Brazil again top global beef exporter, followed by India, USA and Australia

Tuesday, April 19th 2022 

Brazil is projected to account for 22% of global beef exports. After disruptions in 2021, Brazil has resumed exporting beef to China/Hong Kong.

Brazil during March exported 203,490 tons of beef, up 28% year on year, and the UN Department of Agriculture anticipated that the country is projected to become once again the largest beef exporter in 2022., with shipments 12,1% higher than in 2021.

Brazil has been the largest beef exporter running for the last five years, and since becoming the leading exporter in 2004, it has been at the top of the ranking in 14 out of the last 20 years.

Brazil is projected to account for 22% of global beef exports. After disruptions in 2021, Brazil has resumed exporting beef to China/Hong Kong.

Exports to the U.S. increased by 131% in 2021 and are sharply higher so far in 2022, following increased Brazilian market access to the fresh product in early 2021. However, Brazil will encounter sharply higher tariff rates in 2022 for exports to the U.S. once the “other country” Tariff Rate Quota (TRQ) is met.

According to the Brazilian Meatpacking Association (Abrafrigo), income generated from beef and processed products during March grew 57% reaching US$ 1.124 billion, an all-time high for March.

“In addition to exports growth, average product prices rose from US$4,415 (per ton) last year to US$5,319, considering the first three months of the year,” Abrafrigo said in a note.

Beef exports totaled 545,751 tons from January through March, 33% more than in the same period in 2021, generating US$2.9 billion, a 60% increase

China continues to lead among importers, with 188,236 tons in the quarter (+30.6%) and when added to Hong Kong, beef exports to China totaled 275.300 tons and US$ 1.658 billion, 50.45% and 57.11%, respectively, compared to the first quarter. According to Abrafrigo, the United States ranked second in the quarter, with 69,799 tons (+395%).

Overall the tier of beef exporting countries includes U.S., India and Australia in that order and with roughly the same volume of exports. By a small margin, the latest USDA forecast is for the U.S. to be the second-largest beef exporting country for the second consecutive year in 2022.

India is forecast to be the third-largest beef exporting country in 2022, with sales increasing year over year from 2021 levels. India was the largest global beef exporter from 2014 to 2016 but slowed and declined to a recent low in 2020 before recovering. Production of bovine meat in India includes beef and meat from water buffalo (carabeef).

Australia is forecast to be the fourth-largest beef exporting country in 2022. Beef production in Australia dropped to the lowest level in more than two decades in 2021 as the industry began to rebuild after several years of drought-forced liquidation. Beef exports are forecast to increase by 14.2% year over year in 2022. Australia accounted for just 12.3% of U.S. beef imports in 2021, the lowest on record. This compares to an average share of nearly 29% for the prior 20 years.

The top four beef exporting countries represent about 60% of the 2022 projected global total in the USDA report. The third tier of beef exporting countries begins at about half the level of Australia, including Argentina, the E.U., New Zealand, Canada and Uruguay.

Exports from these five countries are projected to decrease by 3.4% in 2022, with only the E. U. showing a slight increase in exports. Together, the top nine exporting countries are forecast to account for nearly 87% of global beef exports in 2022. Additionally, beef exports from Mexico and Paraguay are forecast at slightly more than half of the Argentina level and bring the total share of the top eleven beef exporters to 93% of the global total in 2022.

Why beef is off the menu for some climate-conscious foodies

Inayat Singh, Alice Hopton 

CBC MAY 2,2021

© Evan Mitsui Ikeila Wright readies takeout packages in her Toronto restaurant, One Love Vegetarian. She grew up eating beef, and says food is a personal choice, but hopes people will also make it 'a conscious choice.'

Growing up on a farm in southern Ontario, Toronto chef Ikeila Wright says she ate enough beef as a child to last her a lifetime.

Then, her parents grew crops and raised livestock. Now, she's the chef and owner at One Love Vegetarian, a Jamaican vegetarian restaurant in Toronto.

"What I eat, what I put on my plate, is personal. And I think for everyone it should be personal, but it also should be conscious," Wright said.

"We have to think about sustainability. We have to think about future generations, because history will find us accountable for the choices that we make now."

Wright chose to become vegetarian for health and environmental reasons. Her popular restaurant serves up hearty Jamaican dishes such as callaloo, a barbecue tofu stir fry, potato and chickpea rotis and their signature corn soup.

She's part of a growing number of people who are worried about the carbon footprint of meat — and beef in particular, which the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization estimates is responsible for 41 per cent of all livestock emissions, far more than other meats.

Last week, the major U.S. food magazine and website, Epicurious, took a public stand on the issue by announcing they were no longer publishing beef recipes, because of how carbon-intensive the protein is

.

© Lukas Gojda / Shutterstock Beef steaks on the grill. In 2019, beef was the type of red meat with the largest amount available for consumption per capita (18.2 kg/person), according to Statistics Canada.

Singling out beef

While meat products in general result in greater greenhouse gas emissions than plant-based sources of protein, Epicurious singled out beef arguing that one ingredient makes a difference.

In a post titled "The Planet on the Plate: Why Epicurious Left Beef Behind," the magazine's editors cited statistics from the World Resources Institute that beef requires 20 times more land and makes 20 times more greenhouse gases than common plant proteins, such as beans. It is also three times more carbon intensive than poultry and pork.

"It might not feel like much, but cutting out just a single ingredient — beef — can have an outsize impact on making a person's cooking more environmentally friendly," the editors wrote.

David Tamarkin, one of the co-authors of the post, is the former digital editor of Epicurious. In an interview with CBC Radio's As It Happens, he said that the magazine made the decision to stop posting new recipes with beef a year before the public announcement, in an effort to be "the most sustainable home cooking publication in the world."

"If you think about the point of a food publication like Epicurious, the whole point, its entire purpose, is to influence the way that people eat," Tamarkin said.

"There are millions and millions of people who go to Epicurious every month. If we were successful in replacing one beef meal with one vegetarian meal a month, that is a huge win. Because if everybody did that, that would make an enormous impact on the sustainability of our diets."

© Toby Melville/Reuters Beef production is being singled out as more carbon intensive than other meats or plant-based protein sources.

Greenhouse gas emissions from beef

The question for Canadians is how much beef do people need to cut down on to make an impact on greenhouse gas emissions?

