Agricultural policy reform in South Africa

Addressing animal welfare within a just, agroecological food systems transition

Researched and Written by Linzi Lewis

Copyedited by Hendrien Swanepoel

Design and Layout by Cherize Swanepoel

April 2025

Cape Town, South Africa

Suggested Citation Lewis L., Agricultural policy reform in South Africa. Addressing animal welfare within a just, agrocecological food systems transition, Cape Town, April 2025

Commissioned by:

Humane World for Animals South Africa—formerly called Humane Society International—has been a leader of the animal protection movement, tackling the root causes of animal cruelty and suffering to drive permanent change and create a better world for all animals around the globe.

www.humaneworld.org/en

Food

Wirestock/Freepik

Abbreviations

AAMP

ADPs

AIA

APAP

CAADP

COP

CSA

DALRRD

FAO

GHG

HLPE

HPAI

MTSF

NCD

NFNSP

NR-NCDs

UNFCCC

UNFSS

SDGs

Agriculture and Agroprocessing Master Plan

Animal-derived products

Animal Improvement Act

Agricultural Policy Action Plan

Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme

Conference of the Parties

Climate-smart agriculture

Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development

Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations

Greenhouse gas

High-Level Panel of Experts

Highly pathogenic avian influenza

Medium-Term Strategic Framework

Non-communicable disease

National Food and Nutritional Security Plan

Nutrition-related non-communicable diseases

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

United Nations Food Systems Summit

Sustainable development goals

Rampant environmental and social harms, linked to increased industrialisation, commercialisation and concentration of global food systems, have led to a call for the transformation of agricultural and food systems to become more socially just and ecologically sound. Despite mounting evidence of their extensive and excessive social and environmental costs, industrial agricultural systems in general, and industrial animal farming in particular, continue to enjoy consistent and increasing support in South Africa. These systems are deemed necessary to ensure food security and create jobs, and to serve an insatiable demand for animal-derived products embedded in a highly inequitable, inefficient and malnourishing food system.

This paper provides background to animal production and consumption patterns in South Africa and examines the related national policy and regulatory landscape as entry points towards situating animal welfare within the discourse on food systems transitions in the country. Globally, there are calls to shift away from industrial agricultural and food systems towards those built on agroecological principles and territorial food networks, based on biodiversity and food sovereignty. Against this backdrop, there is a need to deepen the discussion around animal agriculture within agroecological and food systems transitions, and how animal welfare can contribute and guide ethics and justice considerations in food systems transformation.

Executive summary

There is overwhelming evidence pointing to the disastrous impacts of global industrial animal production systems, as well as associated input supply and value chains. This includes these systems’ role in driving deforestation, land degradation, habitat destruction, widespread and unmitigated pollution, zoonotic disease, antimicrobial resistance, and nutrition and diet-related disease. Despite this, industrial animal production continues to expand as part of a greater narrative that industrial agriculture is required to feed a growing global population. To meet global climate and biodiversity targets, addressing the unsustainable and unjust nature of industrial animal production systems and their associated input supply and value chains is vital. This also implies curbing the consumption of animal-derived products (ADPs) to stay within planetary boundaries. The role of agricultural and food systems in driving our intersecting environmental and health crises has led many experts to call for a just agroecological transition in agricultural and food systems. Nevertheless, South Africa continues to pursue export-oriented, industrial animal agriculture, driving further commodification and concentration of this sector, with poor nutritional, environmental and socioeconomic outcomes.

Animal agriculture is South Africa’s largest agricultural sector, accounting for over 40% of the total value of agricultural output and occupying roughly 80% of available agricultural land. The animal agricultural sector comprises extensive, semi-intensive and intensive production systems. Due to historic land-access inequalities, commercial animal agriculture dominates, with the bulk of production arising from integrated companies (most notably in broiler production) with capital- and resource-intensive operations (Queenan et al., 2020). Animal agriculture also plays a central part in the livelihoods of around a million communal and smallholder farmers (Stats SA, 2022).

More than 99% of all eggs and 60% of pork on the South African market is produced from hens and sows that are factory-farmed (Booysens, 2013). Some 75% of all beef in South Africa is produced in feedlots, resulting in widespread land degradation, air and water pollution, and soil contamination, thereby reducing the future viability of that land (Four Paws, no date). According to the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development (DALRRD)1 (2021b), approximately 40% of total maize produced in the country is used for animal feed. Of the yellow maize produced, 87,7% is used for animal feed.

