W I N T E R 2013 Policy Implications from page 14
15 E n v i r o n m e n t a l a n d E n e r g y LA W P E R S P E C TIV E S
concerns about leakage, since the tax would presumably be imposed on both domestic and imported products. Unfortunately, the political feasibility of such a proposal is questionable, especially in countries where consumers are already accustomed to purchasing large quantities of inexpensive meat and dairy products. Before attempting to limit consumption through taxes or mandates, it may be necessary to focus on shifting the values and perceptions of consumers. One approach would be to educate consumers about the environmental impacts of livestock products—however, there is evidence that even educated consumers are unlikely to change their eating habits in response to environmental concerns.20 It may be more effective to educate people about the health benefits of consuming less meat
and dairy, since people tend to respond more strongly to concerns about their personal well-being.21 There is also evidence that consumers tend to adopt more sustainable behaviors once those behaviors are perceived as social norms or moral obligations.22 Law and policy can play a critical role in the development of such norms, to the extent that they promote awareness of social problems and dictate socially acceptable behavior. Non-governmental efforts, including information campaigns and outreach programs, can also influence individual perceptions of norms and obligations.
Conclusion Given the magnitude of livestock’s current environmental impacts,
and projected growth in global livestock production, there is an “urgent need to develop suitable institutional and policy frameworks at local, national, and international levels.”23 Such frameworks should encourage efficiency, mitigation, and better land management practices, but must also promote sustainable levels of production and consumption. An important first step will be to ensure that emissions reductions from the livestock sector qualify for credit under voluntary and mandatory emissions trading schemes, as this will encourage livestock keepers to improve their efficiency and reduce emissions. However, adequately addressing the consumption problem may require the adoption of more targeted policies, such as a carbon tax on livestock products.
Notes 1 FAO, World Livestock 2011: Livestock in Food Security (2011) at 14. 2
Id. at 79.
3
Sanderine Nonhebel and Thomas Kastner, “Changing Demand for Food, Livestock Feed and Biofuels in the Past and in the Near Future,” 3 Livestock Science 139 (2011). 4 Philip K. Thornton, “Livestock Production: Recent Trends, Future Prospects,” 2853 Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society 365 (2010). 5 FAO, Livestock’s Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options (2006). 6 Anthony J. McMichael, John W. Powles, Colin D. Butler, Richardo Uauy, “Food, Livestock Production, Energy, Climate Change, and Health,” 5 Energy and Health 1253 (2007). 7
FAO (2006), supra note 5.
8
Mario Herrero et al., “Livestock and Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The Importance of Getting the Numbers Right,” 166–167 Animal Feed Science and Technology 779 (2011). 9 10
FAO (2006), supra note 5, at 86.
Robert Goodland and Jeff Anhang, Livestock And Climate Change: What if
the Key Actors in Climate Change are Cows, Pigs, and Chickens? Worldwatch Institute (2009). 11
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Frequent Asked Questions,” www.epa.gov/rlep/faq.html.
12 U.S. EPA, “AgStar: An EPA Partnership Program,” www.epa.gov/agstar/. 13
Id.
14
Australian Government, Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, “Carbon Farming Initiative,” www.climatechange.gov.au/cfi.
15
FAO, “Livestock Keepers: Guardians of Biodiversity,” Animal Production and Health Paper No. 167 (2011).
16
See, e.g., McMichael et al. (2007), supra note 6; Nathan Pelletier and Peter Tyedmers, “Forecasting Potential Global Environmental Costs of Livestock Production 2000–2050,” 107 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 18371 (2010).
17
Siwa Msangi and Mark W. Rosegrant, “Feeding the Future’s Changing Diets: Implications for Agriculture Markets, Nutrition, and Policy,” Paper No. 3, 2020 Conference: Leveraging Agriculture for Improving Nutrition and Health, February 10–12, 2011; New Delhi, India.
18
Alla A. Golub et al., “Global Climate Policy Impacts On Livestock, Land Use, Livelihoods, And Food Security,”1 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 10.1073 (2012).
19 Robert Goodland, “Environmental Sustainability in Agriculture: Diet Matters,” 23 Ecological Economics 189 (1997); Stefan Wirsenius and Fredrik Hedenus, “Policy Strategies for a Sustainable Food System: Options for Protecting the Climate,” The Meat Crisis: Developing More Sustainable Production and Consumption (Joyce D’Silva and John Webster, eds., 2010). 20 Matthew Cole et al., “Animal Foods and Climate Change: Shadowing Eating Practices,” 33 International Journal of Consumer Studies 162 (2009). 21 Andrew Joyce et al., “Reducing the Environmental Impact of Dietary Choice: Perspecticves from a Behavioral and Social Change Approach,” 2012 Journal of Environmental and Public Health, Article ID 978672 (2012). 22 Christie Manning, “The Psychology of Sustainable Behavior,” Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Document No. p-ee1- 01(2009). 23
FAO (2006), supra note 5, at xxiv. n
15