# data[].attributes.body
© Fiona Borthwick (2020) CC0

# data[].attributes.body
© GAAFS (2020) CC BY-SA 4.0

# data[].attributes.body
In this audiovisual gallery, you will discover more about the environmental impacts of rice, wheat and beef production systems.

Each of the 13 areas covered (columns) contains an image, audio clip and transcript:

1. Rice production

2. Lowland irrigated rice

3. Transplanted rice

4. Rainfed upland rice

5. Direct dry seeding rice (DSR)

6. Wheat production

7. Wheat production challenges

8. Other impacts of wheat production

9. Beef production

10. Beef production and GHG emissions

11. Beef life cycle assessment (LCA)

12. Impact of beef production on land use

13. Beef - cultural importance

Press play on each audio clip to find out how each food system affects our environment.

You can also select the images to view in full size.

# data[].attributes.body
© Katya Jouravleva (2020) CC0

# data[].attributes.body
© Scidev (2013) CC BY 2.0

# data[].attributes.body
© OpenStreetMap (2020) CC BY 2.0

# data[].attributes.body
Rice is produced in a wide variety of biomes, and this led to a diversity in production systems. It is grown in high altitudes such as the Himalayas, as well as tropical, subtropical and temperate regions. We will now focus on irrigated lowland rice.
• High water demand (60% above other crops)
• High water wastage (leakage, loss into ground)
• High NPK fertiliser application rates
• High source of agricultural methane emissions

One form of rice production is irrigated lowland systems. These account for 75% of global rice production and is therefore the most important form of production to consider in terms of environmental impacts.

The majority of this form of rice production is found in China, India, Indonesia and Vietnam.

This form of production is grown under floating conditions. This makes the water demand for irrigated lowland rice high (60% above other crops). The infrastructure required to irrigate will also determine the amount of water wasted from the system. If the irrigation system is not maintained or efficient, there can be a high degree of water leakage and loss.

This type of rice production is associated with a high use of NPK fertiliser application (nitrogen, phosphorous, and potassium) – and so can be linked to the environmental impacts related to fertiliser use such as water pollution and the energy inputs and GHG emissions related to this process.

If irrigated lowland rice is cultivated via the transplant method, it accounts for a significant amount of methane production – transplanted rice production is considered to account for approximately 10% of total methane production globally per year!

# data[].attributes.body
As we mentioned when looking at lowland irrigated rice, the method of establishing the rice in nurseries and then transplanting into fields has higher methane emissions than direct seeding.

In countries which produce transplanted rice, it can either be carried out manually (typical in countries with low labour costs such as India and China), or it can be done mechanically. The image here is of rice initially established on mats floating in a nursery pond in Malaysia which are about to be mechanically transplanted for lowland irrigated rice.

As we mentioned, this type of production is a major source of methane and also accounts for a large amount of fertiliser use. It can also have a negative effect on the physical properties of the soil such as impaction.

If this is done manually, the labour rights of workers are also a cause for concern. We will explore labour rights in food systems later in the course.

# data[].attributes.body
© Fiona Borthwick (2020) CC0

# data[].attributes.body
This form of production accounts for 4% of global rice production and is predominantly practiced by subsistence farmers. There are low inputs used, and one crop per year. Labour requirements are relatively high, and yields can be low, but this is an important form of production for low income farmers and is also vulnerable to changing rainfall patterns.

A small amount of rice predominantly in China and Brazil is grown as upland irrigated/aerobic rice. This form of production is direct seeded (and so has the benefits associated with this form of establishment), as well as having lower water requirements than other irrigated and rain fed systems. Water requirements for aerobic rice can be 40% lower – through the reduction of percolation, seepage and evaporation loss.

# data[].attributes.body
This method of rice establishment accounts for just over 20% of total rice production. There are a variety of methods depending on if it is upland, rain fed or lowland irrigated.

Across the methods, DSR is associated with lower water demand (primarily due to avoiding the puddling stages of rice nurseries). There are also lower labour requirements and there can be benefits in terms of soil health.

There is, however, a high NPK application rate associated with DSR. As this establishment system is lower in water and labour requirements, it is becoming more popular in major rice producing regions across Asia.

# data[].attributes.body
© FAO (2020) CC BY 4.0

# data[].attributes.body
Wheat, like rice, is a key grain crop and provides a large population across the globe with a critical amount of their daily diet. Like rice, there are different varieties of wheat that grow in different global regions.

In 2018/19, we produced 732 million tonnes of wheat globally (FAO). This makes wheat one of the top five crops. In the UK, we consume an average of 59kg per person per year. In 2018 China consumed 125 million tonnes, the EU 123 million tonnes and India consumed over 95 million tonnes of wheat.