Traditional animal rearing systems, on the other hand, take place mostly on communal land, allowing animals to graze and forage for food, spending most of their lives outside (Oduniyi et al., 2

1 Following the 2024 general elections, the portfolio of the DALRRD was split into Agriculture – with a separate departmental structure and ministry attached to it – and Land Reform and Rural Development – also with its own structure and ministry. Further references to DALRRD in this document should be understood to mean the Agriculture portfolio of the Department, unless stated otherwise.

This is commonly known as pasture-fed or extensive production. Whilst in industrialised countries or sectors, pasture-based systems are a result of consumer-driven demand for “naturally” fed animals, in developing countries, they are usually associated with a lack of resources for intensification (Conner et al., 2009). The ecological, health and welfare implications of varying animal rearing approaches differ significantly.

Small-scale animal producers using traditional methods of animal husbandry are mostly deemed unproductive in agricultural policy; yet farmers in communal areas of South Africa are considered to account for 40% of the national cattle herd (Meissner et al., 2013; Malusi et al., 2021). Therefore, small-scale animal husbandry plays an important role in, inter alia, local food security, traditional knowledge systems and rural livelihoods. Animal-keeping among smallholders and subsistence farmers is primarily for financial and social capital as well as for cultural purposes, and therefore, represents multiple functions beyond consumptive and commodity values (Mahlobo, 2016; Malatji et al., 2016).

Current South African policies, plans and laws fail to adequately consider and incorporate animal wellbeing into their vision. Policies tend to regard animals merely as commodities to produce, trade and consume, with little attention given to the conditions in which animals are kept, transported and slaughtered. Where welfare is mentioned, this is primarily in the interest of production and disease prevention. Yet intensive animal production creates persistent challenges in controlling animal disease. Confining large numbers of genetically uniform animals in unsanitary and stressful conditions provides an ideal breeding ground for both viral and bacterial diseases, allowing their incubation, transmission and amplification (Stevenson, 2023). This calls for the reform of animal agricultural practices, in particular by avoiding high stocking densities and large group sizes, minimising stress by ensuring that animals can still perform their natural behaviours, and avoiding animal selection for excessive production levels, as these practices are associated with an increased risk of immunological problems and pathologies (Stevenson, 2023). The current self-regulation of industries using animals in South Africa impedes progress for animal welfare in the sector. Practices that are illegal in many countries continue in South Africa, including farrowing crates for sows, and cages for broiler chickens and egg-laying hens (World Animal Protection, 2020).

Overall, South African policies are oriented towards making so-called “underutilised land” productive by increasing the industrialisation and commercialisation of grain, horticulture and particularly also animal agricultural production (pigs, poultry, goats, sheep and cattle), along with developing the aquaculture sector. The absolute promotion of industrial animal production also implies increasing industrial grain crop production to meet animal feed needs. The focus on the industrialisation of agricultural practices limits the discourse around just transitions to one about job creation and integrating smallholders into unequal, unsustainable and unethical production and supply chains. These policy imperatives have remained unchanged over the past three decades of democracy, and to date, have been largely unsuccessful, with food insecurity and hunger persistently on the rise. While South Africa is considered a food-secure country (in that it produces enough food to feed its population), current figures indicate that over 60% of South Africans are food-insecure (Simelane et al., 2023).

Industrial animal agriculture, including large-scale, commercial producers or farmers, auctioneers, marketing agents, feedlots or factory farms, abattoirs, wholesalers, retailers, and policies that uphold and entrench large-scale agrifood business, aims to offer

consumers low-cost protein at the till. This drives the consumption, and indeed the overconsumption, of ADPs. While meat has traditionally formed a part of the South African diet, similar to elsewhere in sub-Saharan Africa, animal-keeping among smallholders and subsistence farmers in South Africa serves as financial and social capital as well as for other cultural purposes (Mahlobo, 2016; Malatji et al., 2016). Today, South Africa has the highest meat consumption in Africa. The nutrition transition, i.e. shifting dietary patterns from traditional diets rich in vegetables, cereals and complex carbohydrates and fibre to more Westernised diets with a notably higher proportion of sugars, fats and industrially produced, animal-sourced foods, is very much a reality in South Africa. This is directly linked to the increasing occurrence and persistence of what is known as the triple burden of malnutrition – i.e. overnutrition, undernutrition and malnutrition – and the rising incidence of nutrition-related non-communicable diseases (NCDs).

It is well established that industrial agricultural production, and industrial animal agriculture, in particular, is a major contributor to current global socioecological crises, with widespread and unaccounted-for social and environmental costs across production and supply chains. Beyond being a significant driver of climate change, the animal agriculture sector is one of the leading drivers of land degradation, water and soil pollution, biodiversity loss, overfishing, coastal area sedimentation, wildlife conflicts, and facilitates the spread of invasive alien species. It is therefore vital to get the full picture of the social and environmental costs associated with industrial animal agricultural systems in South Africa, as part of local and global input supply and value chains. This would include unpacking the link between broader sustainability goals and animal welfare. Reforms to agricultural policy, farmer support and extension programmes are necessary, as these are currently oriented towards increased intensification, particularly of smaller-scale animal farming in communal areas.

