Costs of transitioning the livestock sector to net-zero emissions under future climates

Abstract Land managers are challenged with the need to balance priorities in production, greenhouse gas (GHG) abatement, biodiversity and social license to operate. Here, we develop a transdisciplinary approach for prioritising land use, illustrated by co-designing pathways for transitioning farming...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Franco Bilotto, Karen Michelle Christie-Whitehead, Bill Malcolm, Nicoli Barnes, Brendan Cullen, Margaret Ayre, Matthew Tom Harrison
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Nature Portfolio 2025-04-01
Series:Nature Communications
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-59203-5
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849709643827249152
author Franco Bilotto
Karen Michelle Christie-Whitehead
Bill Malcolm
Nicoli Barnes
Brendan Cullen
Margaret Ayre
Matthew Tom Harrison
author_facet Franco Bilotto
Karen Michelle Christie-Whitehead
Bill Malcolm
Nicoli Barnes
Brendan Cullen
Margaret Ayre
Matthew Tom Harrison
author_sort Franco Bilotto
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Land managers are challenged with the need to balance priorities in production, greenhouse gas (GHG) abatement, biodiversity and social license to operate. Here, we develop a transdisciplinary approach for prioritising land use, illustrated by co-designing pathways for transitioning farming systems to net-zero emissions. We show that few interventions enhanced productivity and profitability while reducing GHG emissions. Antimethanogenic feed supplements and planting trees afforded the greatest mitigation, while revenue diversification with wind turbines and adoption of livestock genotypes with enhanced feed-conversion efficiency (FCE) were most conducive to improving profit. Serendipitously, the intervention with the lowest social licence—continuing the status quo and purchasing carbon credits to offset emissions—was also the most costly pathway to transition to net-zero. In contrast, stacking several interventions to mitigate enteric methane, improve FCE and sequester carbon entirely negated enterprise emissions in a profitable way. We conclude that costs of transitioning to net-zero are lower when interventions are bundled and/or evoke productivity co-benefits.
format Article
id doaj-art-a731e823c5414cd4852268152ecba1ab
institution DOAJ
issn 2041-1723
language English
publishDate 2025-04-01
publisher Nature Portfolio
record_format Article
series Nature Communications
spelling doaj-art-a731e823c5414cd4852268152ecba1ab2025-08-20T03:15:13ZengNature PortfolioNature Communications2041-17232025-04-0116111910.1038/s41467-025-59203-5Costs of transitioning the livestock sector to net-zero emissions under future climatesFranco Bilotto0Karen Michelle Christie-Whitehead1Bill Malcolm2Nicoli Barnes3Brendan Cullen4Margaret Ayre5Matthew Tom Harrison6Tasmanian Institute of Agriculture, University of Tasmania, NewnhamTasmanian Institute of Agriculture, University of TasmaniaSchool of Agriculture, Food and Ecosystem Sciences, The University of MelbourneTasmanian Institute of Agriculture, University of TasmaniaSchool of Agriculture, Food and Ecosystem Sciences, The University of MelbourneSchool of Agriculture, Food and Ecosystem Sciences, The University of MelbourneTasmanian Institute of Agriculture, University of Tasmania, NewnhamAbstract Land managers are challenged with the need to balance priorities in production, greenhouse gas (GHG) abatement, biodiversity and social license to operate. Here, we develop a transdisciplinary approach for prioritising land use, illustrated by co-designing pathways for transitioning farming systems to net-zero emissions. We show that few interventions enhanced productivity and profitability while reducing GHG emissions. Antimethanogenic feed supplements and planting trees afforded the greatest mitigation, while revenue diversification with wind turbines and adoption of livestock genotypes with enhanced feed-conversion efficiency (FCE) were most conducive to improving profit. Serendipitously, the intervention with the lowest social licence—continuing the status quo and purchasing carbon credits to offset emissions—was also the most costly pathway to transition to net-zero. In contrast, stacking several interventions to mitigate enteric methane, improve FCE and sequester carbon entirely negated enterprise emissions in a profitable way. We conclude that costs of transitioning to net-zero are lower when interventions are bundled and/or evoke productivity co-benefits.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-59203-5
spellingShingle Franco Bilotto
Karen Michelle Christie-Whitehead
Bill Malcolm
Nicoli Barnes
Brendan Cullen
Margaret Ayre
Matthew Tom Harrison
Costs of transitioning the livestock sector to net-zero emissions under future climates
Nature Communications
title Costs of transitioning the livestock sector to net-zero emissions under future climates
title_full Costs of transitioning the livestock sector to net-zero emissions under future climates
title_fullStr Costs of transitioning the livestock sector to net-zero emissions under future climates
title_full_unstemmed Costs of transitioning the livestock sector to net-zero emissions under future climates
title_short Costs of transitioning the livestock sector to net-zero emissions under future climates
title_sort costs of transitioning the livestock sector to net zero emissions under future climates
url https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-59203-5
work_keys_str_mv AT francobilotto costsoftransitioningthelivestocksectortonetzeroemissionsunderfutureclimates
AT karenmichellechristiewhitehead costsoftransitioningthelivestocksectortonetzeroemissionsunderfutureclimates
AT billmalcolm costsoftransitioningthelivestocksectortonetzeroemissionsunderfutureclimates
AT nicolibarnes costsoftransitioningthelivestocksectortonetzeroemissionsunderfutureclimates
AT brendancullen costsoftransitioningthelivestocksectortonetzeroemissionsunderfutureclimates
AT margaretayre costsoftransitioningthelivestocksectortonetzeroemissionsunderfutureclimates
AT matthewtomharrison costsoftransitioningthelivestocksectortonetzeroemissionsunderfutureclimates