Researcher Jim Dyer set out to answer this question in a report last year for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. The Cambridge, Ont.-based consultant has worked for the federal government in the past and studies the environmental impact of raising livestock.

The study, aimed at the livestock industry, modelled scenarios where Canadians tweaked their meat consumption without reducing their overall protein intake or cutting out any meat completely.

The modelling found that if red meat consumption dropped 25 per cent — in line with medical recommendations — and was one-quarter beef, three-quarters pork, Canada's total greenhouse gas emissions from the livestock sector dropped 10.7 per cent. (The study assumed that any drop in red-meat consumption was replaced with chicken.)

"Given the very high GHG emission intensity of beef, it should not be surprising that this analysis found that diversifying Canadian protein intake away from beef to be such an attractive option for lowering the GHG emission budget of the Canadian agriculture sector," the report said.

Other analyses, including the planetary health diet published in the Lancet in 2019, recommend cutting meat consumption significantly, down to just one serving of beef per week.

Dyer's paper did not model the impact of cutting out meat entirely from the Canadian diet and replacing it with plant-based proteins like pulses. But he says that shifting to vegan diets would have even greater impacts on carbon emissions.

"The first message was really quite simple, and that is: eat less beef. You still need your protein so find your protein from other ways," he said.

Grass vs. grain

Typically, grass-fed beef — where cattle graze in a pasture — has been analyzed as higher in emissions than feedlot beef, in part because of land use. But many studies, including Dyer's, don't account for the other environmental benefits of grass-fed beef, such as the carbon sequestration in the grass and soil.

That can mean the higher emissions from grassfed beef are offset by the carbon sequestered in the pasture, according to a 2018 study, although uncertainty remains about how much carbon is sequestered.

Dyer's recommendation is that people should eat less beef — and when they do, they should choose grass-fed beef.

That's important for Cedric MacLeod, a grass-fed beef producer in New Brunswick. MacLeod and his family operate Local Valley Farm, a farm where cattle roam free and feed on 40 hectares of strategically planted grass. The farm uses as little fertilizer as possible by planting specific types of grasses and using manure effectively, and runs on solar energy. MacLeod, a soil scientist by training, says principles of sustainability are top of mind.

© Supplied by Christopher Parent Cedric MacLeod raises grass-fed cattle at his farm in New Brunswick, where he follows sustainable practices to cut fertilizers and use renewable energy.

"We do everything we can certainly to minimize our emissions," MacLeod said.

"For me, managing a grass farm where I employ cattle to help me to manage said grass, so that it helps the soil which I own, which ultimately I'm hoping to pass on to the next generation, in much, much better shape than what I found it."

MacLeod says that people should be concerned about where and how their food is raised, and be willing to pay for it.

"The chicken growers play a role. The potato growers play a role. The corn and soybean guys play a role. The cattle sector plays an important role because we're managing the grassland," MacLeod said.

"And when you stitch all those landscape functions together and agriculture as a whole, we're all contributing to the sector's contribution to the fight against climate change."

CHARLEBOIS: Beef on the brink: Labour strikes expose cracks in Canada’s meat processing industry

“Labour strikes at Cargill's Guelph and perhaps Calgary plants reveal deep-seated vulnerabilities in Canada's beef processing industry, from heavy reliance on a few major facilities to the challenges of poor working conditions. As beef prices soar and consumption drops, the sector faces an urgent need for modernization and investment.”

Author of the article:Dr. Sylvain Charlebois
Published Jun 02, 2024 •

J

A Cargill meat processing plant is shown in Chambly, Que., south of Montreal

 PHOTO BY GRAHAM HUGHES /THE CANADIAN PRESS


Nearly 1,000 Cargill workers in Guelph are on strike, marking the end of its first week. The Guelph plant is one of the largest beef processing facilities in the country and the largest in Eastern Canada. However, this might just be the beginning. The Cargill Case Ready plant in Calgary could also see workers on the picket lines later this month, as a strike vote is scheduled for June 5-6. Labour disputes in beef processing are not new, and the pandemic highlighted the dark side of working conditions in this sector. The beef industry now faces a potential rupture that has been long overdue.

The Guelph plant is the only major federally licensed beef processing facility in Eastern Canada, capable of exporting and shipping outside the province. If the strike extends beyond a few weeks, consumers in Eastern Canada might see more imported beef from the United States or even Mexico. However, it is unlikely that prices will be significantly impacted, given that they are already quite high at the meat counter.

This is not good news for cattle producers in Ontario and Quebec. Eastern-based cattle producers can hold on to their livestock for a while, but costs inevitably rise with keeping livestock, and quality is also impacted. They may need to transport their herd to Alberta or the United States to sell. Regardless, the distances to harvest the meat would clearly be greater and more costly.

The potential strike at the Calgary plant could also disrupt the beef market in many parts of the country. Meat is sourced from the major Cargill beef processing facility in High River and then transported to Calgary, where workers trim, weigh, and package it. The packaged products are shipped and distributed on the same day. The domino effect created by an idled Calgary plant could be substantial.

Canada produces excellent beef, but the weakest link in the beef sector has always been domestic processing. Just three major plants process about 90% of all the beef in the entire country. These plants rely heavily on foreign workers, as recruitment has always been challenging due to the rough working conditions.

For consumers, climate change and complexities affecting supply chains have slowly made beef a luxury item at the grocery store. Due to droughts affecting inventories in both the United States and Canada, some beef cuts have increased by almost 50% since early 2020. Prices have been incredibly volatile. Ground beef, known for its price stability and affordability, has increased by 11%, according to Statistics Canada. With higher prices, beef consumption has significantly decreased. Each Canadian is expected to consume less than 24 kg of beef in 2024, the lowest level in more than 50 years. That’s a drop of 38.4% since 1980, and most experts expect that trend to continue.

Despite its luxury status, the beef value chain has always been managed with acute frugality. In pork and chicken, the processing sector has seen more capital investment and automation. New greenfield plants have been built in Hamilton, London, and other parts of the country. However, the beef industry has not seen a new plant in years, making it more difficult to comply with new food safety and working environment regulations.

It’s not as if beef processing is dominated by underfunded players. Take Cargill, for example. The company, a privately held U.S. firm with a 159-year history, reported annual revenues exceeding $170 billion in 2023. Net profits, however, were less than $4 billion, demonstrating how low margins are in the food industry. Cargill employs over 160,000 people across more than 70 countries. JBS, another foreign company, controls the other federally licensed plant in Alberta and is also a massive organization.

