Farming News - Could better environmental credentials cut costs?
News
Could better environmental credentials cut costs?
A report released by Compassion in World Farming shows that, once commonly ‘externalised’ elements of industrial livestock farming are factored in to costs, better welfare systems can work out cheaper. The report has found favour with policy makers, as it comes at a time when voices in the UN and EU are suggesting crop production reliant on artificial nitrogen has led to illusory benefits and scaling-up livestock farms has severe environmental consequences. They claim more needs to be done to stimulate the sustainable intensification of the industry.
The animal welfare organisation’s report, which examined figures from the UN and World Bank to reach its conclusions, revealed, "Industrial animal farming might appear to be the most hard-nosed but business-savvy response to food industry demands; forcing up production, yield, size, supply rate and turnover in livestock. However, in some cases improved welfare produces economic benefits." image expired The report, Reviewing the Costs: The Economics of Moving to Higher Welfare Farming, claims that, through lower expenditure on veterinary medicines and lower mortality rates, less intensive production often has financial benefits for farmers. Other benefits listed by Compassion include, improved growth rates in pigs provided with straw and additional space for finishing and increased margins from lower yielding but healthier cows with better fertility and longevity compared with high yielding dairy cows. Compassion said lower heifer replacement costs and higher sale prices for the calves and cull cows are of principal benefit to the farmer. It said the 'negative externalities;' environmental and social costs, including greenhouse gas emissions, water pollution and loss of biodiversity, associated with conventional practices, should be internalised. Compassion believes costs currently borne by third parties or society as a whole, should be included in the costs incurred by farmers or the prices paid by consumers of meat and dairy products. The report calls for increased emphasis in the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) on animal welfare and environmental practices. UN official enters the fray The report's findings echo statements made by UN official Asad Naqvi in Paris last week. Mr Naqvi, of the UN Environmental Programme, said that, once environmental factors were taken into account, farming in industrialised nations such as Great Britain, Germany and the USA ceased to be profitable and actually cost each economy billions of dollars. Naqvi's comments are backed up by a study from the Netherlands, which recently concluded that the 'true cost' of conventionally farmed pork was at least 1.12 euros (97p) per kg greater than that of organic pork. The Compassion report evoked comments made in the Foresight report on food and farming by the government's chief scientific advisor, Sir John Beddington, who said, "There needs to be much greater realisation that market failures exist in the food system that, if not corrected, will lead to irreversible environmental damage and long term threats to the viability of the food system. Moves to internalise the costs of these negative environmental externalities are critical to provide incentives for their reduction." Speaking to The Yorkshire Post last week Peter Stevenson, chief policy advisor for Compassion in World Farming, said switching to free-range eggs and high-welfare pork would cost the average consumer under than 11p per week. The Compassion report concluded The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) should be used to incentivise farmers to introduce practices valued by society which the market does not currently reward. These include carbon sequestration, biodiversity-rich environments, higher animal welfare and preventing pollution and waste. The group has called for: