Food security is often incorrectly used as a justification for the inhumane confinement of animals on industrial farm animal production facilities, while in reality, the industrialization of animal agriculture jeopardizes food security by degrading the environment, threatening human health, and diminishing income-earning opportunities in rural areas.
Although industrialized animal agriculture may increase production for larger farmers, it simultaneously crowds small farmers out of the market and reduces employment opportunities, demonstrating that economic growth at a national level does not necessarily improve food security. Small farmers who try to directly compete with large animal agribusiness are at risk of being pushed out of the market because they lack the political and economic power of the larger companies, or the ability to exploit economies of scale. For example, rural women in many developing countries tend to engage in smallholder egg and poultry meat production, but increased levels of intensification in egg and chicken meat production have been shown to decrease the number of women involved in poultry keeping.
Protein obtained from plant-based sources such as pulses is, according to the FAO, "significantly less expensive" compared to animal foods. Producing meat, milk and eggs actually takes more away from the world's total food supply than it provides. The FAO's report "Livestock's Long Shadow" estimated an annual deficit of 19 million tonnes of protein when comparing the protein contained in animal feed with the amount of protein yielded from animal source food production.
Animal agriculture also affects food security through its well-documented role in climate change, resource depletion, and public heath issues related to overconsumption and non-communicable diseases. Given forecasts for the continued expansion of animal agriculture production globally, and especially in emerging and developing economies, stakeholders should consider inceasing plant-based interventions to enhance food security, while also questioning the increasing reliance on meat, milk and eggs in this regard.
السيد Martin Zerfas
Would it be possible to add more resources and guidance related to specific issues?
The draft references the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil, for example. Please consider adding a reference to the Farm Animals Responsible Minimum Standards (FARMS) Initiative's Responsible Minimum Standards (RMS), which provide technical guidance on best practice for breeding, rearing, transporting and slaughtering for five of the most farmed species. Attention to farm animal welfare has numerous benefits, including relating to food quality, food safety, environmental impact, resource usage, labor conditions and financial viability. The 1-2 page RMS are based upon principles of risk mitigation outlined in the IFC Good Practice Note on Animal Welfare in Livestock Operations. The FARMS Initiative and the RMS will be included in the Resources section of the upcoming UNEP Finance Initiative's Principles for Responsible Banking, to be launched in late-September.
The FARMS Initiative website: www.farms-initiative.com
Responsible Minimum Standards: Beef Cattle, Chickens, Dairy Cattle, Laying Hens and Pigs
Proposed description for the FARMS Initiative and the RMS to be included in Section 3.112.
"In the farm animal sector, the Responsible Minimum Standards of the FARMS Initiative provide technical guidance with respect to breeding, raising, transporting and slaughtering five of the most farmed species: Beef Cattle, Chickens, Dairy Cattle, Laying Hens and Pigs."
Thank you.