The biggest producers of wheat are China, India and the USA. Russia and Canada are also key producers.

Wheat and rice each provide 19% of calories consumed globally.

The environmental impact of wheat production depends on the type of production system and its efficiency, i.e. the quantity of inputs and the efficiency of the system of production.

# data[].attributes.body
Wheat production is facing some global challenges at the moment. Water stress in some regions is driving the need for drought-resistance variety. In China, the biggest pre-harvest losses of wheat are due to pests (diseases and animals) and drought. These losses may well increase as pressure from the climate crisis increases. Pests and diseases are responsible for about 10% of wheat loss.

But here, we are focusing on the impacts of wheat production systems on the environment. Given that it is such a major crop, these impacts are likely to be significant.

Increased yields in wheat from the beginning of the 20th century were driven by access to industrial fertilisers, the breeding of high yield varieties, and the development of a wide variety of pesticides. So, yields went up, and pre-harvest losses went down. This ‘green revolution’ spread across the world, but the increased production slowed towards the end of the 20th century, and concern about the impacts from pesticide use and reliance on industrial fertiliser increased.

In terms of the impacts of wheat production, the most significant will be GHG emissions and water pollution from the application of industrially produced fertiliser – particularly nitrogen. The control of this, as well of the control of the application of pesticides, will depend on where the wheat is grown and the policies applied in that region.

# data[].attributes.body
This image shows wheat growing in Punjab in Northern India. In order to dispose of the stubble from wheat production, the majority of farmers in this state and others in Northern India, burn it – this reduces the costs of removal, which is important to prevent pests as well as clear the field for replanting. There are few available options for farmers who do not have the economic means to invest in mechanisation.

Smoke from these fires is blamed for haze (air pollution) events in New Delhi – which have been very disruptive in recent years – and are linked to poor health and even many deaths. The blame for these events has been laid on farmers, but there are many other sources of air pollution in the region. It is undeniable that stubble burning has a significant impact on air quality, however.

# data[].attributes.body
Of all the production systems, beef represents probably the widest range of impacts. This is due to the poor conversion rate of energy. Studies at the Scotland Rural College (SRUC) have given a range of conversion rates for different breeds and feed rations of between 5.3:1 and 5.7:1 kg dry matter intake: Daily live weight gain - for every 1kg of food given to a beef cow, only 189 – 175g is converted into meat – representing an energy waste. This becomes critical if the ration (the term given to the feed given to beef cows) is made up of things like soy, which itself could be a good protein source for humans. If the beef cows are predominantly grass fed on land unsuitable for other crops, this can reduce the waste inbuilt in the system.

Beef cattle are also associated with methane production due to their digestive system and this is a significant source of anthropogenic GHG emissions.

Beef production in some forms is associated with a feedback loop that drives land conversion and this has been concentrated in the Amazon region, which is vitally important for climate change management as well as a biodiversity hotspot. Land is cleared for beef production or soy production for livestock feed.

But what we need to remember is that there are a wide variety of beef production systems – and these will have different impacts.

The production system depends on the breed of cow, the time taken to grow the animal, the feed used, and the way the animal is housed.

# data[].attributes.body
© World Resources Institute (2020) CC BY 4.0

# data[].attributes.body
Beef production and greenhouse gas emissions.

Let’s look at the breakdown of GHG emissions from human sources in the World Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2016 Sankey diagram.

Of agriculture, livestock production is a significant source – especially of methane. There will also be different driving forces of land use change from livestock – either for land for the animals themselves or for feed production. So meat and dairy production are a significant cause of negative environmental impacts from agriculture but, again, it is more complicated than this.

Livestock include a wide variety of animals like pigs, sheep, goats, but for now let’s focus on beef cows (and so exclude dairy).

# data[].attributes.body
A lifecycle assessment carried out by a group from Aarhus University in 2009 looked at four beef production systems in Europe. This study looked at three systems of beef reared intensively from dairy cows, and one system of suckler cows.

The analysis looked at the impact from 1kg of beef on:

· Global warming

· Acidification

· Eutrophication

· Land use

· Non-renewable energy use

The study found that the impact from dairy cows was lower than for suckler cows. The global warming impact was calculated without taking into consideration land use impacts.

They calculated the amount of CO₂e (carbon dioxide equivalent) produced per 1kg of meat:

· Suckler cow production systems - 27.3kg

· Dairy bulls (12 months) – 16kg

· Dairy bulls (16 months) – 17.9kg

· Dairy bulls (24 months) – 19.9kg

You can see that the type of production system has a significant impact on the climate change impact, but similar results for other environmental impacts such as eutrophication and acidification were shown.

