufs.2026.1842044
Roncevich, M. K., Hayek, M., & Hinestroza, J. P. (2026) · ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering · doi:10.1021/acssuschemeng.5c12631
O’Shannessy, R., & Wiedemann, S. G. (2026) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani16162498
Martínez, P. G., Goenaga, I., León-Ecay, S., Mendizabal, J. A., Aldai, N., Insausti, K., & Aldaya, M. M. (2026) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani16162576
Taylor, J. L., & Tzilivakis, J. (2026) · Journal of Environmental Quality · doi:10.1002/jeq2.70269
Metadata
- Authors
- Desjardins, R., Worth, D., Vergé, X., Maxime, D., Dyer, J., & Cerkowniak, D.
- Affiliations
- Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (CA)
- Private Consultant, Ottawa, ON, K2A 1G6, Canada
- CIRAIG (CA)
- Private Consultant, Cambridge, ON, N3H 3Z9, Canada
- Corresponding author
- Desjardins, Raymond
- ORCID
- Desjardins, Raymond
- Venue
- Sustainability
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2012-12-03
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 3279-3301
- ISSN
- 2071-1050 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2080468116
- Cited by
- 124
- References
- 44
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 3
- FWCI
- 3.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Sustainability (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PolyPublie (École Polytechnique de Montréal) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Sustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
- Keywords
- carbon footprint, beef cattle, greenhouse gas emissions, economic allocation, hides, offal, rendering, sustainable land management, beef production efficiency, cross-national comparison
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
