dynamics of livestock production systems, drivers of ...conservation of animal genetic resources a...

3○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

AGRI 2008, 42: 3-27

SummaryThis overview analyses the key drivers of change inthe global livestock sector and assesses how theyare influencing current trends and future prospectsin the world’s diverse livestock production systemsand market chains; and what are their consequentimpacts on the management of animal geneticresources for food and agriculture. The trends areoccurring in both developing and industrializedcountries, but the responses are different. In thedeveloping world, the trends are affecting the abilityof livestock to contribute to improving livelihoodsand reducing poverty as well as the use of naturalresources. In the industrialized world, thenarrowing animal genetic resource base inindustrial livestock production systems raises theneed to maintain a broader range of animal geneticresources to be able to deal with futureuncertainties, such as climate change and zoonoticdiseases.

This chapter discusses:• What are the global drivers of change for

livestock systems? Economic development andglobalization; changing market demands andthe “livestock revolution”; environmentalimpacts including climate change; and scienceand technology trends.

• How are the livestock production systemsresponding to the global drivers of change?Trends in the three main livestock productionsystems (industrial, crop-livestock and pastoralsystems); the range and rate of changesoccurring in different systems and how theseaffect animal genetic resources. The implicationsare that breeds cannot adapt in time to meet newcircumstances. Hence new strategies andinterventions are necessary to improve themanagement of animal genetic resources insituations where these genetic resources aremost at risk.

Dynamics of livestock production systems, drivers of change andprospects for animal genetic resources

C. Seré1, A. van der Zijpp2, G. Persley1 & E. Rege1

1International Livestock Research Institute, P.O. Box 30709, Nairobi 00100, Kenya2Animal Production Systems Group, Department of Animal Sciences, Wageningen University,

P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands

This paper has benefited from inputs from several reviewersand other contributors, and we thank all for their thoughtfulinsights. We acknowledge the contributions of our colleaguesat FAO, particularly Irene Hoffmann, Dafydd Pilling andHenning Steinfeld, and at the International LivestockResearch Institute (ILRI): Ade Freeman, Mario Herrero,Olivier Hanotte, Steve Kemp, Sandy McClintock,Sara McClintock, Margaret MacDonald-Levy,Susan MacMillan, Grace Ndungu, An Notenbaert,Mwai Okeyo and Robin Reid.

• What are the implications for animal geneticresources diversity and for future prospects oftheir use? - Industrial livestock productionsystems are expected to have a limited demandfor biodiversity, while crop-livestock andpastoral systems will rely on biodiversity toproduce genotypes of improved productivityunder changing environmental and socio-economic conditions. All systems will rely onbiodiversity, albeit to varying degrees, to copewith expected climate change.

• What immediate steps are possible to improveanimal genetic resources characterization, useand conservation? Appropriate institutional andpolicy frameworks are required to improveanimal genetic resources management and theseissues are being addressed at national andintergovernmental levels, in a process led byFAO to promote greater internationalcollaboration on animal genetic resources. Basedon an analysis of the current situation, thecontinuing loss of indigenous breeds and newdevelopments in science and technology, thereare several complementary actions that canbegin to improve the management of animalgenetic resources and maintain future options inan uncertain world.These are summarized here as:a. “Keep it on the hoof” – Encouraging the

continuing sustainable use of traditionalbreeds and in situ conservation by providingmarket-driven incentives, public policy and

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

4Dynamics of production, changes and prospects for AnGR

other support to enable livestock keepers tomaintain genetic diversity in their livestockpopulations.

b. “Move it or lose it” – Enabling access to andthe safe movement of animal geneticresources within and between countries,regions and continents is a key factor in use,development and conservation of animalgenetic resources globally.

c. “Match breeds to environments” –Understanding the match between livestockpopulations, breeds and genes with thephysical, biological and economic landscape.This “landscape livestock genomics” approachoffers the means to predict the genotypesmost appropriate to a given environmentand, in the longer term, to understand thegenetic basis of adaptation of the genotype tothe environment.

d. “Put some in the bank” –- New technologiesmake ex situ, in vitro conservation of animalgenetic resources feasible for criticalsituations and are a way to provide long-terminsurance against future shocks.

The multiple values, functions andconsequences of livestock production systems andtheir rapid rate of change lead to divergent interestswithin and between countries. Conversely, theuncertainty about the implications of rapid,multifaceted global change for each livestockproduction system and the resulting future changesin the required genetic make-up of animal geneticresources make collective action to tackleconservation of animal genetic resources a long-term, global public good. Conserving animal geneticresources will not by itself solve these problems, butit is an important first step towards maintainingfuture options.

Advances in science and the technology, inareas such as reproductive technology, genomicsand spatial analysis, as well as progress inconceptualization of global public good productionfor the future management of animal geneticresources, should enable the internationalcommunity to address both the short- and long-termchallenges in innovative ways.

RésuméCe résumé analyse les facteurs clés qui ont subi deschangements dans le secteur élevage et propose uneévaluation de l’influence qu’ils ont eu sur lasituation actuelle et les prospectives futures dansles différents systèmes d’élevage et de marché au

niveau mondial. On analyse également les impactssur la gestion des ressources génétiques animalespour l’alimentation et l’agriculture. Cette tendancese retrouve aussi bien dans les pays industrialisésque dans ceux en développement, mais les réponsessont différentes. Dans les pays en développementces tendances ont une influence directe sur lacapacité que présente l’élevage à contribuer àl’amélioration de la qualité de vie et à la réductionde la pauvreté, ainsi qu’à l’utilisation desressources naturelles. Dans le monde industrialiséla proximité de la base des ressources génétiquesanimales avec les systèmes de production d’élevageau niveau industriel ont porté au besoin deconserver une plus grande gamme des ressourcesgénétiques animales pour faire face aux incertitudesfutures telles que le changement climatique et leszoonoses.

Dans l’article on discute de:• Quels sont les principaux facteurs de

changement dans les systèmes d’élevage?• Comment répondent les systèmes de production

d’élevage aux facteurs de changement au niveaumondial?

• Quelles sont les implications sur la diversité desressources génétiques animales et pour lesprospectives d’utilisation futures?

• Quels sont les démarches immédiates quipermettront une amélioration de lacaractérisation des ressources génétiquesanimales, leur utilisation et conservation?D’après une récente analyse de la situation

actuelle, de la perte continue de races indigènes etdu nouveau développement de la science et de latechnologie, il existe différentes actionscomplémentaires qui pourraient aider à améliorer lagestion des ressources génétiques animales etconserver des options pour le futur dans un mondeplein d’incertitude.

Ces actions peuvent se résumés comme il suit:• Encourager l'utilisation durable des races

traditionnelles.• Permettre l'accès et la vente de ressources

génétiques animales dans et entre pays.• Compréhension du rapport entre élevage, races

et gènes avec le milieu physique, biologique etéconomique.

• La formation de stock comme assurance future.L’incertitude sur les implications des

changements rapides sur chacun des systèmes deproduction animale et les changements futurs quecela entraîne en terme de demande de ressourcesgénétiques animales, requière d’une actioncollective pour faire face à la conservation desressources génétiques animales en tant que bien

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

5

Animal Genetic Resources Information, No. 42, 2008

Seré et al.

public. La conservation des ressources génétiquesanimales en soi ne résoudra pas les problèmes maisil s’agit d’un pas important pour conserver lesoptions futures.

ResumenEste resumen analiza los factores clave que hancambiado en el sector ganadero y hace unaevaluación de cómo han influenciado la corrienteactual y las prospectivas futuras en los distintossistemas de producción ganadera y mercados en elmundo. También se analizan los consiguientesimpactos sobre la gestión de los recursoszoogenéticos para la alimentación y la agricultura.La tendencia se da tanto en países industrializadoscomo en vía de desarrollo pero las respuestas sondistintas. En los países en vía de desarrollo estastendencias están afectando la capacidad ganaderapara contribuir a la mejora de la calidad de la vida yreducción de la pobreza, así como la utilización delos recursos naturales. En el mundo industrializadola proximidad de la base de recursos zoogenéticoscon los sistemas de producción ganadera industrialplantean la necesidad de mantener un mayor rangode recursos zoogenéticos para hacer frente a lasincertidumbres futuras, tales como el cambioclimático y las zoonosis.En este capitulo se discute:• Cúales son los principales factores de cambio en

los sistemas ganaderos?• Cómo responden los sistemas de producción

ganadera a los factores de cambio a nivelmundial?

• Cúales son las implicaciones para la diversidadde recursos zoogenéticos y para las prospectivasfuturas de su utilización?

• Cúales son los pasos inmediatos que puedanpermitir la mejora de la caracterización de losrecursos zoogenéticos, su utilización yconservación?Sobre la base de un reciente análisis de la

situación actual, la pérdida de razas indígenas y elnuevo desarrollo de la ciencia y la tecnología,existen distintas acciones complementarias quepueden empezar a ayudar a mejorar la gestión delos recursos zoogenéticos y mantener opcionesfuturas en un mundo lleno de incertidumbres.

