Hi guys! So I recently entered the Young Economist essay writing competition, with the title
"What fundamental economic and political change, if any, is needed for an effective response to climate change?"(1000 words). My essay didn't win (shocking), but I thought my idea of taxing livestock producers was a timely idea considering Finland has recently proposed that the EU ban Brazilian beef after the Amazon rainforest fires. Anyway here's my essay below!
In this essay I will argue that fundamental economic and political change is necessary in the livestock production industry. According to the Food and Agriculture Organisation, the world has 1.468 billion head of cattle. This essay argues that in order to effectively respond to climate change, producers in Brazil, India, China and the United States, whom collectively account for 41.12% of global cattle head, must be required to purchase Livestock Production Credits in order to continue production. Although a further 104 countries have a cattle inventory of over 1 million head, it would be much harder to ensure compliance on a global scale and as a result less effective than if only the main polluting countries are targeted. As cattle are the main producers of greenhouse gases such as methane and consume the most grazing land, with 0.5kg of beef having a water footprint 200 times that of plants, the countries with the highest cattle production rates will be the ones producing the most livestock pollution.
As stated by the UN the human activity of meat production creates 14.5% of total greenhouse gas emissions. In the United States alone a family of 4 is estimated to emit more greenhouse gases from the meat they consume than having 2 cars used on the road daily. This 14.5% of greenhouse gas emissions is more than all global means of transport pollution combined. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2018 report states that to keep the global warming forecast at a safe level, greenhouse gas emissions would need to reach net 0 within the next 15 years. The report also stresses the vital need for limiting food loss and waste. Globally, 70% of agricultural land is used for livestock with only the remaining 30% being used for food crops. Within that 30% a further 10% of these crops are used to feed livestock, with only 20% remaining to feed the world. By implementing a policy where credits needed to be purchased from the government or the United Nations, where the cost for such credits would be high enough that the trillion-dollar meat industry would be reduced, food waste and greenhouse gas emissions would significantly fall. More agricultural land could be used for the production of crops and less land would be needed to feed livestock. Studies have shown that 700 million tons of food is consumed by livestock in the United States alone each year, yet world hunger could be eliminated by an estimated 40 million tons of food. Not only would greenhouse gas emissions be significantly reduced, but any new crops and plants that grow in place of these livestock farms would mean that more photosynthesis would take place. This would further reduce climate change as in photosynthesis plants take in carbon dioxide to convert to oxygen, thus further reducing the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
In order for this credit policy to be as effective as possible, the price of credits would need to continually rise every year for the most successful livestock production industries to collapse. Economists might argue that with around 1 billion people worldwide currently working in the livestock production industry, this mass loss of jobs and industry in the highest producing countries would hurt the global economy. However, this is not true; firstly, the change would not be immediate and as a result livestock producers would have time to transition to crop agriculture where those who had lost their jobs could therefore be re-employed. Secondly, the money derived from the purchase of credits by those whom could afford them would then be used by governments to subsidise collapsed livestock production farms and help them transition into crop production. Meat and dairy factories also contain machinery which could be used for the production of meat-less meats and plant milks, meaning that these factories could also have the option to simply change their products. With the decreased availability of meat produce, the demand for plant produce will therefore rise as meat and dairy become more expensive. The recent initial public offering of meat alternative producers Beyond Meat’s great success indicates that consumers would respond positively to the change in produce. Others may argue that some land is now so dry that it can only support livestock production. Unfortunately, it is true that about 1/3 of agricultural land globally would in fact be desolate and could not regrow jungle or crops if not used to graze livestock, however this land could be used to cater for the ever-growing world population or used as farm sanctuaries for cattle that had not been released into the wild. A majority of livestock released into the wild would most likely be eaten by predators, however this is a natural process of survival of the fittest and would ensure that methane production is reduced, as well as that livestock numbers return to the amount naturally needed for the ecosystem to thrive.
In conclusion, the reduction of greenhouse gases is essential in order to effectively respond to climate change. The implementation of a Livestock Production Credit policy in the top livestock polluting countries; Brazil, India, China and the United States would be a successful way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and suppress climate change. The price of such credits would need to be high enough to derail the trillion-dollar meat, dairy and egg industries and would need to be supported by subsidies, derived from the profit of these same credits, to further encourage livestock producers to make a change. Not only would this policy be an effective response to climate change, but it also has the capability to end world hunger through the food saved from livestock consumption, whilst also saving millions of animals from unnatural factory deaths.
