Wild meat consumption in tropical forests spares a significant carbon footprint from the livestock production sector
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Wild meat consumption in tropical forests spares a significant carbon footprint from the livestock production sector. / Nunes, André Valle; Peres, Carlos A.; Constantino, Pedro de Araujo Lima; Fischer, Erich; Nielsen, Martin Reinhardt.
In: Scientific Reports, Vol. 11, 19001, 2021.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Wild meat consumption in tropical forests spares a significant carbon footprint from the livestock production sector
AU - Nunes, André Valle
AU - Peres, Carlos A.
AU - Constantino, Pedro de Araujo Lima
AU - Fischer, Erich
AU - Nielsen, Martin Reinhardt
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2021, The Author(s).
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - Whether sustainable or not, wild meat consumption is a reality for millions of tropical forest dwellers. Yet estimates of spared greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from consuming wild meat, rather than protein from the livestock sector, have not been quantified. We show that a mean per capita wild meat consumption of 41.7 kg yr−1 for a population of ~ 150,000 residents at 49 Amazonian and Afrotropical forest sites can spare ~ 71 MtCO2-eq annually under a bovine beef substitution scenario, but only ~ 3 MtCO2-eq yr−1 if this demand is replaced by poultry. Wild meat offtake by these communities could generate US$3M or US$185K in carbon credit revenues under an optimistic scenario (full compliance with the Paris Agreement by 2030; based on a carbon price of US$50/tCO2-eq) and US$1M or US$77K under a conservative scenario (conservative carbon price of US$20.81/tCO2-eq), representing considerable incentives for forest conservation and potential revenues for local communities. However, the wild animal protein consumption of ~ 43% of all consumers in our sample was below the annual minimum per capita rate required to prevent human malnutrition. We argue that managing wild meat consumption can serve the interests of climate change mitigation efforts in REDD + accords through avoided GHG emissions from the livestock sector, but this requires wildlife management that can be defined as verifiably sustainable.
AB - Whether sustainable or not, wild meat consumption is a reality for millions of tropical forest dwellers. Yet estimates of spared greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from consuming wild meat, rather than protein from the livestock sector, have not been quantified. We show that a mean per capita wild meat consumption of 41.7 kg yr−1 for a population of ~ 150,000 residents at 49 Amazonian and Afrotropical forest sites can spare ~ 71 MtCO2-eq annually under a bovine beef substitution scenario, but only ~ 3 MtCO2-eq yr−1 if this demand is replaced by poultry. Wild meat offtake by these communities could generate US$3M or US$185K in carbon credit revenues under an optimistic scenario (full compliance with the Paris Agreement by 2030; based on a carbon price of US$50/tCO2-eq) and US$1M or US$77K under a conservative scenario (conservative carbon price of US$20.81/tCO2-eq), representing considerable incentives for forest conservation and potential revenues for local communities. However, the wild animal protein consumption of ~ 43% of all consumers in our sample was below the annual minimum per capita rate required to prevent human malnutrition. We argue that managing wild meat consumption can serve the interests of climate change mitigation efforts in REDD + accords through avoided GHG emissions from the livestock sector, but this requires wildlife management that can be defined as verifiably sustainable.
U2 - 10.1038/s41598-021-98282-4
DO - 10.1038/s41598-021-98282-4
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 34620906
AN - SCOPUS:85116568295
VL - 11
JO - Scientific Reports
JF - Scientific Reports
SN - 2045-2322
M1 - 19001
ER -
ID: 282035731