Tales acciones se resumen así:• Fomentar la continua utilización sostenible de

razas tradicionales.• Permitir el acceso y movimiento para venta de

recursos zoogenéticos dentro y entre paises.

• Conocer la relación entre poblacionesganaderas, razas y genes con el entorno físico,biológico y económico.

• Conservar stocks para hacer frente aincertidumbres futuras.La incertidumbre sobre las implicaciones decambios rápidos, multifacéticos y globales paracada sistema de producción ganadera y losconsiguientes cambios futuros en la demanda derecursos zoogenéticos requieren una accióncolectiva para hacer frente a la conservación derecursos zoogenéticos a largo plazo como bienpublico mundial. La conservación de losrecursos zoogenéticos por sí sola no resolverá losproblemas pero es un paso importante paramantener las opciones futuras.

Keywords: Global livestock sector, Livestock productionsystems, Market chains, Environmental effects, Climatechange, Management, Sustainable use.

IntroductionThis overview paper analyses the key drivers ofchange in the global livestock sector and assesseshow they are influencing current trends and futureprospects in the world’s diverse livestockproduction systems and market chains; and whatare their consequent impacts on the management ofanimal genetic resources for food and agriculture.The trends are occurring in both developing andindustrialized countries, but the responses aredifferent. In the developing world, the trends areaffecting the ability of livestock to contribute toimproving livelihoods and reducing poverty as wellas the use of natural resources. In the industrializedworld, the narrowing animal genetic resource basein industrial livestock production systems raises theneed to maintain a broader range of animal geneticresources to be able to deal with futureuncertainties, such as climate change and zoonoticdiseases.

The range of livestock covered here aredomesticated species, particularly the five majoreconomic species (cattle, sheep, goats, chickens andpigs). There are no detailed figures yet to linkspecific breeds with specific production systems.We are tackling the problems from a productionsystem angle. Throughout the paper, and based onthe findings of The State of the World’s Animal GeneticResources for Food and Agriculture, we use theapproximation that commercial breeds, as asubgroup of international transboundary breeds,are used in intensive, high-external input livestock

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


production systems (termed “industrial systems”),and that local breeds are the basis in most extensiveand low-external input systems. These are calledhere “pastoral systems” and “crop-livestock systems”,respectively.

This paper covers four main areas:• What are the global drivers of change for

livestock systems?• How are the three main livestock production

systems (industrial, crop-livestock and pastoralsystems) responding to the global drivers ofchange, and what are the implications of therange and rate of changes for the management ofanimal genetic resources in these systems?

• What are the implications for animal geneticresources diversity and future prospects of theiruse?

• What immediate steps are possible to improveanimal genetic resources characterization, useand conservation?

Drivers of change in globallivestock systems

Economic development andglobalization

Livestock production is a complex andheterogeneous part of global agriculture. It rangesfrom highly automated, intensive large-scaleproduction of pigs and poultry and, to a lesserdegree, cattle, to small-scale, largely scavengingproduction of backyard pigs and chicken.Domestication of livestock started several millenniaago and humans have shaped the genetic make-upof domesticated animals to respond to human needsin different production environments.

This genetic make-up of livestock that resultedfrom this long-term process has been put understress by fast-paced changes over the past fewdecades, across the entire range of biophysical,social and economic contexts in which humanskeep animals. These changes can be subsumedunder terms of economic development andglobalization. These are themselves largely drivenby technical progress, plus the global exchange ofknowledge and products. These trends are alsocharacterized by unequal access to naturalresources, financing, markets, technology andpersonal mobility.

Since 1945, the world has seen anunprecedented economic growth, starting in theindustrialized economies (countries of the

Organisation for Economic Co-operation andDevelopment [OECD]) and expanding into the restof the world over the past two decades. The latter isepitomized by the economic growth path of China.A number of developing countries, mainly in Asiaand Latin America, have undergone majortransformations associated with significant growthin their economies and increases in per capitaincomes.

The socio-economic indicators for selectedcountries are given in table 1. The followinginferences can be drawn from the data:• The contribution of livestock to agricultural

gross domestic product (GDP) demonstrates thesignificance of the livestock sector in manyeconomies (providing value addition); thisoccurs even in countries that are experiencingrapid economic growth (India and China)and/or have a growing share of industriallivestock systems (China, Brazil and Argentina).

• The key demand drivers of GDP growth andurbanization point towards growing demand forlivestock products across all regions in thedeveloping world. This “livestock revolution” isdiscussed further below.

• The trends in foreign direct investment (FDI)show that increases in FDI are concentrated in afew countries (China and India). These countriesare ones in which the industrialization oflivestock production has been rising sharply.Some other countries in Africa (e.g. Kenya andBotswana) have also recorded significantincreases in FDI over the past decade, althoughfrom a lower base.Economic development has led to important

changes in the spatial distribution of the world’spopulation, leading to a rapid process ofurbanization in the developing world. At the sametime, breakthroughs in medical research and theirapplications have led to dramatic increases of thehuman population in developing countries. In theindustrialized world, population growth rates havedeclined in the last decades as social security,female employment in labour-scarce economies andcultural/social changes have led to declining birthrates and gradually aging populations. In terms ofconsumer demand, there is more demand for“fast food” and processed animal products. Foodsafety requirements are becoming increasinglystringent, due to disease problems such as bovinespongiform encephalopathy (BSE) associated withprocessed animal products. A similar trend isoccurring in developing countries, althoughcurrently limited to the affluent urban class.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

7


Seré et al.

Tabl

e 1. S

ocio

-eco

nom

ic in

dica

tors

for s

elect

ed co

untr

ies.

U

rban

pop

ulat

ionb

FD

Ic

C

ontr

ibut

ion

of

lives

tock

to a

gric

ultu

ral

GD

P (in

%)

GD

P gr

owth

(a

nnua

l cha

nge)

a -

(in %

)

Tota

l po

pula

tion

(in %

)

Ave

rage

an

nual

gr

owth

(in

%)

Ann

ual a

vera

ge in

US$

mill

ion

1990

–199

5 av

erag

e 20

00–2

005

aver

age

1990

19

95

2000

20

05

1990

20

04

1990

–200

4 19

97–1

999

2000

–200

2 20

03–2

005

Sub-

Saha

ran

Afr

ica

Bo

tsw

ana

85.0

82

.1

6.8

4.5

8.3

6.2

42

52

3.0

77

161

363

K

enya

42

.5

44.5

4.

1 4.

3 0.

6 5.

8 25

40

6.

1 15

48

50

Sout

h A

fric

a 46

.1

44.0

-0

.3

3.1

4.2

5.1

49

57

3.0

1 95

5 2

991

2 58

1 La

tin A

mer

ica

and

the

Carib

bean

Arg

entin

a 45

.9

36.5

-1

.3

-2.8

-0

.8

9.2

87

90

1.4

13 4

80

4 91

1 3

552

Br

azil

41.8

44

.4

-4.2

4.

2 4.

3 2.

9 75

84

2.

3 26

713

23

942

14

501

Peru

36

.0

33.1

-5

.1

8.6

3.0

6.4

69

74

2.2

1 90

8 1

370

1 89

0 Ea

st A

sia a

nd P

acifi

c

Cam

bodi

a 20

.5

20.1

1.

1 6.

5 8.

4 13

.4

13

19

5.5

226

148

198

Ch

ina

26.9

24

.6

3.8

10.9

8.

4 10

.4

27

40

3.6

42 2

47

43 9

83

60 3

80

V

iet N

am

16.7

18

.0

5.0

9.5

6.8

8.4

20

26

3.4

1 76

8 1

333

1 67

1 So

uth

Asia

Indi

a 26

.51

30.7

5 6.

0 7.

6 5.

3 9.

2 26

29

2.

5 2

794

4 89

4 5

552

Pa

kist

an

49.1

53

.5

4.5

5.0

4.3

8.0

31

34

3.3

585

505

So

urce

s: a IM

F (2

007)

. b W

orld

Ban

k (2

006)

. c U

nite

d N

atio

ns (2

007)

.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


Another key driver of change that is leadingtowards larger-scale, cereal-based animalproduction systems around the world has been therise in labour costs in the industrialized economiesand in some parts of the developing world, as aresult of economic growth and rising incomes.

Changing economic policy associated withrapid economic growth in parts of the developingworld (e.g. Asian “tiger” economies) has changedthe investment climate in emerging economies andled to massive inflows of FDI. Similarly, labourmigration from developing to industrializedeconomies has generated capital flows back todeveloping countries, which are often larger thanofficial development assistance. Capitalinvestments from outside the farming community,for example in the feed industry and livestockproduction chains in Southeast Asia, are alsoinfluencing changes in livestock productionsystems.

