Substituting 50% of meat and milk products with plant-based alternatives by 2050 has the potential to decrease agriculture and land use-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 31%, preventing the degradation of forests and natural land, according to recent research.
Published in Nature Communications, the study indicates that replacing meat and milk with plant-based alternatives could also offer climate and biodiversity benefits by reforesting areas previously used for livestock production.
The restored land could potentially fulfil up to 25% of the global land restoration requirements outlined in Target 2 of the Kunming Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework by 2030.
The independent research, conducted by IIASA in collaboration with the Alliance of Bioversity and CIAT, as well as USAID, involved input from Impossible Foods for data relevance.
‘Novel alternatives’
Lead author Marta Kozicka, a researcher in the IIASA Biodiversity and Natural Resources Programme, emphasised the importance of understanding the impacts of dietary shifts on reducing GHG emissions and improving biodiversity.
“A global introduction of all novel alternatives has additional benefits compared to the scenarios with limited product or geographical scope, but regional substitution of specific products may be highly effective, especially if combined with regional strategies and purposeful selection of recipes,” she said.
The study developed scenarios of dietary changes using plant-based recipes for beef, pork, chicken, and milk, ensuring nutritional equivalence to animal-derived products.
A 50% substitution scenario could significantly reduce the environmental impact of food systems by 2050, including a 12% decline in global agricultural area compared to 2020 and a 10% decrease in water use.
Biodiversity-focused afforestation
To fully benefit from dietary shifts, the study suggests restoring unused agricultural land through biodiversity-focused afforestation. In the 50% substitution scenario, the advantages of reduced land-use emissions could double with afforestation.
The authors also acknowledge that transitions to a more plant-based society will require policy interventions, as well as technology adoption.
“While the analysed dietary shifts serve as a powerful enabler for reaching climate and biodiversity goals, they must be accompanied by targeted production side policies to deliver their full potential,” added IIASA Biodiversity and Natural Resources Program Director Petr Havlík, who coordinated the study.
“Otherwise, these benefits will be partly lost due to production extensification and resulting GHG and land-use efficiency losses.”