These labour disruptions point to a much broader problem in federally licensed beef processing that has not been addressed in years. Every time a plant closes, for one reason or another, beef producers are held hostage with no compensation while retail prices increase. As for striking workers, it’s hard to blame them, as they know few other Canadians would want to do the job, so why not ask for more money? Unless automation takes a greater role in beef processing, the industry will continue to operate archaic plants worthy of the 1980s.


– Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is senior director of the agri-food analytics lab and a professor in food distribution and policy at Dalhousie University

Prairie farmers using high-end Wagyu genetics to create 'snow beef'

© Laura Sciarpelletti/CBC Ian Crosbie with a 10-week-old Wagyu-cross calf at Benbie Holsteins in south-central Saskatchewan, his farm just outside the village of Caronport, about 90 kilometres west of Regina.

Benbie Holsteins in south-central Saskatchewan milks 150 Holsteins every day, but the dairy farm does not need all of its heifer calves for milking, so the remainder are used for something very different: snow beef.

Snow beef comes from artificially inseminating a Holstein heifer with whole blood Japanese Wagyu, the world's most expensive and exclusive beef.

After becoming interested in the luxury beef's story, farmer Ian Crosbie bought full blood semen from Wagyu Sekai in Puslinch, Ont., and began an artificial insemination program. He launched the snow beef product in 2018 at his farm just outside the village of Caronport, about 90 kilometres west of Regina.

"It was an investment; a bit of a risk at the time, too," said Crosbie, who would not say how much it cost him. "But it all stemmed from us doing a better job of managing our dairy herd to begin with."

Canada's beef industry produces about 1.55 million tonnes of meat each year, according to the Canadian Cattlemen's Association. In 2019, the cattle industry generated $9.4 billion in farm cash receipts

.

© CBC Crosbie, who grew up on a farm, launched his snow beef product in 2018. 'It was an investment; a bit of a risk at the time, too,' he says.

There are only a handful of snow beef producers in Canada, but Crosbie's leap of faith is a sign of how some are getting creative with their products as a way to stand out in a massive market and appeal to consumers who are increasingly conscious of the quality of the meat they're buying and its origin story.

Interest in cattle breeding runs deep

Crosbie, 29, has been fascinated with animal breeding since he was 10 years old. Growing up on a farm, he loved picking out which Holstein bulls his family was going to use next for breeding.

"I've been very fascinated with seeing what you can produce from just a thought in your own head, to applying it practically on the farm — what you can wind up producing and how you can see the change in the animals over the generations," he said.

Crosbie's great-grandfather established the farm west of Moose Jaw, Sask., after the Second World War, and it has been family owned and operated ever since.

"It's been in my blood. It was right from the get-go. I always remember racing Dad in the winter months back from the barn.... That's stuck with me forever. It never crossed my mind to do anything other than farming."

Raising Wagyu-cross breeds

The snow beef difference isn't just buried in its DNA. Regular Holsteins are black and white, but the Holstein heifers that have been artificially inseminated with Wagyu semen produce calves that are only black at birth.

Crosbie said Wagyu crosses also have distinctly healthy characteristics.

"They come out with a lot of hybrid vigour, because when you cross two very distinct bloodlines, you get extremely aggressive, healthy calves right from the get-go. They just do really well."

Another trait that sets the Wagyu crosses apart from Holstein dairy cows is their temperament. The crosses are extremely friendly and will nuzzle humans.

Wagyu crosses are also more lean and feminine-looking than a typical Holstein, and they take longer to reach their peak size.

© Laura Sciarpelletti/CBC One of the massive Wagyu-cross cows in the finishing pen at Benbie Holsteins.

By the time Holsteins are a year old, they're put on a full regimented finishing diet and will be on feed for about 150 days to add weight. When they hit the optimal 590-kilogram mark, they're between 15 and 18 months old. That's when they are sent to the abattoir.

But Wagyu crosses only start their finishing diet when they are about 15 months old, and they won't head to the abattoir until they are 28 or 29 months old. This allows them to grow much taller than a typical Holstein and put on massive frames.

The crosses are fed a specialized grain regimen of rolled barley, whole oats, distiller's grain from wheat or corn, molasses and a mineral mixture imported from Texas.

"That helps us get the fat content," Crosbie said. "The oleic acid levels actually rise the longer an animal's on feed, too. You're putting more money into it, but what you get out of is very much so worth it."

Tasting the difference

The main thing that sets a Wagyu steak apart from a regular steak is the fat. Wagyu contains intramuscular fat or marbling — contributing to the name "snow beef." This is hailed by chefs and home cooks alike because of the rich, buttery texture it provides.

"The fat itself is just a completely different fat," Crosbie said.

Snow beef is higher in unsaturated fats and lower in saturated fats.

"It's like the difference in going and getting a vegetable oil in the supermarket: You can get your cheapest oils, your canola oils, your sunflower oils or your olive oils. There's a wide variety of them, and with beef it's no different," he said.

"When you cook that steak, all that fat will melt away, and that's what gives you that buttery taste to the meat and gives you a really good texture — and the best bite of steak you'll have in your life."

Chef takes note

Jonathan Thauberger, executive chef and partner at Crave Kitchen and Wine Bar in Regina, had never had Wagyu crossed with Holstein beef before he tried Crosbie's snow beef.

"When we came across the Holsteins [cross], it was really interesting. The strip loin is about twice the size of an Angus-Wagyu cross. It's very big, very long and pretty incredible," Thauberger said.

"To my palate, I find it almost tastes a little bit more beefy. It's rich. It's got a little bit more flavour. It's very delicious."

© Laura Sciarpelletti/CBC Jonathan Thauberger, executive chef and partner at Crave Kitchen and Wine Bar in Regina, preparing snow beef carpaccio.

Thauberger uses every part of snow beef that comes through his restaurant's kitchen doors when he orders it. Snow beef is sometimes offered as a butcher's cut and a carpaccio on the menu, among other items. He even makes pemmican — whipped snow beef fat with snow beef jerky and dried fruit.

He said his customers particularly appreciate hearing the story of where the snow beef comes from.

"You're talking about a local farmer who's doing this boutique product. You can come here on any particular day and have a different cut from this animal and taste how it's different from cut to cut, animal to animal, even. It's a great story."