The effects of globalization and growingincomes have by no means been evenly distributedwithin or between countries. In the context of rapidpopulation growth, many countries and social andethnic groups within countries have notparticipated in the growth process. Large numbersof poor people, particularly in rural areas, havebeen left behind or adversely affected by thechanges. For example, such communities mayactually suffer from loss of access to naturalresources, bear the brunt of environmental impactsand be characterized by the breakdown oftraditional social and economic ties and values,without a better (or at least viable) alternative. Also,local breeds of animals are often not competitive inthis changing world.

These inequalities pose a major challenge for theglobal community, which has responded by settingthe Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), aUN-driven process to address several core problemsfacing the world. The MDGs include a commitmentto halve the numbers of people living in poverty by2015, as well as setting several other keydevelopment targets, including protecting theenvironment and conserving biodiversity. Thesustainable use and conservation of the world’sanimal genetic resources for food and agriculturesupports the Millennium Development Goals 1and 7, and is also covered by the Convention onBiological Diversity (CBD).

Market demand for livestockproducts – the “livestock revolution”

Growing demand for animal products – as well ashigher standards to improve the quality and safetyof the products – and more processed animalproducts have substantial consequences for theevolution of livestock production systems. Overall,the processes of economic development, populationgrowth, urbanization and changing patterns ofconsumption have led to a dramatic increase in theconsumption of animal products in the developingworld, a process that has been termed the “livestockrevolution”. FAO data suggest that this trend isexpected to continue for several decades because ofthe strong direct correlation between rising incomeand increasing animal product consumption.

Figure 1 shows the expected percentage changesin per capita consumption of selected foodcommodities in developing and industrializedcountries between 2001 and 2030, providingevidence of the “livestock revolution” occurring in thedeveloping world. There are large differencesbetween the projected per capita growth rates inconsumption of livestock products (meat and milk)between developing and industrialized countries.There are also marked differences in the per capitagrowth rates of the different products in developingcountries, with meat and milk being the highest,followed by oil seeds. Growth rates for cerealconsumption as human food are stagnatingeverywhere, but increasing for other uses, especiallyfor animal feed and biofuels.

The consumption of milk and meat per capitaare shown in figures 2 and 3, respectively. Thesedata illustrate substantial differences in currentconsumption of meat and milk betweenindustrialized and developing countries; the ratesof growth in consumption are higher in thedeveloping world. This trend is part of the“livestock revolution” and is the result of increaseddemand and increased incomes, economic growthand urbanization in developing countries.Consumption per capita of milk and meat iscurrently between two and four times higher inindustrialized countries than in the developingworld but, in absolute terms, demand is higher inthe developing world.

The growing demand for animal products in thedeveloping world is associated with the changes inproduction location, facilitated by the increasingease of transporting feed and animal productsaround the world. Animal products werepreviously produced close to where the consumerslive. Increasingly, livestock production now takes

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

9


Seré et al.

Figure 1. Expected percentage changes in per capita consumption of selected food commodities in developing andindustrialized countries, 2001–2030.Source: adapted from IAASTD (2007).

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

developing countries industrial countries

chan

ge 2

001

- 203

0 (%

)

cereals, foodcereals, all usesveg. oils, oilseeds and by-productsmeatmilk

Figure 2. Milk consumption per capita to 2050 (kg/person).Source: adapted from IAASTD (2007).

0

50

100

150

200

250

1969/71 1979/81 1989/91 1999/01 2030 2050

year

milk

con

sum

ptio

n (k

g/pe

rson

)

developing countries industrial countries World

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


place close to the locations with good access to feed,either in feed production areas or ports. The animalproducts are then transported to markets. This trendis changing the competitiveness of diverse livestockproduction systems worldwide, with more animalproducts being produced in lower cost economies(mainly in industrial and crop-livestock systems)and traded in domestic, regional and internationalmarkets.

At the same time, large numbers of poor peopledepend on livestock production for their livelihoodsand, for some of them, livestock offer a pathway outof poverty. These smallholders and pastoralistsfrequently compete for markets with the commercialsector, which is producing animal products inindustrial systems worldwide. Smallholders andpastoralists together with their traditional breedsare increasingly being pushed out by the industrialsystems coming into the developing world. Hencethere is pressure for smallholders and pastoraliststo replace their traditional breeds with moreproductive but less resilient breeds in order to beable to compete in the expanding livestock marketsin the developing world.

Technological developments associated withinternational transport, partially related to theincreased access to capital and the opening of manyeconomies, have dramatically increased the role of

international trade in animal products. Theexpansion of international trade in animal productshas brought to the fore the need to establish morestringent animal health and food safety standards,in order to manage the risks to the domestic sector ofindividual countries and to protect consumers.These health and food safety requirements havebeen driven by the growing problems of animaldiseases, including zoonoses. These disease risksare linked to a number of factors includingincreasing stock numbers, the intimate cohabitationof poor families with their animals and theincreased global movement of animals and animalproducts.

Domestic markets, including the informallivestock product markets, handle the largest shareof the livestock products consumed in developingcountries. However, in urban areas, the modernfood retail sector is also growing rapidly, andimposing specific requirements in terms of qualityassurance and homogeneity of the products (ofnational and international origin). The term“supermarket revolution” has been coined for theseprocesses. These two marketing systems requiremarkedly different food safety and biosecuritystandards, affecting livestock production systemssupplying these markets.

Figure 3. Meat consumption per capita to 2050 (kg/person).Source: adapted from IAASTD (2007).

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1969/71 1979/81 1989/91 1999/01 2030 2050

year

mea

t con

sum

ptio

n (k

g/pe

rson

developing countries industrial countries World

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

11


Seré et al.

Table 2 shows that the share of supermarkets infood retailing has been increasing over the past twodecades in much of the developing world. If currenttrends in expanding urban populations continue,the share of supermarkets in the urban food retailsector in the developing world will increase tolevels that they are now in the industrializedeconomies (i.e. about 80 percent of the total foodretail sector). The changing set of actors implied bythe supermarket revolution and the growingimportance of agribusiness in food retailing willhave important implications for poor farmers.

The coexistence of three markets for animalproducts in the developing world (the traditional,frequently informal markets, the growing formal(super)markets for the urban middle classes and theregional/international export markets) posesparticularly daunting challenges for policy-makersin pursuing mutually compatible policies of:1. protecting livelihoods among the smallholder

livestock keepers and pastoralists;2. upporting efficient markets for the urban

population; and

3. encouraging active engagement of livestockproducers and their traditional breeds in theregional and global livestock markets.The livestock product markets in industrialized

countries are evolving along quite different paths.Besides consuming relatively inexpensive livestockproducts from large-scale industrial systems, thereis increasing demand for niche products, frequentlylinked with certification of origin, often produced intraditional ways or with specific breeds, by “organicagriculture”, and/or with particular concern foranimal welfare.

Animal welfare is an increasing area of concern,especially in markets in industrialized countries.These concerns include caring for animals in alltypes of production systems. There is particularcriticism of intensive housing systems for animals(e.g. chickens, pigs, dairy cows). This is leading tomore animal friendly housing systems such asgroup housing of sows; and free range hens asalternatives for the caging for laying hens. Someconsumers in industrialized countries are preparedto pay a premium for animal products coming from

Table 2. Trends in share of supermarkets in total food retail for selected countries.

Waves of diffusion and average market share Country Year

Supermarket share in food retail (%)

Industrialized country example

United States of America 2005 80

Argentina 2002 60 Brazil 2002 75 Taiwan Province of China 2003 55 Czech Republic 2003 55 Costa Rica 2001 50 Chile 2001 50 Republic of Korea 2003 50 Philippines 2003 50 Thailand 2003 50

First wave of developing countries

(10–20% market share

around 1990)

South Africa 2001 55 Mexico 2003 56 Ecuador 2003 40 Colombia 2003 47 Guatemala 2002 36

Second wave of developing countries

(5–10% market share

around 1990) Indonesia 2001 30 Bulgaria 2003 25 Kenyaa 2004 20 Nicaragua 2006 20 China* 2004 30

Third wave of developing countries

(Virtually zero market

share around 1990) India 2007 9 aShare of urban food retail. Source: Reardon, Henson and Berdegué (2007).

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


such production systems that take account ofanimal welfare concerns. Animal welfare concernsare highly culture-specific and, while important insome societies, others consider them to be non-tarifftrade barriers. Some of these trends will dictatebreeds and breeding practices – for example,performance under range conditions and“broodiness” of hens will be important attributes forthe niche markets.

In the industrialized countries, hobby farminghas become a popular activity, using relativelysmall land areas for limited numbers of livestocksuch as sheep, goats, horses and cattle. For in situconservation of species and breeds within species,these part-time farmers are important contributors.

Environmental effects of livestockproduction

The rapid population growth and the growingconsumption of goods and services by peoplewhose incomes are growing puts pressure onnatural resources and the environment. Livestockproduction, under certain conditions, is drivingdegradation processes and is at the same timeaffected by them. Increasing land use for food cropsand crops for biofuels is increasing the pressure onrangelands and other open access or communitymanaged resources. This affects the viability of thelow-input production systems, the sustainable useof traditional breeds and thus the livelihoods ofpastoralists and smallholders.

