Forest regeneration on European sheep pasture is an economically viable climate change mitigation strategy

Livestock production uses 37% of land globally and is responsible for 15% of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Yet livestock farmers across Europe receive billions of dollars in annual subsidies to support their livelihoods. This study evaluates whether diverting European subsidies into...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Connie O’Neill, Felix K S Lim, David P Edwards, Colin P Osborne
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: IOP Publishing 2020-01-01
Series:Environmental Research Letters
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abaf87
_version_ 1797747780165304320
author Connie O’Neill
Felix K S Lim
David P Edwards
Colin P Osborne
author_facet Connie O’Neill
Felix K S Lim
David P Edwards
Colin P Osborne
author_sort Connie O’Neill
collection DOAJ
description Livestock production uses 37% of land globally and is responsible for 15% of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Yet livestock farmers across Europe receive billions of dollars in annual subsidies to support their livelihoods. This study evaluates whether diverting European subsidies into the restoration of trees on abandoned farmland represents a cost-effective negative-emissions strategy for mitigating climate change. Focusing on sheep farming in the United Kingdom, and on natural regeneration and planted native forests, we show that, without subsidies, sheep farming is not profitable when farmers are paid for their labour. Despite the much lower productivity of upland farms, upland and lowland farms are financially comparable per hectare. Conversion to ‘carbon forests’ is possible via natural regeneration when close to existing trees, which are seed sources. This strategy is financially viable without subsidies, meeting the net present value of poorly performing sheep farming at a competitive $4/tCO _2 eq. If tree planting is required to establish forests, then ∼$55/tCO _2 eq is needed to break-even, making it uneconomical under current carbon market prices without financial aid to cover establishment costs. However, this break-even price is lower than the theoretical social value of carbon ($68/tCO _2 eq), which represents the economic cost of CO _2 emissions to society. The viability of land-use conversion without subsidies therefore depends on low farm performance, strong likelihood of natural regeneration, and high carbon-market price, plus overcoming potential trade-offs between the cultural and social values placed on pastoral livestock systems and climate change mitigation. The morality of subsidising farming practices that cause high GHG emissions in Europe, whilst spending billions annually on protecting forest carbon in less developed nations to slow climate change is questionable.
first_indexed 2024-03-12T15:55:30Z
format Article
id doaj.art-35f49f774e9c404ab551d7d9576e36a7
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1748-9326
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-12T15:55:30Z
publishDate 2020-01-01
publisher IOP Publishing
record_format Article
series Environmental Research Letters
spelling doaj.art-35f49f774e9c404ab551d7d9576e36a72023-08-09T14:54:54ZengIOP PublishingEnvironmental Research Letters1748-93262020-01-01151010409010.1088/1748-9326/abaf87Forest regeneration on European sheep pasture is an economically viable climate change mitigation strategyConnie O’Neill0Felix K S Lim1https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1227-460XDavid P Edwards2Colin P Osborne3https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7423-3718Grantham Centre for Sustainable Futures, University of Sheffield , Sheffield S10 2TN, United Kingdom; Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield , Sheffield S10 2TN, United KingdomGrantham Centre for Sustainable Futures, University of Sheffield , Sheffield S10 2TN, United Kingdom; Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield , Sheffield S10 2TN, United KingdomGrantham Centre for Sustainable Futures, University of Sheffield , Sheffield S10 2TN, United Kingdom; Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield , Sheffield S10 2TN, United KingdomGrantham Centre for Sustainable Futures, University of Sheffield , Sheffield S10 2TN, United Kingdom; Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield , Sheffield S10 2TN, United KingdomLivestock production uses 37% of land globally and is responsible for 15% of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Yet livestock farmers across Europe receive billions of dollars in annual subsidies to support their livelihoods. This study evaluates whether diverting European subsidies into the restoration of trees on abandoned farmland represents a cost-effective negative-emissions strategy for mitigating climate change. Focusing on sheep farming in the United Kingdom, and on natural regeneration and planted native forests, we show that, without subsidies, sheep farming is not profitable when farmers are paid for their labour. Despite the much lower productivity of upland farms, upland and lowland farms are financially comparable per hectare. Conversion to ‘carbon forests’ is possible via natural regeneration when close to existing trees, which are seed sources. This strategy is financially viable without subsidies, meeting the net present value of poorly performing sheep farming at a competitive $4/tCO _2 eq. If tree planting is required to establish forests, then ∼$55/tCO _2 eq is needed to break-even, making it uneconomical under current carbon market prices without financial aid to cover establishment costs. However, this break-even price is lower than the theoretical social value of carbon ($68/tCO _2 eq), which represents the economic cost of CO _2 emissions to society. The viability of land-use conversion without subsidies therefore depends on low farm performance, strong likelihood of natural regeneration, and high carbon-market price, plus overcoming potential trade-offs between the cultural and social values placed on pastoral livestock systems and climate change mitigation. The morality of subsidising farming practices that cause high GHG emissions in Europe, whilst spending billions annually on protecting forest carbon in less developed nations to slow climate change is questionable.https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abaf87greenhouse gas mitigationlivestockpastureforest regenerationsubsidiescarbon costs
spellingShingle Connie O’Neill
Felix K S Lim
David P Edwards
Colin P Osborne
Forest regeneration on European sheep pasture is an economically viable climate change mitigation strategy
Environmental Research Letters
greenhouse gas mitigation
livestock
pasture
forest regeneration
subsidies
carbon costs
title Forest regeneration on European sheep pasture is an economically viable climate change mitigation strategy
title_full Forest regeneration on European sheep pasture is an economically viable climate change mitigation strategy
title_fullStr Forest regeneration on European sheep pasture is an economically viable climate change mitigation strategy
title_full_unstemmed Forest regeneration on European sheep pasture is an economically viable climate change mitigation strategy
title_short Forest regeneration on European sheep pasture is an economically viable climate change mitigation strategy
title_sort forest regeneration on european sheep pasture is an economically viable climate change mitigation strategy
topic greenhouse gas mitigation
livestock
pasture
forest regeneration
subsidies
carbon costs
url https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abaf87
work_keys_str_mv AT connieoneill forestregenerationoneuropeansheeppastureisaneconomicallyviableclimatechangemitigationstrategy
AT felixkslim forestregenerationoneuropeansheeppastureisaneconomicallyviableclimatechangemitigationstrategy
AT davidpedwards forestregenerationoneuropeansheeppastureisaneconomicallyviableclimatechangemitigationstrategy
AT colinposborne forestregenerationoneuropeansheeppastureisaneconomicallyviableclimatechangemitigationstrategy