© Laura Sciarpelletti/CBC The rich marbling of snow beef can be seen in Crave's carpaccio.

Consumers looking to feel connected to farms

Jeff Nonay and his wife run a mixed dairy farm in Sturgeon County, Alta. They produce dairy, cheese, potatoes and beef — Wagyu-cross beef, to be exact. Like Crosbie, Nonay crosses the Wagyu genetics with Holstein genetics.

Nonay, who's been marketing his product for four years, said that while he cannot produce on a large scale, the demand and interest are there.

"When you think about Alberta and you think about beef, being able to brand something off a specific farm and consistently produce quality that becomes recognized is a pretty interesting feat," he said.

"It tells you quite a bit about what consumers want and the connection they have directly to the farm, adding value, adding to the experience."

© Amara Dirks Photography Jeff Nonay and family with their Wagyu-crosses and Holstein cows at their mixed dairy farm in Sturgeon County, Alta.

Nonay said the Wagyu-cross market is a niche one, so there is potential for it to grow exponentially.

Ryder Lee, CEO of the Saskatchewan Cattlemen's Association, said products such as snow beef help to connect consumers with what producers are doing in genetics.

"I think that's something that all cattle producers would like to do but aren't always able to do," Lee said.

His father experimented with genetics in the 1970s, bringing semen from the United States to crossbreed his herd with.

"They were actually called exotic breeds, and they are now part of the mainstream in Canada."

Lee said things have since changed due to producers' ability to communicate their breeding stories with the media and consumers.

"I think the mainstream industry is now just trying to make sure that people know the story of Canada — know the story about cattle on the land and the good that we provide for the habitat, for the environment and for your diet."

© Laura Sciarpelletti/CBC A snow beef steak, left, and a regular steak, right.

Snow beef sales increasing

Prairie Meats in Saskatoon is the latest business to partner with Crosbie and sell packaged snow beef cuts. CEO Casey Collins said that Saskatchewan residents are keen to support local farmers when they're at the butcher shop.

"This allows them to have a high-end dining experience but also understand where it came from and stay within 50 miles of where they live."

© Radio-Canada Prairie Meats in Saskatoon carries Ian Crosbie's Saskatchewan Snow Beef.

Benbie Holsteins markets snow beef exclusively in Saskatchewan. Ian Crosbie, the owner, said it is difficult for small farms and niche brands to market their product nationally due to federal plant restrictions.

"That makes it difficult for small niche beef brands to grow."

But he is hopeful.

Benbie Holsteins produced 6,800 kilograms of beef this year, and Crosbie said he hopes to double that by 2022.

Collins said the market has changed over the years: People's diets are different due to the amount of protein they are being told to consume, and their palates are changing.

"In 2019, consumption of beef per capita amounted to around 27.4 kilograms in Canada," according to Statista, a market and consumer research company based in Germany. "This figure is forecast to decrease to 26.7 kilograms in 2021. This expected decrease follows a long-term downward trend: in the year 1980, consumption per capita was 38.8 kilograms."

"The trend is that they're not eating red meat maybe as often as they used to, but when they do, they want to make sure it's a great experience," Collins said.

"And the fact is that even producers in general are having to pay more focus to how they raise their animals, how they grade out, how the quality is. And Ian is doing an excellent job of that."