At the same time, the rapid growth of large-scale,intensive animal production units puts a seriousconstraint on the capacity of the environment todeal with carbon dioxide and methane output,nutrient loading in certain areas, effluent into riversand seas, loss of biodiversity because of landclearing to grow feeds (for example, soybeans inLatin America) and other environmental impacts.

The recent FAO (2006) report Livestock’s longshadow: environmental issues and options focused onthe effects of livestock on the environment. The“long shadow” refers to the negative effects of thelivestock food chain on almost all aspects of theenvironment; livestock production is associatedwith carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxideemissions, water depletion, soil erosion, soilfertility, damage to plants, loss of biodiversity andcompetition with wildlife.

As population and living standards grow,natural resources become a limiting factor.Particularly in marginal zones for rangeland-basedanimal production (pastoral systems), alternative

land uses such as provision of opportunities forcarbon sequestration through trees or wildlifeconservation may become increasingly competitivewith livestock production. On the other hand,livestock production in pastoral systems can becomplementary to other services – for example,livestock production provides a means to maintainshrub/rangeland systems, with grazing reducingthe risk of fire in extensive rangelands andproviding other ecological services.

Climate change effects

The relationship between livestock production andclimate change works in both directions. On the onehand, livestock contributes significantly to climatechange via carbon dioxide, methane and nitrousoxide production (calculated in FAO (2006) at18 percent of the total global greenhouse gasemissions from human sources). On the other hand,climate change will have important effects onfarming systems and on the role of livestock, bothdirectly and indirectly.

For example, large parts of Africa and CentralAsia are likely to experience reductions in thelength of growing period as a result of increasedtemperatures and lower rainfall. This is likely tolead to lower crop yields and reduced rangelandproductivity, thus affecting the provision of feedsfor animals. Climate change is also likely to changethe distribution of animal diseases and theirvectors. Large parts of South and Southeast Asia arelikely to experience increases in rainfall and in thenumber of extreme climatic events (e.g. cyclones).This could lead to increased exposure of livestock todiseases, such as those caused by helminths. Croplosses due to extremes in climate could result in lessanimal feed being available, especially incrop-livestock and pastoral systems.

Science and technology drivers ofchange: general aspects and in relation toanimal breeding and genetics

Science and technology have had a major influenceon the transformation of animal production inindustrialized economies and increasingly indeveloping countries. With increasing labourscarcity, larger, high-output and more productiveanimals were bred. From multipurpose breeds,highly specialized breeds were developed.Generally, disease resistance was sacrificed for

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

13


Seré et al.

higher output, taking into account that throughcapital investments it became possible to adapt theenvironment to the existing animals in ways thathad not been possible in the past. Research intohousing and mechanization allowed significantlabour productivity increases. These advancesoccurred in many species but particularly inshort-cycled monogastric species such as poultryand pigs.

Animal nutrition research, linked with breeding,has made major contributions to improving feedefficiency and shortening production cycles andthereby reducing maintenance feed requirementsand allowing a more efficient use of the capitalinvestments and natural resources.

In the developing world, the impact of modernlivestock science and technology has been uneven.Industrial livestock production systems (mainly forchickens) with limited links to the local resourcebase have been developed in some locations close tourban demand and/or to ports, given their frequentdependence on imported feed. Smallholdercrop-livestock systems are much more reliant onlocally available feed and traditional breeds. Thesecrop-livestock systems are highly complex,delivering multiple products and services. Progressin improving the sustainable productivity of thesesystems has been much more limited and is asignificant research challenge. System-basedresearch is required to help these systems change inline with the changing social, economic andenvironmental context in which they operate.Currently, the speed of change of animal productionsystems and market chains is very high in somelocations/regions, and is accompanied by loss ofanimal genetic resources. (This is discussed furtherbelow.)

Science and the management of animal geneticresources

The science related to the management of animalgenetic resources has made significant progress,based mainly on advances in molecular biology andgenetics as well as new developments ininformation and communications technology (ICT).The main advances are summarized in this paperand are discussed in more detail in the followingpapers. The advances include:• Technologies are increasingly available for

characterizing animal genetic resources.Molecular characterization is providing a betterunderstanding of the genetic diversity in globallivestock populations. Functional genomics is

also making it possible for genomes to becharacterized, specific genomic regions andgenes identified and gene functions elucidated.These technologies are based on a combinationof genetic analysis and bioinformatics.

• New technologies are becoming increasinglyavailable for utilizing animal genetic resourcesbetter, to meet changing needs, threats andopportunities.New genetic technologies enable the bettercharacterization of breeds and populations.Other technologies, such as geographicinformation systems (GIS), enable the bettercharacterization of the environment. Linkingthis knowledge will enable making a better fitbetween a genotype and an environment and, inthe longer term, understanding the genetic basisof genotype x environment interaction. In thisway, we can begin to identify appropriategenotypes for fast-changing environments. Forexample, there are increasing threats from drierclimates that increase the need for hardieranimals, tolerant to drought and disease.Animal reproduction technologies such as sexedsemen and in vitro fertilization of embryos willenable the rapid development of newpopulations and faster distribution of superioranimal genetics. These technologies are not yetwidely used in developing countries, but offerfuture options in areas where a genetic solutionis possible.

• Technologies are increasingly available forconserving animal genetic resources.New technologies are available for improvedcryopreservation of embryos and semen that areapplicable in more species. These technologieslead to new options for ex situ, in vitroconservation of animal genetic resources. Forexample, use of testes and ovaries obtained fromlivestock as sources of frozen semen and in vitrofertilization (IVF) embryos for long-termcryopreservation of animal genetic resources ingene banks.

• ICTs enable more precise linkage of genotypesand locations/production environments.New developments in ICTs also haveimplications for animal genetic resourcescharacterization and conservation. Thesedevelopments are linked to improvement ofinfrastructure and communication systems, suchas the widespread use of mobile phones. ICTsalso allow georeferencing to link particulargenotypes with specific geographic locations.This knowledge provides the scientificunderpinning of in situ conservation practices.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


In order to take full advantage of theopportunities presented by advances in ICT, it isnecessary to develop common standards forcharacterizing animal genetic resources, in terms oftheir genetics, phenotype and production system, sothat knowledge can be shared among differentcommunities and countries. Given such systematicand standardized descriptions of livestock, theintersection between new ICTs and moderngenetics, through genomics and bioinformatics,presents opportunities to examine genome functionby integration of these rich data sets.

Current status and trends inlivestock production systemsIn the light of the above drivers of change, thissection discusses:• The relative importance of the three main

livestock systems worldwide (industrial,crop-livestock and pastoral) and the breeds theyharbour.

• The implications of global drivers of change forthe different livestock production systems.

• The implications for livelihoods.• The implications of the scope and rate of

changes in the main livestock productionsystems for current and future animal geneticresources management.

Livestock species by region

The geographic distribution of the major livestockspecies worldwide is given in table 3. This tableshows that for all species the majority of animalsare in the developing world. It also shows theimportance of different species by region. Forexample, ruminants are most important insub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and Latin America (LAC),both continents with vast areas of savannah andrelatively low population densities. Poultry is mostimportant in East Asia and the Pacific and LAC,regions of either high economic growth or withmiddle-income countries with high degrees ofurbanization and adequate market infrastructure.

Livestock production systems by region

Three major types of livestock production systemscan be identified worldwide – industrial livestocksystems (IS); crop/livestock systems, mainly in highpotential areas (CLS); and pastoral systems, mainlyin marginal areas (PS).

The share of livestock in each of these systems indifferent geographic regions is shown in table 4.These data show that most livestock are located incrop-livestock systems. The proportion of livestockin industrial systems by region is mainly a functionof economic status and rate of growth (e.g. higherproportions of industrial systems in theindustrialized world and Asia).

Implications of global drivers of changefor livestock production systems

Current status of livestock production systems

Each of the three main livestock production systemsresponds differently to the effects of the globaldrivers of change, and therefore has differentdevelopment and investment needs. Theoverarching trends are increasing intensification inboth industrial systems and in crop-livestocksystems in order to meet increasing demand foranimal products and consumer preferences forhigher-quality products that meet stringent foodsafety standards.• Intensification and scaling up trends in

industrial and crop-livestock productionsystems.The demand for livestock products has been metby intensification of livestock productionsystems in both developing and industrializedcountries. Among other factors, thisintensification has been based on using cerealgrains as livestock feed. For example, in OECDcountries, livestock feeding in intensive systemsaccounts for two-thirds of the average per capitagrain consumption. In contrast, crop-livestocksystems in sub-Saharan Africa and India useless than 10 percent of grains as feeds as theyrely mostly on crop-residues (40–70 percent offeed), grazing and planted fodders.

• Market characteristics and demand.The trend towards intensification of industrialsystems and crop-livestock systems is largelydriven by consumer demands for livestockproducts, both fresh and processed. The marketcharacteristics are increasing demand for animal

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

15


Seré et al.

