Lower pork consumption and technological change in feed production can reduce the pork supply chain environmental footprint in China.

Nearly half of global pork production and consumption occurs in China, but the transition towards intensification is associated with worsening environmental impacts. Here we explore scenarios for implementing structural and technological changes across the pork supply chain to improve environmental sustainability and meet future demand. Following the middle-of-the-road socio-economic pathway (SSP2), we estimate that the environmental footprint from the pork supply chain will increase by ~50% from 2017 to 2050. Utilizing technologies that improve feed crop production and manure management could reduce phosphorus and nitrogen losses by three-quarters and one-third, respectively, with modest reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and cropland area. Reducing pork consumption had substantial mitigation potential. Increased feed and pork imports would decrease domestic environmental footprints and meet demand, but increase footprints elsewhere. We conclude that farm-specific technologies and structural adjustments can support the development of rural, small-scale pig farms near cropland and promote circular economy principles.

Cooperation between specialized livestock and crop farms can reduce environmental footprints and increase net profits in livestock production.

The rapid specialization of livestock production in China has contributed to spatially decoupled crop and livestock production, leading to various environmental pollution issues. Some regional agro-environmental policies have recently promoted the coupling of specialized crop and livestock farms through cooperation. However, the environmental and economic performances of such cooperation remain unclear. This study investigated multiple environmental footprints of two contrasting production systems: cooperative crop-livestock systems (CCLS) and decoupled specialized livestock systems (DSLS), using survey data of 87 ruminant farms in Northwest China. Results show that farms in CCLS had lower net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (12-29%), lower reactive nitrogen (Nr) emissions (21-40%), lower phosphorus footprints (PF) (41-54%), and used less cropland (24-31%) per kg animal product, compared to those in DSLS. The large differences in GHG emissions between the two systems were mainly related to enteric fermentation and resource production (used for feed production). The differences in Nr emissions and PF were mainly related to manure management. Net profits per kg animal product were higher in CCLS (13-35%) than in DSLS, and most profits originated from lower purchasing costs of feed and young livestock. Net profits and environmental footprints were negatively correlated, suggesting an environmental and economic win-win situation for CCLS. The possible obstacles to recoupling specialized crop and livestock farms through cooperation have been discussed, including farm size, contract stability, and local policies. Our study provides science-based evidence to support policymakers and specialized farms to close nutrient loops between crop and livestock production sectors through regional cooperation.

Mitigation of Multiple Environmental Footprints for China's Pig Production Using Different Land Use Strategies.

Pig production contributes considerably to land use and greenhouse gas (GHG) and reactive nitrogen (Nr) emissions. Land use strategies were widely proposed, but the spillover effects on biological flow are rarely explored. Here, we simultaneously assessed the carbon (C), nitrogen (N), and cropland footprints of China's pig production at the provincial scale in 2017. The environmental impacts of land use strategies were further evaluated. Results show that one kg live-weight pig production generated an average of 1.9 kg CO2-equiv and 59 g Nr emissions, occupying 3.5 m2 cropland, with large regional variations. A large reduction in GHG (58-64%) and Nr (12-14%) losses and occupied cropland (10-11%) could be achieved simultaneously if combined strategies of intensive crop production, improved feed-protein utilization efficiency, and feeding co-products were implemented. However, adopting a single strategy may have environmental side-effects. Reallocating cropland that pigs used for feed to plant food alternatives would enhance human-edible energy (3-20 times) and protein delivery (1-5 times) and reduce C and N footprints, except for rice and vegetables. Reallocating cropland to beef and milk production would decrease energy and protein supply. Therefore, a proper combination of land use strategies is essential to alleviate land use changes and nutrient emissions without sacrificing food supply.