COVID-19 shuts down half of Canada’s beef supply A COVID-19 outbreak in a Cargill plant at High River, Alberta has shut down almost half of Canada’s beef supply, leaving many farmers with no place to sell their cattle. Nearly all beef produced in Canada is processed by three high-volume, high-throughput meat packing plants: Cargill’s High River facility, the JBS plant in Brooks, Alberta and the smaller Cargill plant in Guelph, Ontario. The two Alberta plants have 85% of Canada’s beef slaughter capacity and both are now grappling with COVID-19 outbreaks. While this choke point gives US-based Cargill and Brazilian JBS tremendous power over both cattle prices paid to farmers and the grocery store beef prices paid by consumers, the pandemic outbreaks show it is also one of the weakest links in Canada’s food system. This week a major COVID-19 outbreak in Cargill’s Alberta plant and a smaller outbreak at the JBS plant have required slow-downs at the JBS plant and a shut-down of the Cargill facility to protect the health of plant workers and the wider community. This also has a domino effect through the food system. Demand for cattle has collapsed, and if supplies dwindle, retail beef prices will likely rise. Without intervention, the price difference between the price of cattle and grocery store beef will end up harming both farmers and consumers while enhancing the already large profits of JBS and Cargill. “Excessive concentration of ownership and centralization of beef processing, supported and encouraged by our federal and provincial governments, has now put the health of workers, the beef supply and the livelihoods of thousands of farmers in jeopardy,” said Iain Aitken, National Farmers Union (NFU) member and Manitoba beef producer. “We extend our heartfelt condolences to the loved ones of the Cargill worker who lost her life to COVID 19.” “Farmers need emergency support so we can take care of our livestock until the plants ramp up again. Health and safety come first, but you can’t tell the cows to stop eating and growing until the crisis is over,” said Ian Robson, Deleau Manitoba mixed farmer and NFU Board member. “We need a price floor to make sure that Cargill and JBS don’t take advantage of this crisis to reduce prices. Today’s government must not make the same kind of mistakes as during the BSE Mad Cow crisis when the giant packers pocketed support program money and put hundreds of family farms out of business.” The NFU also urges emergency support to lay the groundwork for a more resilient and fair meat sector in Canada. “The NFU’s vision is for a food policy based on food sovereignty,” said Tim Dowling, grassfed beef producer from the Kingston, Ontario area. “Our food system would then support more family farmers providing more food for more Canadians by focussing on building up our capacity to serve local and regional markets across the country.” In 2008 the NFU published a comprehensive study of Canada’s cattle industry, analysing the development meat packing companies’ concentration, the impacts on cattle prices for farmers, and offering solutions that would reorient the system towards a more resilient beef sector. Its recommendations are more valid than ever today. “The COVID-19 crisis is a wake-up call and an opportunity to rebuild our economy in ways that work for people, and which have the resilience to manage the crisis conditions that will undoubtedly occur in the future,” concluded Aitken. For the complete NFU cattle report, please visit The Farm Crisis and the Cattle Sector: Toward a New Analysis and New Solutions – 30 – PDF Concentration of meat packing makes Canada’s food system vulnerable  April 22, 2020 Meat packing concentration makes Canada’s food system vulnerable The National Farmers Union (NFU) offers heartfelt condolences to family and friends of the Cargill beef packing plant worker who lost her life to COVID-19 on April 20. The COVID-19 pandemic is revealing many vulnerabilities in Canada’s food system. The excessive concentration of ownership and centralization of beef processing has put the health of workers, the beef supply and the livelihoods of thousands of farmers in jeopardy. As of April 21, Cargill is finally idling its plant at High River, Alberta after one death, at least 358 cases ofCOVID-19 among workers and about 150 more confirmed cases related to the Cargill plant through family and community spread. There is also a COVID-19 outbreak at the JBS meatpacking plant in Brooks, Alberta area, where 67 people have tested positive. Cargill’s Alberta plant normally slaughters and processes 4,500 head of cattle per day, which is nearly half of Canada’s total beef processing capacity. The JBS Brook’s facility’s daily beef slaughter capacity is 4,200 head per day The Cargill beef plant in Guelph, Ontario has a slaughter capacity of 1,500 head per day. Nearly all of the beef sold in Canadian grocery stores and exported from Canada comes from these three high-volume, high-throughput meat packing plants. Cargill’s High River facility, the JBS plant in Brooks, Alberta and the Cargill plant in Guelph, Ontario together process over 95% of the beef in Canada, as well as nearly all of Canada’s $3 billion worth of beef exports. Cargill, with headquarters in the USA, is the world’s largest private company. In 2018 the family members that control Cargill Inc. got $643 million in the company’s the biggest payout since 2010, according to Bloomberg. JBS is a Brazilian corporation and the world’s largest meat company. Its net profit in 2018 was nearly $US 50 billion, a 10% increase over the previous year. These two foreign-owned companies completely dominate Canada’s beef sector. Canada has just 17 other federally licenced beef slaughter facilities, all small and many serving specialized markets. The provinces of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia have no federally licenced abattoirs for beef. Prince Edward Island and Saskatchewan each have one facility; BC and Manitoba each have just two, all of them are small. There are also provincially licenced abattoirs, which in 2019 slaughtered a total of 153,859 head of cattle, the equivalent of 15 days of output from the threelargest federally inspected plants. JBS and Cargill control the flow of beef through Canada’s food system and to export markets. Their three processing plants form a choke point that gives them undue influence over the price of cattle paid to farmers and the price of beef paid by consumers in the grocery store. While this choke point gives Cargill and JBS tremendous power, it is also one of the weakest links in Canada’s food system. Slow-downs and shut-downs necessary to protect the health of plant workers also have a domino effect on cattle producers. Farmers expecting to sell their livestock find demand has collapsed. Prices are falling and farmers are faced with selling well below the cost of production or continuing to feed and care for cattle while waiting for an opportunity to sell. Meanwhile if grocery store supplies dwindle, retail beef prices will likely rise, especially if JBS and Cargill raise their wholesale prices. The price difference between what farmers are paid and what consumers pay for their meat will be captured by the big retailers and/or JBS and Cargill, to enhance these companies’ already large profits. Health and safety for workers and the public must come first. The failure of Cargill and JBS to implement changes to permit safe operations during the pandemic is creating a larger crisis in the food system in addition to its health impacts. Farmers now require emergency support to allow them to continue feeding cattle that no longer have a market.  Price floors must be put in place to ensure Cargill and JBS do not take advantage of this crisis to reduce prices they or their captive feedlot suppliers payfor cattle. The lessons of the BSE crisis must be applied to ensure that the giant packers do not take all the value of government support programs for themselves. Any emergency support for farmers and ranchers coping with the precipitous drop in demand must meet the needs of cow-calf producers, and independent feedlots and backgrounders. The NFU also urges emergency support be designed to lay the groundwork for a more resilient and fair meat sector in Canada. In 1988 there were 119 federally inspected beef packing plants in Canada, all were 100% Canadian owned. For the past three decades, Canadian governments have measured success in agriculture by export volumes. The measuring stick is Canada’s share of global exports – not the quality and value of food being produced for Canadians, the livelihoods of Canadian farmers, nor the prosperity of rural communities. The pursuit of maximum exports has resulted in a corporate beef sector that extracts all it can from workers, farmers, tax-payers, consumers and agricultural ecosystems. The National Farmers Union advocates for a food sovereignty-based food policy for Canada that would promote more high-quality food produced by Canadian ranchers and farmers on the tables of families across the country. A key strategy to achieve this would be developing domestic markets and localized distribution systems with direct, fair and transparent distribution chains. In 2008 the NFU published a comprehensive study of Canada cattle industry, analysing the development meat packing companies’ concentration, the impacts on cattle prices for farmers, and offering solutions that would reorient the system towards a more resilient beef sector. Its recommendations include:  Create and implement a national meat strategy to better serve the economic, nutritional, social, community development, food production, and environmental goals of Canadians in all regions.  Shift the location, ownership, and conduct of our beef packing plants to reduce its geographic concentration (nearly all capacity is currently in southern Alberta) and ownership concentration, so that our packing plants are spread across the nation, focused on serving local and regional markets, under diversified ownership and providing meat of the highest possible nutrition and safety.  Ban captive supply – feedlots owned or controlled by JBS and Cargill which they use to depress prices paid to producers.  Tailor food safety regulations to encourage local abattoirs to develop Canadian markets for organic beef, grass-finished beef, bison, and other specialty livestock and that create high-value deli meats and processed foods.  Recognize that dispersed local abattoirs with shorter supply chains are also key to reducing greenhouse gas emissions from our meat production system. These recommendations are more valid than ever today. The COVID-19 crisis is a wake-up call and an opportunity to rebuild our economy in ways that work for people, and which have the resilience to manage the crisis conditions that will undoubtedly occur in the future. For the complete NFU cattle report, please visit The Farm Crisis and the Cattle Sector: Toward a New Analysis and New Solutions SEE  https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=CARGILL https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=BEEF https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=MEAT+PACKING https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=COVID19 https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=JBS https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=ALBERTA https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=NFU https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=GROCERY

How an American meat broker is fueling Amazon deforestation

LONG READ 

Sat, November 4, 2023 



WASHINGTON (AP) — As incomes in China have grown in the last decade, so has China’s appetite for beef. No longer out of reach for China’s middle class, beef now sizzles in home woks and restaurant kitchens.