The study recommends several changes to production that could reduce the environmental impacts of these production systems:

1. Using an optimal diet to reduce enteric methane production (the methane produced as the cow digests food can be reduced by changing the ration)

2. Manure management has a significant impact on reducing the eutrophication and acidification impact from beef production.

All four systems rely on off-farm sources of feed – the origin of feed for cows will also be a significant factor in the impact of a production system.

You can find out more in this ‘Environmental consequences of different beef production systems in the EU’ paper.

# data[].attributes.body
© Land Capability for Agriculture in Scotland (2020) CC0

# data[].attributes.body
How to determine the impact of beef production on land use.

One of the most important aspects of understanding the impact of livestock production is to understand how land use is accounted for in the assessments.

A simple way of looking at land use for livestock is to calculate the area used by the livestock and the amount of time it is used to produce the food being assessed. This helps to compare land use efficiency between different systems – crops vs livestock, for example.

This simple approach misses some key considerations about land use – one called the ‘land opportunity costs’. We should also consider what the land could be used for, so if it was forested land as opposed to agricultural land, what would be the carbon sequestration value of that land?

Again, this also needs to take into account wider issues – what are the rebounds of not using land for grazing, or agricultural production at a global scale? If we reduce agricultural land use in the UK, does this drive land use conversion in other parts of the globe and so continue the environmental impacts of food systems?

Land Capability for Agriculture (LCA)

Another consideration to make when looking at land use is suitability or productivity of land for agricultural production. Some land is very productive for crop production – a function of the soil type and quality – the amount of water available, whether rain or irrigation, as well as topography, which can have implications in terms of run-off, but also on how easily machinery can be used on the land.

Some land is more suitable for other uses – grazing, or not suitable at all for agricultural production. In Scotland, for example, there is limited land available which is classed as suitable for the production of crops, whereas the majority of land in Scotland is classified as ‘rough grazing’. This is called ‘Land Capability for Agriculture’, or LCA, classification.

# data[].attributes.body
© Fiona Borthwick (2020) CC0

# data[].attributes.body
This is a photo taken in rural Punjab state in India. It is taken in a holy cow sanctuary where the cows are fed and looked after, but are also allowed to leave and wander freely, they are not used as food. The status of cows, in particular a certain breed of cow in India, is considered holy, and is a crucial part of the cultural identity of India.

This picture leads us to touch briefly on issues around livestock, and in particular cattle farming that we must be mindful of when thinking about the impacts of this form of farming. There are social and cultural issues beyond simply the production of food, and the environmental impacts.  The most important factor to consider is animal welfare – the protection of animal rights and the guarantee of animal welfare in livestock farming is a top priority.

Animal welfare is closely related to health, and the maintenance of healthy livestock systems is also a priority not only for welfare considerations but also to avoid impacts such as the spread of zoonotic infections, and the development of antimicrobial resistant infections. The cultural significance of livestock is also a consideration.

Livestock can represent more than food, as in the case of holy cows in India, where they are not considered food at all. They can be part of traditional cultures in terms of wealth. Livestock can represent resilience and transportable wealth that can help a family or community to be resilient in the face of changing climates.

Finally, and this is relevant in particular to cattle, animals can provide a wide range of additional services such as tillage and transportation power, and manure to improve soil. These benefits are particularly important to small holder and subsistence farmers, and so are vital considerations when thinking about food security for vulnerable communities.

# data[].attributes.body
One of the largest quantities of grains produced globally is rice. Around 500 million tonnes of rice are consumed annually. Over a billion people rely on rice as a key element of daily diets. There are a large variety of production systems, reflecting the wide range or biomes and ecosystems rice is produced within. There are also a number of different rice varieties – some which grow in waterlogged conditions and some in dry conditions. We will look at the environmental impact of consumption at a later date – but, the wasting of rice by consumers is a large factor in its environmental impact, regardless of how it is produced. In the UK alone, the estimated amount of rice wasted is 40,000 tonnes per year!

There are a number of methods of growing rice, which vary in terms of:

· Water availability (rain fed or irrigated)

· The nature of the land (lowland vs upland)

· The nature of the rice (anaerobic vs aerobic rice)

There are also variations in terms of how the rice is established - in a nursery area (transplanted) or directly sewn into the field (direct seeded).

There are also a wide range of varieties – such as ones that are fortified (golden rice), organic forms of production as well as the type of inputs used in production such as fertiliser and pesticides used.