Globally, there are calls to shift away from industrial agricultural and food systems towards those built on agroecological principles and territorial food networks, based on biodiversity and food sovereignty. Current discussions on agricultural and food systems transitions, where animal agriculture is discussed, is primarily in relation to their instrumental role in closing cycles and in creating more integrated or circular production systems (Meijboom et al., 2023). Yet animal agriculture touches on all of the High-Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition’s (HLPE) 13 agroecological principles across both production and social equity aspects (HLPE, 2019), with principle 4, “Ensure animal health and welfare”, specifically addressing this elephant in the room. As such, it is possible, and indeed necessary, to build on these intersections and explore how animal wellbeing and welfare can be firmly integrated across zones of production, processing and consumption to effectively advocate for just transitions in agricultural and food systems. Animal welfare and its linkage to justice and ethics within food systems transitions is a useful lens through which to articulate and probe into the future of food production and consumption.

Freepik/Freepik

Animal welfare needs to be integrated into agricultural and food policies and into just agroecological transitions, by building on traditional grazing protocols and regenerative rangeland practices, and developing locally relevant, cost-effective infrastructure. This requires a focus on small-scale integrated agricultural systems that adequately consider the health, welfare and wellbeing of animals within biodiverse agroecological production systems. The shifting of production methods will demand working closely with the DALRRD to develop welfare standards for the diverse range of cattle, poultry and fish sectors, differentiating between smallholder and industrial systems. These standards would bolster innovative local production to meet nutritional needs, and work to integrate animal welfare into various production practices.

Addressing farm animal welfare is not only an ethical imperative, but also a key element of sustainable food production that has environmental, societal and economic benefits (Sardar et al., 2023; Hashem et al., 2020; Christensen et al., 2019). A just transition in agricultural and food systems centres on a radical move away from industrialised production with large agribusinesses at the helm. Such a transition recognises the role of culturally appropriate meat consumption and the economic, social, nutritional and cultural significance of traditional animal husbandry and pastoralist systems in African contexts and communities. Yet, it must be accompanied by policy responses to shifting dietary patterns and associated NCDs, linked in part to rising consumption of ADPs, with a focus on local markets, food safety, access and affordability, food environments, and dietary diversity. It must therefore be coupled with the necessary, adequate regulations to reduce the reliance on ADPs, and ensure the accessibility and affordability of nutrient-dense foods and plant-rich diets.

Aleksandarlittlewolf/Freepik

Introduction: Problem statement

Animal agriculture in South Africa

The agricultural landscape in South Africa is highly dualistic, with a small and concentrated commercial farming sector, and a large small-scale agricultural sector. This concentration spans all aspects of the food chain, from inputs to distribution and retail. The animal agricultural sector is no exception. Approximately 80% of South Africa’s land is used for agriculture, of which animal agriculture takes up four fifths (DALRRD, 2022; Grobler, 2012). Animal farming is South Africa’s largest agricultural sector, accounting for over 40% of the total value of agricultural output and occupying roughly 80% of available agricultural land.

The commercial animal agriculture industry is one of the largest employers in the agricultural and agroprocessing sectors. Overall, 162 116 people were estimated to be employed in commercial animal production in 2017, and another 185 863 in mixed farming (crops and animal) (Stats SA, 2020). An estimated 100 000 people are employed on red-meat farms, the bulk of them beef (Bennie et al., 2024). The beef industry makes the second-largest contribution to the gross value of production in agriculture and accounted for more than 12% between 2018 and 2020 (BFAP, 2021). Animal agriculture also plays a significant part in the livelihoods of around a million communal and smallholder farmers (Stats SA, 2022), some even estimate this number to be as high as 3 million (DALRRD, 2021a).

