Recent research: If 13 percent less meat were produced in the world, pasture lands could be turned into forests to sequester carbon

Forests would be worth growing on the current pastures. It would achieve significant benefits for the Earth’s climate. Current food production should not be changed much.

For years researchers have presented that meat production should be drastically reduced if we want to fight climate change effectively.

A recent study shows with calculations that moderate cuts in meat production in prosperous countries would help here.

With cuts of around 13 percent, up to 125 billion tons of carbon dioxide could be removed from the atmosphere. The amount corresponds to the global emissions of fossil fuels over a period of three years.

The study was published by Journal of the American Academy of Sciences Pnas.

Wood efficiently bind carbon dioxide. If pasture lands are restored to forests, it benefits the climate significantly.

The changes could be concentrated in areas where forests are able to bind a particularly large amount of carbon.

Rangelands that were previously forests are particularly suitable for restoration, says an assistant professor at New York University’s Department of Environmental Studies Matthew Hayek. He is the lead author of the study.

Pastures were often originally forests. If livestock farming is removed from such original forest areas, their ecosystems can return to a natural forest state.

The calculations were made by researchers from New York University and Aalto University.

High and upper-middle-income countries have pastures where grass only grows for a short growing season. They produce little grass for fodder per hectare.

Instead, in sub-Saharan Africa and South America, for example, grass can grow all year round. The soil produces more food for animals per hectare than in the north.

The researchers suggest ways in which lower-income areas could increase the efficiency of feeding and raising livestock on pasture lands.

Landowners could be offered incentives for forest protection. Another possibility would be to buy pasture land from meat producers.

Research evaluate the productivity of pastures using remote sensing. It was used to measure the annual amount of grass suitable for fodder.

The technical implementation of the survey was carried out by a doctoral researcher at Aalto University Johannes Piipponen. He is part professor Matti Kummun research group.

Kummu’s group studies, among other things, how to produce enough food for everyone without exceeding the earth’s carrying capacity.

Piipponen says that with the help of remote sensing, it was possible to estimate for the first time how much grazing land would decrease in different areas if forests were extensively restored.

At the same time, beef production would also decrease.

Meat consumption reduction would improve both people’s health and the environment, especially in high-income areas such as Europe and North America.

“Until now, however, it was unclear where to start reducing production,” says Piipponen.

The research team prepared maps that identified promising areas. For them, reducing beef production and restoring forests would be the most profitable.

Forestation would benefit the climate for decades. In many areas, carbon sequestration would begin in a few years. It would continue for at least 75 years, until the forests are almost fully grown.

All the world’s original forest areas could bind up to 445 gigatons of carbon dioxide by the beginning of the 21st century. It corresponds to the current global fossil emissions for more than a decade.

The researchers remind us that quick actions are also needed to reach the climate goals. Research can offer decision-makers new ways.