Table 4. Share of livestock (total livestock units [TLU]: cattle, goats, sheep, pigs and poultry) per livestock production system for selected regions and countries.

TLU shares (%) Livestock production system PS CLS IS Sub-Saharan Africa Botswana 80 19 0.14 Kenya 34 50 14 Mali 47 51 0.9 South Africa 55 36 8 Latin America and Caribbean Argentina 42 40 16 Brazil 18 63 17 Peru 44 21 33 East Asia and Pacific Cambodia 6 73 20 China 9 70 19 Viet Nam 0.75 82 16 South Asia India 2 82 15 Pakistan 25 63 10 Developed World European Union 9 67 22 Russian Federation 16 50 32

Source: FAO (2004).

products in developing countries, plus qualitypreferences and food safety requirements in allmarkets. Public-private partnerships thatprovide services and market opportunities alsoplay a key role in intensifying industrial andcrop-livestock systems.

Future trends in livestock production systems

Intensive systems. Intensive systems are facingincreasing restrictions, owing to their associatednegative environmental effects, such as problems ofwaste disposal and water contamination. Demand

Table 3. Geographic distribution of livestock (millions of head).

Cattle Sheep and

goats Pigs Poultry Sub-Saharan Africaa 219 365 22 865 Near East and North Africaa 23 205 0 868 Latin America and Caribbeana 370 112 70 2 343 North Americaa 110 10 74 2 107 East Europe and Central Asiaa 84 121 72 1 160 West Europea 83 119 125 1 072 East Asia and Pacifica 184 514 543 7 168 South Asiaa 244 303 15 777

Industrial worldb 318 390 284 4 663 Developing worldb 1 046 1 460 659 12 735

aAverage 2000–2005 number. bReported number for 2004. Source: FAOSTAT (2007).

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


for cereals is also increasing for other purposes(e.g. biofuels) and this is driving up the price ofcereals, and subsequently the price of livestockproducts coming from intensive systems.

Crop-livestock systems. Crop-livestock systemsin developing countries are constrained by farmsize and lack of access to inputs and services. Theseconstraints affect soil fertility, crop yields, incomegeneration and ultimately livestock productionthrough the limited provision of high-quality feeds.There is also increasing competition for land andassociated opportunity costs.

Pastoral systems. The remoteness and thelimited agricultural potential of pastoral systems inmarginal areas of the developing world createdifficulties for these systems to integrate into theexpanding markets for livestock products. Thisposes a set of different needs related to adaptationof systems to reduce the vulnerability of livestockkeepers and their animals and expanding access tomarkets.

A major driver of change in pastoral systemsover the past decades has been the widespreadpolicy to settle pastoralists and allocate themindividual land rights. This approach and theincreasing encroachment of crop production haveseriously affected the viability of these systems byreducing the mobility of livestock and access to feedresources. Although the negative aspects of thesepolicies are increasingly acknowledged, they willcontinue to shape political processes in manydeveloping countries.

Future implications of structural changes inlivestock production systems

In the industrial and mixed crop-livestock systems,rising demand for livestock products will continueto drive structural changes in these livestockproduction systems and markets. Markettransformation, particularly in urban markets, willlead to the increasing importance of supermarkets,large livestock processors and transformation ofwholesale livestock markets. Much of thistransformation has taken place in the industrializedcountries. This pattern is expected to increase in thedeveloping world with a growing share ofindustrial livestock systems.

Farmers in intensifying crop-livestock systemswill diversify their production into dairy and otherlivestock products even more in response to marketopportunities arising from rising demand forhigh-value foods. Similarly, income growth andurbanization will increase diversification of

consumer diets and the share of livestock productsin diets.

The major changes in livestock markets aregoing to take place in domestic markets. The relativeimportance of domestic markets versus trade in thefuture will reflect past trends in which domesticmarket dynamics were far more important thantrade. For example, in 1980 and 2001, meat exportsand imports were approximately four percent ofoutput and consumption in the developing world.In contrast, the share of domestic urban markets intotal livestock consumption has been increasingover the past 25 years.

The growing importance of domestic urbanmarkets as opposed to international trade implieschanges of actors in domestic livestock industries,particularly in agribusiness in wholesale markets,livestock processing and the retail industry, withmore fresh and processed animal products beingsold through supermarkets.

These structural changes in markets,transformation in urban markets, and in retail anddistribution sectors in the livestock industry willhave profound impacts for the future ofsmallholders and poor livestock keepers incompeting with intensifying industrial andcrop-livestock systems in high potential areas.Empirical evidence from Asia shows thatsmallholder farmers provide up to half of the shareof production in dairy and meat markets.Undercapitalized small producers are likely to besqueezed out of dynamic domestic livestockmarkets. Policy action that supports smallproducers who can be helped to become competitivewill have substantial equity pay-offs. In the absenceof such pro-poor policies in the livestock sector,market changes and the entry of new actors inlivestock processing, distribution chains and theretail sector can marginalize poor people whodepend on livestock for their livelihoods.

High transaction costs and limited access tomarkets will lead to a dramatic decline of share oflivestock production from pastoral systems inmarginal areas. Without significant publicinvestments in infrastructure and services, poorproducers in these areas will become increasinglymarginalized and many will have to leave livestockproduction as a source of income. Livestock willcontinue to be important in traditional pastoralsystems as sources of food and fulfil multiple otheruses, providing traction, transport, skins and hidesfor shelter.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

17


Seré et al.

Implications for livelihoods

In terms of livelihood impacts, the above changeswill lead to changes in the role of animal geneticresources for livelihoods in two divergent ways: inintensive systems livelihoods will have a weak linkto genetic resources, which will play veryspecialized production roles. The major livelihoodimpacts will be through employment. Frequentlythis will be limited direct employment in large-scaleoperations but some increased employment will beexpected along the value chain. Consumerlivelihoods will be affected in terms of impact ofprices and of changed attributes of the animalproducts coming from these intensive systems.Society-wide, there may be negative impacts onlivelihoods of traditional smallholders displacedfrom markets by industrially produced animalproducts. The net effects will depend significantlyon the policy environment and the extent ofsubstitution between animal products produced byindustrial systems and smallholder systems.

In crop–livestock systems, livelihoods will beaffected by the pressures to intensify and specializeproduction. Systems may change from grazing tozero-grazed systems, increasing milk productionwhile reducing animal traction. This will implychanges in the labour patterns and possibly genderdistribution of work and benefits from animalproduction. More intensively kept animals willrequire higher levels of management and externalinputs. Increasing livelihood opportunities can beexpected to develop in these forward and backwardlinkages associated with these commodity chains.

Pastoral systems in developing countries tend tohave very strong linkages to diverse species andbreeds of animals, which allow them to adapt to theexploitation of natural resources with very uniqueattributes and generally very limited alternativeuses. Livelihoods are intimately linked to theanimal genetic resources under these conditions.Risk is a major issue and the management ofmultiple species and multiple outputs is a key wayof coping. Increasing competition for the resources,as well as policy orientations towards settlingpastoralists, significantly affect these peoples’livelihoods.

In the industrialized world, highly specializedpastoral production systems rely heavily on theiranimal genetic resources – normally a narrowgenetic base comprising one or two commercialbreeds of one or two species or a defined crossbredanimal population. In relation to pastoral andsmallholder systems in developing countries, thesesystems do not involve much labour. Therefore, the

livelihoods of fewer people are generally involvedin these production systems.

Implications of the scope and rate ofchanges in livestock production systemsfor animal genetic resources management

The drivers of change and the evolution of thefarming systems that they induce will haveimportant effects on livestock biodiversity and itsuse. This in turn implies that needs andopportunities for human intervention will vary.

In industrial systems, where it is largely possibleto adapt the environment to the needs of theanimals, highly productive commercial breeds andhybrids are going to be the main genetic pillar.Genetic resources are handled by the specializedprivate sector firms and traded internationally.Their interest in hardiness or disease-resistancetraits will be limited unless diseases emerge forwhich no alternative control strategies are availableor policies require important changes in themanagement systems, e.g. free-ranging instead ofcaged laying hens.

In crop-livestock systems, pressure to intensifywill be a major force shaping the production systemand the genetic resources underpinning it.Significant increases in productivity will berequired to meet demand and these will be achievedby simultaneously improving the conditions (feed,health, etc) and adapting the genetic resources.Given the heterogeneous environments, manydifferent breeds will be required. In higher potentialareas with good market access this specializationwill increasingly involve crossbreeding with exoticbreeds. Given the relatively small numbers ofanimals of each breed required in these niches,these genetic materials will not be produced byprivate multinational companies but will requireactive engagement of farmers, public sector andnon-governmental organizations (NGOs). Thesesystems will continue to be an important source ofgenetic diversity and will also demand a range ofsolutions to fit their specific conditions. As scienceimproves its capacity to understand the role ofspecific genes and their interaction withenvironmental factors triggering their expression,the value of local breeds in targeted breedingprogrammes for these systems will increase. Thesesystems will naturally use a diverse genetic baseand will be amenable to engage with in situconservation. Supportive institutionalarrangements will be key to driving such efforts.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


In pastoral systems in developing countries,high levels of diversity can be encountered andtraits of disease-resistance and tolerance of harshenvironments are widely present. These systems arefrequently declining in livestock numbers and inparticular small endemic populations are at risk. Inthese settings, conservation will require publicaction because of the limited resources of thegenerally poor pastoralists. This will be an areawhere NGOs can be expected to play a key role inassisting in in situ conservation.