According to DALRRD (2022), the total number of cattle in South Africa at the end of August 2021 were estimated at 12,10 million, comprising various international dairy and beef cattle breeds in addition to indigenous breeds such as the Afrikaner and the Nguni. Beef cattle constitute approximately 80% of the total number of cattle, while dairy cattle make up the remaining 20%. Holstein-Friesian, Jersey, Guernsey and Ayrshire are the four major dairy breeds found in the country. Cattle are found throughout the country, but mainly in the

Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, the Free State and North West. Herd sizes vary according to cattle type, ranging between less than 50 to 300 for dairy cattle, while beef cattle herds range from fairly small (less than 20 head of cattle) to large farms and feedlots (more than 4 000). The total number of sheep in South Africa at the end of August 2021 were estimated at 21,3 million. For August 2021, the largest numbers of sheep were estimated to be in the Eastern Cape (30%), Northern Cape (24%), Free State (20%) and Western Cape (12%). The number of goats appears to have decreased from 5,170 million in August 2020 to 5,118 million in August 2021. Goats are found mainly in the Eastern Cape, Limpopo, KwaZulu-Natal and North West. The indigenous, meat-producing Boer goat accounts for about 40% of all goats in South Africa. Pigs are found predominantly in Limpopo, North West, Gauteng and the Western Cape. The country has approximately 400 commercial pork producers and 19 stud breeders. Pig numbers are said to have decreased by 2,13% from 1,357 million in August 2020 to 1,328 million in August 2021. The poultry industry consists of day-old chicks, broilers and eggs. The broiler industry dominates the South African agricultural sector as the main supplier of animal protein. During the first six months of 2021, an average of 24 million broilers were slaughtered per week.

More than 99% of all eggs and 60% of pork on the South African market is produced from hens and sows that are factory-farmed (Booysens, 2013). Approximately 75% of all beef in South Africa is produced in feedlots, resulting in widespread land degradation, air and water pollution, and soil contamination, thereby reducing the future viability of that land (Four Paws, no date). According to DALRRD (2021b), approximately 40% of total maize produced in the country is used for animal feed. The animal feed industry uses primarily yellow maize for animal feed manufacturing. Of the yellow maize produced, 87,7% is used for animal feeds.

The animal agricultural sector comprises extensive, semi-intensive and intensive production systems. Due to historic land-access inequalities, commercial animal agriculture dominates, with the bulk of production arising from integrated companies (most notably in broiler production) that use capital-intensive, sophisticated systems to maximise efficiencies (Queenan et al., 2020). Traditional animal rearing systems, on the other hand, take place mostly on communal land, allowing animals to graze and forage for food and spend most of their lives outside (Oduniyi et al., 2020). This is commonly known as pasture-fed or extensive production. In industrialised countries or sectors, pasture-based systems are a result of consumer-driven demand for “naturally” fed animals; in developing countries, however, they are usually associated with a lack of resources for intensification (Conner et al., 2009).² Nevertheless, varying production practices and the lack of any specific grassland or grazing management protocols in South Africa often contribute to land degradation (Greenberg and Drimie, 2022).

Small-scale animal producers who use traditional methods of animal husbandry are mostly deemed unproductive in agricultural policy; yet farmers in communal areas of South Africa account for 40% of the national cattle herd (Meissner et al., 2013; Malusi et al.,2021:1). Therefore, small-scale animal husbandry plays an important part in, inter alia, local food security, traditional knowledge systems and rural livelihoods. Animal-keeping among smallholders and subsistence farmers is primarily for financial and social capital as well as for cultural purposes, and therefore, represents multiple functions beyond consumptive and commodity values (Mahlobo, 2016; Malatji et al., 2016). For instance, animals are often used in ceremonies, dowry payment rituals, and as an indicator of social status (Mbatha, 2021; Greenberg and Drimie, 2022).

2 In South Africa, the commercial beef sector relies on extensively raised cattle to be sent to feedlots to be slaughtered, and therefore, production systems are not exclusive as such, but rather interact (Bennie, 2024, personal communication).

The consumption of animal-derived food in South Africa

Animal production systems have expanded and changed dramatically over recent decades, with a major impact on food systems in all regions (IPES-Food, 2022). Globally, per capita consumption of meat and fish nearly doubled between 1961 and 2015, driven primarily by the Global North and, more recently, by increased consumption in the Global South. The animal agriculture sector now represents 40–50% of the global agricultural gross domestic product and is increasingly characterised by vast multinational firms with huge market share and political influence. A limited number of industrial meat and dairy companies dominate the animal food sectors globally. In Africa, food systems are changing rapidly as a result of factors such as trade liberalisation, urbanisation, employment, income growth, and industrialisation of farming and retail sectors (Wanyama et al., 2019; Reardon et al., 2021).