China has become the world’s biggest importer of beef, and Brazil is China’s biggest supplier, according to United Nations Comtrade data. More beef moves from Brazil to China than between any other two countries.

But the Brazilian cattle industry is a major driver of the destruction of the Amazon rainforest. Data analysis by The Associated Press and the Rainforest Investigations Network, a nonprofit reporting consortium, found that a little-known American company is among the key suppliers and distributors feeding China’s hunger for beef – and the Amazon deforestation that it fuels.

The world’s largest rainforest, the Amazon plays a critical role in the global climate by absorbing carbon emissions. A new study published this week in the journal of the National Academy of Sciences linked Amazon deforestation to warmer regional temperatures.

Salt Lake City-based Parker-Migliorini International, better known as PMI Foods, has been a major beneficiary of the beef trade between Brazil and China. PMI has shipped more than $1.7 billion in Brazilian beef over the last decade – more than 95% of it to China, according to data from Panjiva, a company that uses customs records to track international trade. Over the last decade, Chinese beef imports have surged sixfold, U.N. Comtrade data shows, and PMI has helped satisfy China’s growing demand.

As a middleman that has been one of the leading importers of Brazilian beef to China, PMI provides a window into how that growing international trade is driving deforestation.

___

This story was supported by the Pulitzer Center’s Rainforest Investigations Network.

___

Holly Gibbs, a professor of geography and environmental studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison who studies land use changes linked to the beef industry, says that PMI has contributed to the Amazon’s destruction, because it sources beef from companies that purchase cows raised on deforested land.

Last year, the Brazilian Amazon lost more than 4,000 square miles (10,360 square kilometers) of rainforest, the equivalent of nearly 3,000 soccer fields each day, according to a January report by Imazon, a Brazilian research group that uses satellite monitoring to track deforestation.

More than two-thirds of deforested land in the Brazilian Amazon has been converted to cattle pastures, according to Brazil’s Ministry of Environment and Climate Change.

PMI gets more of its Brazilian beef from Sao Paulo, Brazil-based meat processing giant JBS SA than from anywhere else. In a series of reports released between 2018 and 2023, Brazilian prosecutors have determined that JBS purchased massive numbers of cattle raised on illegally deforested land. Last December, prosecutors found that JBS had bought more than 85,000 cows from ranches that engaged in illegal deforestation in Pará, one of nine states in the Brazilian Amazon. Their latest report, released October 26, found that JBS had substantially lower but still significant rates of purchases from ranches involved in environmental violations across four Amazon states.

“There’s no doubt that PMI Foods is benefiting from the deforestation of the Amazon,” Gibbs said. “They’re also helping to drive that deforestation by continuing to pay into that system.”

In an email, a PMI spokesperson said that “in a world where famine, malnutrition and acute food insecurity are a global concern, PMI is focused on feeding millions of people all over the world,” including providing meals to refugees.

PMI said it is working to strengthen environmental practices of its beef operations. “While our absolute primary priority is feeding people, we remain committed to continuous improvement of sustainability across the beef value chain,” the spokesperson said.

PMI Foods is a $3 billion global enterprise that buys and sells more than 1.6 billion pounds (725.7 million kilograms) of beef, pork, chicken, seafood and eggs each year. In the last decade, PMI Foods shipped more than $616 million of Brazilian beef from JBS, almost twice as much as from any other supplier, shipping records show.

JBS, in turn, purchased a significant share of its cattle from ranches that were illegally deforested, Brazilian prosecutors have found. These properties accounted for 15% of JBS’s cattle supply in the Amazon state of Pará from 2019 to 2020, according to an audit by prosecutors audit last December. The company’s purchases from properties linked to environmental violations decreased to 6% of its supply across four Amazon states in the following year, prosecutors found in an audit published in October.

JBS has been investigated and fined by Brazilian authorities in connection with its purchases of cattle from illegal farms, but these are separate from the audits, which are focused on improving company practices.

JBS, the world’s largest meat processor, asserts that it has fixed the problems identified in previous audits by prosecutors. In a statement, JBS said it has a “zero-tolerance policy for illegal deforestation” in its supply chains, and is adopting block chain technology to include vetting of indirect suppliers by 2025.

Yet as recently as last fall, JBS admitted to a large-scale purchase of cattle raised on illegally deforested land. Following an investigation by Repórter Brasil, a contributor to the Rainforest Investigations Network, JBS acknowledged it had illegally bought nearly 9,000 cattle from a rancher whom Brazilian authorities have described as “one of the biggest deforesters in the country.” The rancher, Chaules Volban Pozzebon, is now serving a 70-year prison sentence for offenses including leading a criminal gang.

PMI also buys in large volume from Brazil’s second largest meat processor, Marfrig, which has been dogged as well by reports by environmental groups and news outlets alleging that it purchased cattle from ranches that were involved in illegal deforestation. In February 2022, the Inter-American Development Bank scrapped a $200 million loan to Marfrig amid criticism of the company’s environmental record. In September, the Swiss food multinational Nestlé dropped Marfrig as a beef supplier in Brazil following media reports last year that Marfrig had bought cattle raised on land that was seized from indigenous peoples.

Marfrig said in an email that the ranch cited in last year’s reports was on land that had not yet been designated protected indigenous territory. Marfrig did not face legal penalties in connection with the case. The company said it has a “rigorous livestock sourcing policy” that uses satellite monitoring to avoid suppliers linked to deforestation.

Asked about its leading suppliers, JBS and Marfrig, buying cattle raised on deforested or illegally seized lands, PMI said it requires its suppliers to follow local laws, and depends on government environmental agencies in Brazil and elsewhere to enforce them. “PMI relies on the assurances set forth in the sustainability policies of its suppliers,” a company spokesman said in an email.

For its part, Brazil's Environment Ministry said independent audits have shown that major meat processors are still buying significant quantities of cattle raised on deforested land through their indirect suppliers.

“The persistence of these cases shows that the companies' systems are flawed and there is not sufficient effort to avoid illegal purchases,” the ministry said in a statement.

The FBI Investigation

PMI Foods has come under scrutiny from U.S. authorities before for its shipments to China.

