Have your sustainable beef (and eat it too)

Americans love beef. Beef is delicious and ubiquitous; burgers on the grill in summertime, mouthwatering prime rib, and tantalizing steak are all staples of American food. However, beef production is one of the least sustainable agricultural industries and a major contributor of greenhouse gases. Cattle require copious amounts of water, abundant pastureland, and twenty-five times more protein than what is eventually produced for human consumption. When confronted with the environmental implications of beef production, concerned shoppers often reevaluate their beef consumption. Although demand per individual might be decreasing, it is highly unlikely the beef industry will disappear. To reduce the environmental impacts of production without eliminating consumption, the beef industry needs a sustainable framework.

While there are many existing proposals for a sustainable beef industry, the solution must be a joint effort between the producer and the consumer. In the second edition of Nature Ecology & Evolution, Gidon Eshel and colleagues suggest that the United States could achieve a sustainable industry if Americans cut their demand for beef by half. In this study, the researchers explore different scenarios for beef production and considers possible changes to American nutrition.

The authors build their sustainable model for the beef industry by restricting all cattle feed to existing agricultural by-products. Feed production currently constitutes about one-third of the beef industry’s greenhouse gas emissions. Instead of cattle- specific feed production, cattle could eat the leftovers that would otherwise be thrown away. This includes things like grains from distilleries or produce unfit for sale. The authors found that if cattle feed were to come from by- products only, the thirty-two million hectares of land currently required to make cattle feed would instead be available for croplands. If that land were shifted to croplands, the environmental resources currently used for feed could be applied towards higher efficiency foods.

The authors then performed a nutritional analysis on the consequences of shifting land away from cattle feed production and towards crop production. They found that, due to the very low protein yield of beef, it is far more effective to produce soybeans or peanuts. Producing these products is more sustainable; however, incentivizing producers to make the direct shift from cattle feed to soybeans isn’t easy. It ultimately requires consumers to buy less beef from their local producer and instead purchase their crops.

The authors conclude by saying that if Americans were to cut their average beef consumption in half, the United States beef industry could be environmentally sustainable. For each person who slashes their beef consumption and moves towards soybean or peanut crops, they would recoup any nutritional loss from eating less beef and meet the full protein needs of four additional people. Though the debate over meat industries will undoubtedly continue, this study simplifies the solutions for sustainable beef. For the individual consumer, purchasing decisions do impact future of the industry.