Given the fragility of institutional arrangementsin many developing country contexts and theirexposure to natural and human-induced crises,there is merit in designing ex situ, in vitroconservation strategies as a back up and long-terminsurance against loss of diversity in the field.These conservation strategies will need to becoordinated at national and regional/internationallevels to be efficient and cost-effective.

Climate change considerations add animportant dimension to the discussion of livestockbiodiversity. Different systems will be affected indifferent and highly uncertain ways, but access togenetic resources could be a critical ingredient formost adaptation responses in the medium to longterm. Table 5 summarizes major trends in livestocksystem evolution and their implications for themanagement of animal genetic resources.

Conclusions and next steps

What immediate steps are possible toimprove animal genetic resourcescharacterization, use and conservation?

Appropriate institutional and policy frameworksare required to improve animal genetic resourcesmanagement and these issues are being addressedat national and intergovernmental levels, in aprocess led by FAO to promote greater internationalcollaboration. Based on an analysis of the currentsituation, the continuing loss of indigenous breedsof farm animals, new developments in science andtechnology, and the strategies suggested for thefuture management of animal genetic resources (assummarized in table 5), there are severalcomplementary actions that can begin to improvethe management of animal genetic resources andmaintain future options in an uncertain world. Thescientific basis that underpins these proposedactions is discussed in more detail in subsequentpapers. Four areas for action to improve the

sustainable use and in situ conservation,characterization and long-term ex situ conservationof animal genetic resources are summarized here,and are addressed in further detail in thecompanion papers:

Sustainable use and in situ conservationof animal genetic resources

“Keep it on the hoof” – Encouraging the continuingsustainable use of traditional breeds and in situconservation of animal genetic resources, by providingmarket-driven incentives, public policy and othersupport to enable livestock keepers to maintain geneticdiversity in their livestock populations.

In this context, sustainable use refers to thecontinuing use of traditional breeds by livestockkeepers, as a result of market-driven incentives. Insitu conservation refers to animal genetic resourcesconservation measures supported by public policyand, on occasion, public investments to supportin situ conservation of traditional breeds bylivestock keepers.

In regard to encouraging the sustainable use ofanimal genetic resources, market-driven incentivesapplicable in developing countries includefacilitating access to markets for livestock productscoming from traditional breeds. This may includeidentifying niche markets for traditional productsand providing infrastructure (such as transport) tohelp livestock keepers to get their products tomarket.

Increasing the productivity of traditional breedsthrough breeding is also an incentive for livestockkeepers to retain these breeds. (The companionpaper discusses the role of breeding in more detail.)These breed improvement strategies could alsomake more use of the widespread crossing that hasoccurred in traditional populations over time, aslivestock keepers seek to improve their breeds.

In regard to encouraging in situ conservation ofparticular breeds, especially in the diversity-richcrop-livestock and pastoral systems in developingcountries, the incentives include having publicpolicies that support the conservation of traditionalbreeds and providing public services (e.g. humanand livestock health services, schools, roads) tosupport communities in livestock producing areas.Such services may encourage people to stay withtheir animals in rural areas rather than migrate tourban areas where more services are available.

In situ conservation makes use of local andindigenous knowledge, which can also be validatedscientifically. For example, some farmers have

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

19


Seré et al.

realized that by crossbreeding part of their herd toan exotic breed, they can make more profit duringthe good times but avoid the risk of losing all theiranimals when conditions are bad. Exotic animalstend to be poorly adapted to harsh conditions andtend to die during droughts, for example. Thusgenetic variability reduces vulnerability to suddenchanges and shocks in the system.

The concept of in situ conservation also extendsto conserving livestock as part of the landscape,within an overall biodiversity conservation strategy,as a long-term global public good.

“Move it or lose it” – Enabling access and safe movementof animal genetic resources within and between countries,

regions and continents.

Maintaining mobility of animal breeds,populations and genes within and betweencountries, regions and continents is one of the keyactions for facilitating the sustainable use andthereby the conservation of animal genetic

resources. Safe movement of animal geneticresources enables their access, use and conservationfor mutual benefit by livestock keepers worldwide.Mobility here refers to facilitating informed access togenetic diversity, based on systematic breedevaluations and analysing the potential usefulnessof various breeds in different environments.

There are benefits and risks in increasing themobility of animal genetic resources. The benefit isthat, in a fast-changing, unpredictable world,mobility of animal genetic resources enablesflexibility in response to changing climate,disasters, civil strife, etc. For example, when civilstrife has occurred in some part of Africa, animalsare moved across borders to avoid their unintendeddeath in conflicts. One risk of increased mobility isthat animals moving to different environments maynot be adapted to their new environment, livestocksystem or social system. There are also animalhealth risks, in terms of the possible spread ofdisease, or by animals not being tolerant to thediseases prevalent in a new environment. For

Table 5. Trends in livestock system evolution and their implications for the management of animal genetic resources.

Livestock production system: description and trends

AnGR – current status in system

AnGR management: future strategy for each livestock production

system Industrial systems (IS) Industrial systems changing quickly, expanding globally. Controlled system, almost “landless” environment, able to adapt environment to genetics. Systems changing to reduce negative environmental impacts, meet market demands and consumer preferences, and address new issues (e.g. animal health and welfare). Changing systems require broader genetic base to address new issues and future shocks.

Breeding by private sector, with narrow genetic base in pigs, poultry, cattle. High-value genetic stock protected by know-how and traded internationally. Limited interest or incentive for private firms in conserving species/breed biodiversity.

Commercial systems will continue to adapt environment to suit genetics (IS prefer to use most productive breeds and manage other production issues by non-genetic means). IS need to be able to respond to future shocks (e.g. identify tolerance to zoonotic diseases such as avian influenza and also identify more disease-resistant breeds able cope with diseases of intensification without antibiotics). Conserving AnGR of main industrial species (pigs, poultry, cattle) to maintain biodiversity is a long term, public (and private) good to enable IS to deal with future options and new shocks .

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○





system Crop-livestock systems (CLS) Diverse systems with broader genetic base, in industrialized and developing countries. CLS dependent on natural resource (NR) base. CLS less in control of environment than IS. Future of CLS affected by market demands, NR availability, climate change, land-use options. CLS changing and intensifying production, especially in developing countries; but rate of change less than for IS. Intensification options – better feed, land, water use, genetic improvement.

Developing and conserving AnGR by use in CLS (in situ). Genetic base more diverse than IS, as animals need to be in balance with system and co-evolve with natural resource base. Sustainable delivery of genetic material occurring in some CLS.

Need to adapt animal genetics to changing environment. CLS need to be able to respond to changing environment, climate change effects, other drivers of change; conserving diverse AnGR in CLS is a public good. Sustainable use of AnGR will help CLS maintain diversity and ability to respond to future drivers of change. Smallholders may require incentives to continue to conserve AnGR in situ with changing, more productive CLS (e.g. foster niche markets to encourage farmers to keep traditional breeds, for short- and long-term value). Mobility of AnGR critical to maintain future options as CLS change in response to global drivers (mobility favours sustainable use of AnGR). Example of moving adapted AnGR to new areas when climate change affects system, such as moving hardier animals to areas more prone to drought. Institutional development to support sustainable AnGR management in CLS (e.g. farmers associations, environmental, food safety and animal health regulations).

(... continued)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

21


Seré et al.




system Pastoral systems (PS) in marginal areas PS comprise rangelands in industrial and developing countries. Systems determined by NR base, usually in marginal environments. Multiple value and uses of animals in traditional PS in developing countries. PS changing more slowly than IS or CLS as least likely to be influenced by global drivers of change. Some PS changing more quickly (e.g. in parts of India where there is competition for pastoral land for alternative uses). PS closely related to traditional (cultural) practices and institutions for the management of natural resources and traditional knowledge.

PS in industrial countries have narrow genetic base. PS in developing countries have diverse AnGR, conserved through sustainable use. Traditional AnGR conservation in situ by livestock keepers, linked with indigenous knowledge of animals and land.

Need to adapt animal genetics to marginal environment. Maintaining diverse AnGR is desirable to reduce vulnerability of livestock keepers. Future need to improve productivity of PS, maintain livelihoods, with less people likely to be living in marginal lands (e.g. animal health interventions). Genetic solutions through hardier animals, able to adapt to harsher environments, with few interventions. Incentives to maintain in situ conservation practices and promote sustainable use (e.g. improve market access through better infrastructure; foster niche markets for traditional animal products). Risk mitigation (e.g. better forecasting and strategies for handling risks in PS, such as droughts). Payments for environmental services may mean alternative land-use options that complement or compete with livestock production; requires adaptation of PS and related AnGR, depending on the nature of the environmental service. Institutional development to support policies and practices for grazing, water and land-use rights.