Between 2008 and 2011, Parker International, a predecessor of PMI and co-creator of PMI Foods, took in more than $289 million in revenue from illegal beef shipments to China, representing the majority of U.S.-sourced sales to the country, according to a spreadsheet produced by a whistleblower for FBI investigators.

“They were willing to break laws,” whistleblower Brandon Barrick said in an interview in 2022, referring to the time that he worked at PMI. “They were willing to do whatever it took to make a buck for themselves.”

In spring of 2014, Parker International pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of making a false statement to U.S. authorities about the destination of its beef exports and paid a $1 million fine.

In an email, PMI said it had put the “entire episode behind us” nine years ago, and emphasized that Parker International pleaded guilty only to making a false statement. “PMI was never charged with a crime for its export operations,” said company attorney Mark Gaylord.

Rise of beef in China

In the last decade, Chinese imports of beef from Brazil have increased from $1.3 billion in 2013 to more than $8 billion in 2022, according to U.N. Comtrade data.

PMI has been a major player in feeding that growing market. As of 2017, the company was the second largest importer of Brazilian beef to China, according to a 2020 report by Trase, a research group that studies commodity supply chains.

As Brazil became China’s biggest supplier, cattle production ramped up. China imposes relatively few environmental demands on its beef importers, meaning suppliers who need land for cattle may be tempted to engage in deforestation, said Gibbs, the University of Wisconsin geography professor.

“As China’s demand for beef goes up, so does the stress on the rainforest,” Gibbs said.

Daniel Azeredo, a Brazilian federal prosecutor who has led crackdowns on illegal deforestation in the beef industry, said companies must ensure that products from the Amazon region do not come from illegally deforested land.

“Everyone who participates in the trade of products that come from the Amazon has to be able to transparently determine the products' origin,” Azeredo said.

In response to inquiries about whether it had raised concerns about deforestation with JBS or other suppliers, PMI Foods said it “has discussions with our partners, vendors and suppliers including JBS, about always improving best practices towards the environment and sustainability.”

Middlemen avoid scrutiny

As a middleman rather than a company that raises animals or processes meat, PMI’s role in deforestation has been little examined.

PMI’s reliance on JBS is not unusual among food companies. While a handful of European retailers have dropped JBS beef products in recent years due to deforestation concerns, major American brands such as Kroger and Albertsons, the parent company of Safeway, still purchase its beef.

Albertsons confirmed that it sources beef from JBS, but said it is only a small quantity. Kroger did not respond to inquiries but its online store includes JBS beef products.

JBS, Marfrig and other top beef producers have signed pledges to work against illegal deforestation. But unlike most leading meat processors and commodity traders, PMI has not signed on to agreements to fight deforestation, such as the New York Declaration on Forests, in which endorsers commit to goals including eliminating deforestation by 2030.

Two months after initial inquiries about its environmental policies for this story, PMI said it was joining industry efforts to combat deforestation.

“We are now proud to partner with One Tree Planted, Green Business Bureau and the U.S. Roundtable for Sustainable Beef,” the company said last November. Since then it has planted 10,000 trees in the Amazon, the company said, part of a longer-term plan to plant a million trees.

The company has not yet signed a pledge against rainforest destruction, but last month said it was considering making one. “We are open to pledges and currently working on these matters,” the company said.

Gibbs, the University of Wisconsin professor, said that because PMI and other middlemen have such strong purchasing power, they “need to come to the table” to help stop deforestation.

So far meat brokers have been “completely ignored,” she said, allowing beef to reach consumers’ tables without meeting environmental standards strong enough to protect the Amazon.

Azeredo, the Brazilian prosecutor, emphasized that not just meat processors, but all companies in the beef and leather industries share the obligation to avoid suppliers that violate environmental laws.

“The entire industry that buys those animals, that sells leather or meat, must make sure that they don't allow products from areas of illegal deforestation,” Azeredo said.

___

AP journalists Camille Fassett in Seattle and Fabiano Maisonnave in Brasilia, Brazil, contributed to this report.

___

This story was first published on Nov. 3, 2023. It was updated on Nov. 4, 2023, to make clear that Parker International, a predecessor of PMI and co-creator of the PMI Foods brand, pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of making a false statement to U.S. authorities.

Sasha Chavkin, The Associated Press

 

How a mere 12% of Americans eat half the nation’s beef, creating significant health and environmental impacts

Findings may help consumer groups and government agencies craft educational messaging around the health and environmental impacts of beef consumption.

Peer-Reviewed Publication

TULANE UNIVERSITY

A new study has found that 12% of Americans are responsible for eating half of all beef consumed on a given day, a finding that may help consumer groups and government agencies craft educational messaging around the negative health and environmental impacts of beef consumption.

Those 12% – most likely to be men or people between the ages of 50 and 65 – eat what researchers called a disproportionate amount of beef on a given day, a distinction based on the latest Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which suggest 4 ounces per day of meat, poultry, and eggs combined for those consuming 2200 calories per day. 

The study, published in the journal Nutrients, analyzed data from the CDC’s National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, which tracked the meals of more than 10,000 adults over a 24-hour period. The global food system emits 17 billion tons of greenhouse gases a year, equivalent to a third of all planet-warming gases produced by human activity. The beef industry contributes heavily to that, producing 8-10 times more emissions than chicken, and over 50 times more than beans. 

“We focused on beef because of its impact on the environment, and because it’s high in saturated fat, which is not good for your health,” said the study’s corresponding and senior author Diego Rose, professor and nutrition program director at Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine.

Rose said the study's purpose was to assist in targeting educational programs or awareness campaigns to those eating disproportionate amounts of beef. Honing messaging around the environmental impact of beef production is crucial at a time when climate change awareness is higher than ever. 

Rose said he and fellow researchers were “surprised” that a small percentage of people are responsible for such an outsized consumption of beef, but it’s yet to be determined if the findings are encouraging for sustainability advocates. 

“On one hand, if it’s only 12% accounting for half the beef consumption, you could make some big gains if you get those 12% on board,” Rose said. “On the other hand, those 12% may be most resistant to change.” 

The study also found that those who were not disproportionate beef consumers were more likely to have looked up USDA’s MyPlate food guidance system. 