(... continued)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


transboundary movements, these risks as well asthe benefit should be identified and shared withstakeholders prior to importation, and riskmitigation steps taken before importing semen,embryos or live animals into a country.

Characterizing animal genetic resources

“Match breeds to environments” – Understanding thematch between livestock breeds, populations and genesand the physical, biological and economic landscape.

This “landscape livestock genomics” approach offers themeans to predict the genotypes most appropriate to a

given environment and, in the longer term, to understandthe genetic basis of adaptation of the genotype to the

environment.

In regard to the long-term prospects for thisresearch, the advances in our ability to describe thegenome of an animal in unprecedented detail,coupled with our ability (through spatial analysis)to describe the landscape in which it resides – alandscape description that includes biotic, abiotic,human and market influences – are beginning toprovide an opportunity to probe genome function ina unique way. This is an approach already used tostudy the distribution of particular alleles inlivestock and to probe the human genome fordisease-causing genes. Its potential forunderstanding the fit between livestock genotypeand landscape is significant, and it depends onsophisticated data-management tools. It also offersthe opportunity not only to understand the functionof the genome, but also to predict the genotype mostappropriate to a given environment.

This is a long-term research objective that can belinked with existing data-gathering exercises to addto their value. For example, building in systematicsampling of DNA of livestock breeds incombination with a careful description of thesystems under which each population presentlyfunctions, and georeferencing the data, will addgreatly to our ability to understand and utilizeanimal genetic resources. For example, we can beginto ask “what combination of genotypes is appropriate fora milking cow under a given management regime, undera given range of disease pressures and under a given setof physical stresses?” Knowing this will enhance thevalue of genotypes “in the bank” or “on the hoof” andwill provide the tools we need to identifyintelligently appropriate genotypes for specificagro-ecological niches. (Approaches to

characterizing AnGR are discussed further in thecompanion paper.)

Ex situ conservation of animal geneticresources in gene banks

“Put some in the bank” – New technologies make ex situ,in vitro conservation of animal genetic resources feasible

for critical situations and a way to provide long-terminsurance against future shocks in all livestock

production systems.

Improving technology (e.g. cryopreservation) ismaking long-term, ex situ, in vitro conservation ofsemen and embryos more feasible, affordable andapplicable to a wider range of species. Thechallenge is to decide which animal geneticresources to conserve; how to collect them; where tostore them; when and how to characterize them;and who can access, use and benefit from them inthe future. It is particularly important to collect therich diversity of traditional livestock breeds in crop-livestock and pastoral systems in developingcountries before it is lost forever.

A risk is that ex situ, in vitro gene banks canbecome “stamp collections”, put away in the deepfreeze and never characterized. Another potentialrisk is that this approach may be a disincentive toin situ conservation through sustainable use, wherethe genetic resources are more accessible in theshort to medium term and where not only thegenetic resources but also the traditional knowledgeassociated with them are conserved. In fact, in situand ex situ conservation approaches arecomplementary rather than competing approaches,serving short- and long-term needs. Ex situ, in vitroanimal genetic resources conservation is along-term insurance policy and an important firststep in conserving animal genetic resources forfuture generations. (Further details on conservationapproaches are given in the companion paper.)

Closing remarksSeveral important drivers of change are leading torapid changes in the livestock production sectorthat have implications for the future management ofanimal genetic resources. The multiple values,functions and consequences of livestock productionsystems and their rapid rate of change lead todivergent interests within and between countries.Conversely, the uncertainty about the implications

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

23


Seré et al.

of rapid, multifaceted global change for eachlivestock production system and the resulting futurechanges in the required genetic make-up of theanimals makes collective action to tackleconservation of animal genetic resources along-term, global public good. Developing andconserving animal genetic resources will not bythemselves solve all these problems, but areimportant first steps towards maintaining futureoptions.

Advances in science and technology, in areassuch as reproductive technology, genomics andspatial analysis, as well as progress inconceptualization of global public good productionfor the future management of animal geneticresources, should enable the internationalcommunity to address both the short- and long-termchallenges in innovative ways.

List of referencesFAO. 2004. Working files produced by

Environmental Research Group, Oxford, UK,unpublished.

FAO. 2006. Livestock’s long shadow –environmental issues and options, by H. Steinfeld,P. Gerber, T. Wassenaar, V. Castel, M. Rosales &C. de Haan. Rome.

FAO. 2007. FAOSTAT statistical database.Rome (available at http://faostat.fao.org).

IAASTD. 2007. International Assessment ofAgriculture Science and Technology forDevelopment. World Bank, Washington, DC (inpress).

IMF (International Monetary Fund). 2007.World economic outlook database. Washington,DC.

Reardon, T. & Timmer, P.C. 2005.Transformation of markets for agricultural output indeveloping countries since 1950: how has thinkingchanged? In R. Evenson, P. Pingali & T.P. Schultz,eds. Handbook of agricultural economics, Vol. 3A.Amsterdam, Elsevier.

Reardon, T., Henson, S. & Berdegué, J. 2007.Proactive fast-tracking’ diffusion of supermarkets indeveloping countries: implications for marketinstitutions and trade. Journal of EconomicGeography, 7: 399–432.

United Nations. 2007. Common database.New York, USA.

World Bank. 2006. World developmentindicators. Washington, DC.

Bibliography for further readingDe Fraiture, C., Wichelns, D., Rockstrom, J.,

Kemp-Benedict, E., Eriyagama, N., Gordon, L.,Hanjra, M.A., Hoogenveen, J., Huber-Lee, A. &Karlberg, L. 2007. Looking ahead to 2050: scenariosof alternative investment approaches. Water forfood, water for life. In: A comprehensive assessmentof water in agriculture. London, Earthscan, andColombo, International Water ManagementInstitute, pp. 9–145.

Delgado, C., Rosegrant, M., Steinfeld, H.,Ehui, S. & Courbois, C. 1999. Livestock to 2020: thenext food revolution, Food, Agriculture, and theEnvironment Discussion Paper 28. WashingtonDC., International food Policy Research Institute.

Fisher, P., Hedeler, C., Wolstencroft, K.,Hulme, H., Noyes, H., Kemp, S., Stevens, R.T. &Brass, A. 2007. A systematic strategy for large-scaleanalysis of genotype-phenotype correlations:identification of candidate genes involved inAfrican trypanosomiasis. Nucleic Acids Research(in press).

Gibson, J., Gamage, S., Hanotte, O.,Iñiguez, L., Maillard, J.C., Rischkowsky, B.,Semambo, D. & Toll, J. 2006. Options andstrategies for the conservation of farm animalgenetic resources. Report of an internationalworkshop, 7-10 November 2005, Montpellier,France. Rome, CGIAR System-wide GeneticResources Programme (SGRP)/BioversityInternational, pp. 53.

ILRI (International Livestock ResearchInstitute). 2002. Livestock, a pathway out ofpoverty: ILRI ’s strategy to 2010. Nairobi.

ILRI/FAO. 2006. The future of livestock indeveloping countries to 2030, Workshop Report onFuture of Livestock in Developing Countries,13-15 February 2006. Nairobi, ILRI.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


adfbg

Kierstein, S., Noyes, H., Niessens, J.,Nakamura, Y., Pritchard, C., Gibson, J., Kemp, S. &Brass, A. 2006. Gene expression profiling in amouse model for African trypanosomiasis. GenesImmun., 7: 667–679.

Lockhart, D.J. & Winzeler, E.A. 2000.Genomics, gene expression and DNA arrays.Nature, 405: 827–836.

MacKenzie, A.A. ed. 2005. Biotechnologyapplications in animal heath and production.Scientific and Technical Review, 24(1), April 2005.

Pittroff, W., Cartwright, T.C. & Kothmann,M.M. 2002. Perspectives for livestock ongrazinglands. Archivos Latinoamericanos deProduccion Animal, 10(2): 133–143.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

25


Seré et al.

Mr Ken Laughlin, European Forum of FarmAnimal Breeders (EFFAB), the Netherlands

Firstly I would like to thank FAO for theopportunity to participate in this meeting and paneldiscussion.

This paper recognizes the need for action andaction plans to ensure the retention of biodiversityand not just to conserve the status quo for anotherday.

Further it recognizes the need for market drivenincentives as part of the process for using anddeveloping traditional breeds at local, national andinternational levels where this might be possible.The paper suggests having public policies thatsupport the conservation of traditional breeds and itmay also be valuable to have discussion on theperceived positive and negative opportunities ofsome system of “animal breeder’s rights” in thisregard.

Critically in the paper there is an appreciation ofthe need to focus on understanding the real valuesof these breeds, which can be validatedscientifically following the generation of a sufficientnumber of animals with accurate traitmeasurements. This will be a necessary basis forunderstanding the match between breeds,populations and genes with the physical biologicaland economic landscape. Fortunately this does notrequire high tech science but does require diligenceand attention to detail. There is a vast amount ofavailable experience amongst existing breeders inthis area of trait definition and collection.

There is a clear opportunity to engage with thebreeders in the “industrial system” who have seenmany of the opportunities and pitfalls of the lastcentury of “informed animal breeding” Specificallythere is an opportunity to learn from the experienceand data of poultry breeding which has probablyevolved further than any other species in terms ofbalanced breeding.

Interestingly, the importance of focusing onreducing and halting the loss of indigenous breedsof farm animals is strongly supported by a recentgenomic study of poultry which has concluded thatmodern agricultural practices were not the majorsource of allele loss. The majority of alleles were lostprior to the formation of the current intensiveindustry.

The breeders in industrial systems have furtherexperience of the opportunities and threats ofbreeding stock movements where the OIE systems ofdisease recognition and subsequent movementcontrol are followed.

Finally it is important that during this forum wetry to identify what the real drivers are in reducingbiodiversity and protecting biodiversity. These maynot simply be opposites.

Mr Fernando Madalena, Brazil

I would like to compliment Dr. Seré and co-authorson their comprehensive paper. I have the followingcomments, not so much to the paper itself, but ratherto the general atmosphere related to themanagement of animal genetic resources. It wouldseem that we keep changing our flags over timebefore the goals are reached. In the sixties we talkedabout development, then -before development wasaccomplished in most countries- we started talkingabout sustainable development, and again beforedevelopment, let alone sustainable, wasaccomplished, we now talk about alleviatingpoverty ... of the future generations. Incidentally,poverty should be eliminated, not just alleviated,and the proper utilization of animal geneticresources may contribute some to that end, by thewidespread use of the more economic stocks, breedsor crosses. Less productive resources need thenspecial preservation programmes. Using newgenomic technologies seems particularly attractiveto researchers in developed and developingcountries. However, this comes at a price, because ofpatenting and problems of accessing knowledge.

While in the past emphasis was in theutilization of genetic resources, I have theimpression that we are now focusing too much oncharacterization and conservation, and a lot oftechnical work and funding are dedicated to thesetwo. However, I must confess I fail to grasp the logicof caring only of preserving resources for thepossible use by future generations when we do notuse them properly now to help meeting the so manyurgent human needs. Some “stakeholders” wouldagree with me, as the duck in this quoted cartoon,who is telling its chick “Humans are odd. They saveanimals but let their own kids die of hunger”. I therefore

Panellists’ comments and discussion

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


would like to emphasize the need for a renewed andstronger focus on the utilization of animal geneticresources to meet current human needs and notonly on conservation for potential future needs. Inorder to achieve this, we must go beyondcharacterization to evaluation. Only bycomparatively evaluating the specific features of ourbreeds in given environmental and economiccircumstances, we will be in a position to betterutilize them.

Ms Ilse Köhler-Rollefson, League for PastoralPeoples and Endogenous LivestockDevelopment, Germany/India

I agree with many of the observations andconclusions made in the paper, however I feel theanalysis remains on a superficial level, and thatthere is not enough critical reflection on why wehave gotten where we are and whether the rapiderosion of animal genetic resources that we havewitnessed in the last several decades has been asinevitable as it is depicted here.

The paper zeros in on four drivers of change,i.e. economics and globalization, poverty,environmental concerns, and science andtechnology. This is the way in which the situationmay present itself to scientists and is a correctanalysis on some level. However for anorganization that is working with poor andmarginal livestock keepers, especially pastoralists,on the ground, the scenario looks quite different.

The paper does not mention that the poorlivestock keepers that have stewarded diversityhave been progressively losing their rights, and thatindustrialized systems and the introduction ofexotic breeds have been heavily subsidized. Theexample of how exotic pig breeds in Viet Nam havebeen promoted through a variety of subsidies isnow well known, but it is only one case thathappens to have been scrutinized. In fact, in the lastseveral decades, livestock development indeveloping countries everywhere has beenpractically synonymous with the replacement or“upgrading” of local breeds with exotic ones. Bycontrast, very little endeavour has been made withrespect to endogenous development and takinglocal resources, knowledge, and institutions as astarting point for livestock-related interventions.There have been no efforts to strengthen thelivestock keepers themselves, by assisting them todevelop their own breeds, by supporting themorganizationally, by involving them in policydevelopment, and by integrating them into research

projects. In order to protect industrial production,we are now making it almost impossible fordiversity-conserving livestock keepers to continuekeeping animals.

In the wake of avian influenza, some countrieshave prohibited the keeping of smallholder poultryin the vicinity of industrial holdings. In Germany,there has been a close to 50 percent decrease in thenumber of smallholder poultry because theirkeepers could not comply or cope with regulationsto confine their animals.

For us, the drivers of change are thus theprogressive loss of rights of smallholder livestockkeepers and of pastoralists – such as the right tokeep animals, in order to protect the interests ofindustrial producers, and the loss of customarygrazing rights and access to land.

We are also concerned that farmers areincreasingly losing their breeding function,becoming mere raisers of animals that aredependent on a handful of companies for all theirinputs which have often been produced at the otherend of the world and leave a huge carbon footprint.

Cryoconservation as a backup is ok, but in thefinal analysis it can not be expected to be of muchrelevance, if the pressure on small-scalediversity-conserving livestock keepers continuesand they are forced to, or choose to, give up keepinganimals. Banking on cryoconservation basicallymeans taking the easy way out, and is once again away of strengthening scientists and governmentbureaucracies, rather than livestock keepers.

We must be clear that even the best science willnot be able to move things in a better direction andto save diversity – it can only play a supportingrole. The only real care takers of animal geneticresources are farmers and pastoralists. If we want tosave animal genetic resources, then we need to savethese livestock keepers first, by creating appropriatepolicies that strengthen them and that reward themfor their crucial role in sustaining diversity. Suchpolicies need to be combined with the monitoringand regulation of industrial production systems.Instead of subsidizing them and providing themwith unfair advantages, these systems should betaxed.

My organization, the League for PastoralPeoples will continue to contribute to theimplementation of the Global Plan of Action on twolevels:• Globally and nationally, we will support

pastoralist and small-scale farming communitiesto advocate for their rights and to achieverecognition of their role in conserving breedsand as custodians of diversity.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

27


Seré et al.

• Equally important, we will continue to work onthe ground through our partners in theLIFE-Network to help pastoralists and smallfarmers to get organized and develop the skillsand knowledge that they will need to remaincompetitive in a globalized economy.

Summary of plenary discussionThe meeting was then opened for generaldiscussion and interventions from the floor. Issuesraised during this discussion included:• The importance of non-market livestock

functions and the question of their inclusion ineconomic statistics.

• The need to assess consumer demographics andtrends with respect to their effects on animalgenetic resources.

• The importance of networking andcapacity-building.

• The impact of natural disasters, wars andunrest, and global warming on animal geneticresources.

• The important role of small-scale production.• The potential conflict between maintaining

genetic diversity and meeting increased demandfor animal products in developing countries.

·• The nature of the key issues that need to beaddressed with respect to the rights of livestockkeepers and communities, and differencescompared to the plant sector.

• The important contribution of “minor” species(e.g. guinea pigs, snakes, insects).

• The influence of religious and cultural factors onthe development of animal genetic resources.

• The need to consider possible trade-distortingeffects of providing subsidies to livestockkeepers.The authors’ responses and concluding remarks

included the following points:

• Maintaining animal genetic resources as anintegral part of production systems offersopportunities to address conservation, and foodand livelihood security in a complementary way.

• Animal genetic resources should be matched tothe production environment. Exotic breeds andcross-breeding programmes offer opportunitiesto meet increased demand and supportlivelihoods where conditions are appropriate.However, in some production systems, theproductivity of local breeds may be as good as,or better than, potential replacements if alloutputs and inputs are taken intoconsideration – non-market roles of livestock,including insurance and financing functions areimportant here, but are often receive insufficientattention from researchers and policy-makers.

·• There is a need to identify institutionalarrangements that can offer smallholders theopportunity to successfully market theirproducts. The roles of “minor” species alsorequire greater research attention as these areoften important to livelihood and food security.

• Addressing all these issues, and providing thebasis for informed decision-making, is achallenge to the scientific community - includingthe social sciences.

• With respect to the rights of farmers andcommunities, it is important to recognize thatissues are not identical to those in the plantsector. In the case of livestock, the replacement oflocal breeds with exotic animal genetic resourcesrather than the expropriation of local geneticresources by outside interests is a key issue,although the latter also needs to be addressed.An equitable framework for access and benefitsharing is needed.

• In the case of acute threats such as wars,pre-emptive actions, for example to ensure thatappropriate animal genetic resources areavailable for restocking programmes, are needed.

dynamics of livestock production systems, drivers of ...conservation of animal genetic resources a...

Documents