"This might indicate that exposure to dietary guidelines can be an effective tool in changing eating behaviors, but it could also be true that those who were aware of healthy or sustainable eating practices were also more likely to be aware of dietary guideline tools,” said Amelia Willits-Smith, lead author on the paper and a post-doctoral fellow at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 

Of the beef consumed on a given day, almost a third came from cuts of beef such as steak or brisket. But six of the top 10 sources were mixed dishes such as burgers, burritos, tacos, meatloaf or spaghetti with meat sauce. Some of these foods may offer an easy opportunity for disproportionate beef eaters to alter their dietary habits. 

“If you’re getting a burrito, you could just as easily ask for chicken instead of beef,” Willits-Smith said.

Those below the age of 29 and above the age of 66 were least likely to eat large amounts of beef. Rose said this indicated that the younger generation might be more interested in mitigating the effects of climate change. 

“There's hope in the younger generation, because it's their planet they're going to inherit,” Rose said. “I’ve seen in my classes that they’re interested in diet, how it impacts the environment, and what can they do about it.”

In addition to Rose and Willits-Smith, the study's authors include Tulane clinical assistant professor Dr. Keelia O’Malley and Tulane Masters of Public Health graduate Harmonii Odinga.

---

JOURNAL

Nutrients

DOI

10.3390/nu15170000 

METHOD OF RESEARCH

Data/statistical analysis

SUBJECT OF RESEARCH

People

ARTICLE TITLE

Demographic and Socioeconomic Correlates of Disproportionate Beef Consumption among US Adults in an Age of Global Warming

ARTICLE PUBLICATION DATE

30-Aug-2023

COI STATEMENT

The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Beef industry can cut emissions with land management, production efficiency

Ranchers in United States, Brazil and other regions can help create a more climate-friendly beef system

COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY

Research News

 

IMAGE: RESEARCHERS FOUND THE MOST POTENTIAL FOR INDUSTRY TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS IN THE UNITED STATES AND BRAZIL. view more 

CREDIT: KENTON ROWE FOR THE NATURE CONSERVANCY

A comprehensive assessment of 12 different strategies for reducing beef production emissions worldwide found that industry can reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by as much as 50% in certain regions, with the most potential in the United States and Brazil. The study, "Reducing Climate Impacts of Beef Production: A synthesis of life cycle assessments across management systems and global regions," is published April 5 in Global Change Biology.

A research team led by Colorado State University (CSU) and funded by the Climate and Land Use Alliance found that widespread use of improved ranching management practices in two distinct areas of beef production would lead to substantial emissions reductions. This includes increased efficiency to produce more beef per unit of GHG emitted - growing bigger cows at a faster rate - and enhanced land management strategies to increase soil and plant carbon sequestration on grazed lands.

Globally, cattle produce about 78% of total livestock GHG emissions. Yet, there are many known management solutions that, if adopted broadly, can reduce, but not totally eliminate, the beef industry's climate change footprint, according to lead author Daniela Cusack, an assistant professor in the Department of Ecosystem Science and Sustainability at CSU.

Overall, the research team found a 46% reduction in net GHG emissions per unit of beef was achieved at sites using carbon sequestration management strategies on grazed lands, including using organic soil amendments and restoring trees and perennial vegetation to areas of degraded forests, woodlands and riverbanks. Additionally, researchers found an overall 8% reduction in net GHGs was achieved at sites using growth efficiency strategies. Net-zero emissions, however, were only achieved in 2% of studies.

"Our analysis shows that we can improve the efficiency and sustainability of beef production, which would significantly reduce the industry's climate impact," said Cusack, also a research associate at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute in Panama. "But at the same time, we will never reach net-zero emissions without further innovation and strategies beyond land management and increased growth efficiency. There's a lot of room, globally, for improvement."

Global analysis

Researchers analyzed 292 comparisons of "improved" versus "conventional" beef production systems across Asia, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Latin America and the U.S. The analysis revealed that Brazilian beef production holds the most potential for emissions reductions.

In the studies analyzed, researchers found a 57% GHG emission reduction through improved management strategies for both carbon sequestration and production efficiency in Brazil. Specific strategies include improved feed quality, better breed selections and enhanced fertilizer management.

The biggest impact was found in integrated field management, including intensive rotational grazing schemes, adding soil compost, reforestation of degraded areas and selectively planting forage plants bred for sequestering carbon in soils.

"My home country of Brazil has more than 52 million hectares of degraded pastureland - larger than the state of California," said Amanda Cordeiro, co-author and a graduate student at CSU. "If we can aim for a large-scale regeneration of degraded pastures, implementation of silvo-agro-forestry systems and adoption of other diversified local management strategies to cattle production, Brazil can drastically decrease carbon emissions."

In the U.S., researchers found that carbon sequestration strategies such as integrated field management and intensive rotational grazing reduced beef GHG emissions by more than 100% - or net-zero emissions - in a few grazing systems. But efficiency strategies were not as successful in the U.S. studies, possibly because of a high use of the strategies in the region already.

"Our research shows the important role that ranchers can play in combatting the global climate crisis, while ensuring their livelihoods and way of life," said Clare Kazanski, co-author and North America region scientist with The Nature Conservancy. "By analyzing management strategies in the U.S. and around the world, our research reinforces that ranchers are in a key position to reduce emissions in beef production through various management strategies tailored to their local conditions."

Darrell Wood, a northern California rancher, is an example of a producer leading the way on climate-friendly practices. Wood's family participates in the California Healthy Soils program, which incentivizes practices with a demonstrated climate benefit.

"As a sixth-generation cattle rancher, I see nothing but upside potential from using our cattle as a tool for reducing greenhouse gas emissions," Wood said. "Taking good care of our grasslands not only benefits climate, but also wildlife and the whole ecosystem that generates clean air and water. It'll help the next generation continue our business, too."

Next steps

Although the research shows a significant reduction in the GHG footprints of beef production using improved management strategies, scientists don't yet know the full potential of shifting to these emission-reducing practices because there are very few data on practice adoption levels around the world.

"Asia, for example, is one of the most rapidly growing beef markets, but there is an imbalance between the amount of research focus on improving beef production and the growing demand for beef," Cusack said. "We know with the right land management and efficiency strategies in place, it's possible to have large reductions in emissions across geographic regions, but we need to keep pushing for additional innovations to create a truly transformation shift in the way the global beef system operates to ensure a secure food supply and a healthy environment."

###

Additional co-authors on the paper include Alexandra Hedgpeth, Kenyon Chow and Jason Karpman (University of California, Los Angeles); and Rebecca Ryals (University of California, Merced).