Animal production offers a significant food source and livelihood for many people across the world. It contributes to the livelihoods of 1,7 billion smallholder farmers in the Global South and has a crucial economic function for approximately 60% of rural households in developing countries (IPES-Food, 2022). Fisheries and aquaculture provide livelihoods for nearly 60 million people worldwide, and more than 3 billion people rely on fish as their primary source of protein (IPES-Food, 2022). For the majority of people around the world, however, diets remain primarily based on pulses, grains and other plant-based foods, with minimal consumption of ADPs. This is also the case in Africa, who still consumes more vegetables, legumes and wholegrains than much of the rest of the world. Yet dietary patterns here are clearly shifting from traditional diets rich in vegetables, cereals and complex carbohydrates and fibre to more Westernised diets with a notably higher proportion of sugars, fats and industrially produced, animal-sourced foods – a trend commonly known as the “nutrition transition” (Mockshell and Ritter, 2023; Popkin, 2001; Popkin and Gordon-Larsen, 2004; Steyn & Mchiza, 2014; Holmes et al., 2018).

Shifting dietary patterns, in particular those linked to the nutrition transition, are a major cause of increasing nutrition-related NCDs. While meat has traditionally formed a part of the South African diet, similar to elsewhere in sub-Saharan Africa, animal-keeping among smallholders and subsistence farmers in South Africa is primarily for financial and social capital as well as for cultural purposes (Mahlobo, 2016; Malatji et al., 2016). Therefore, the considerable change in the quantity and type of meat consumed is disconnected from the traditional valuing of animals and has implications for human health. The nutrition transition is very much a reality in South Africa, with the triple burden of malnutrition – overnutrition, undernutrition and malnutrition – persistently on the rise. While adult obesity rates are rising to over 30%, stunting in children below the age of 5 remains unresolved at 27%, with micronutrient deficiencies being especially high among vulnerable groups (Kolahdooz et al. 2013; NDoH et al., 2019).

Per capita meat consumption in Africa rose from 15,65 kg in 2000 to 19,01 kg as of 2017 (21,5%) (Rich et al., 2022). In South Africa, the consumption of ADPs increased by a significant 39% between 1985 and 2015 (Rich et al., 2022). South Africa has the highest per capita meat consumption on the continent at over 60 kg per year (Rich et al., 2022), with variations across demographic groups, notably income. South Africans consume approximately 2,9 million tons of beef, pork and poultry per annum (Ndlela and Murcott, 2021). Between 1985 and 2015, the per capita consumption of poultry meat and eggs increased by 250% and 83% respectively, while pig and mutton consumption each increased by 40% (Queenan et al., 2020). Poultry meat has shown the greatest rise of all animal-based food consumption over the past 20 years (DSEA, 2016, while beef consumption has remained high at over 18 kg per capita (DALRRD, 2021c).

Increased ADP consumption is the result of a number of factors, including increased urbanisation, shifting dietary patterns, rising incomes, the development and concentration of agricultural and retail sectors, and linear and limited policy responses to complex socioeconomic issues. Supermarkets dominate food retail and extend widely into rural areas, which changes rural food environments and leads to greater consumption of purchased, rather than self-produced, food (Queenan et al., 2020). Supermarkets and fast-food companies typically employ aggressive, price-focused and aspirational lifestyle marketing, which affects so-called food choice. To a large extent, South Africans’ overconsumption of, and overreliance on, ADPs has been driven by the increased accessibility and artificial affordability of these products.

Social and environmental costs and externalities of industrial animal agriculture

Industrial agriculture and its expansion significantly drive biodiversity decline and loss, ecosystem collapse, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other forms of pollution, as well as global health and nutrition crises (IPBES, 2019). Industrial animal agriculture, in particular, is a major contributor to current socioecological crises, with widespread and unaccounted-for social and environmental costs across production and supply chains. Beyond being a significant driver of climate change, animal agriculture is one of the leading drivers of land degradation, water and soil pollution, biodiversity loss, overfishing, coastal area sedimentation and wildlife conflicts, and facilitates the spread of invasive alien species. The increasing demand for pastureland and monocultures to produce animal-sourced foods has an impact on biodiversity and climate change through extensive changes in land cover. Moreover, industrial animal agricultural systems drive zoonotic disease, antimicrobial resistance, and nutrition-related and diet-related disease.

The current socioecological and existential crises of biodiversity decline, climate change, pollution and health – driven by, among others, industrial and corporate concentration in the agrifood system – threaten the future of food production globally, continentally and in South Africa. Industrial animal production and the rapid rise in the consumption of ADPs in general (and ultraprocessed/ reconstituted animal products in particular)³ play a central role in driving these crises (African Centre for Biodiversity, 2024).

3 Studies in Brazil (Da Silva et al., 2021), China (Song et al., 2015), India (Athare et al., 2020) and Australia (Hadjikakou, 2017) found that ultraprocessed meat and dairy products have the highest GHG emissions and largest water and ecological footprints of all ultraprocessed foods (Anastasiou et al., 2022).

Jay Galvin/Flickr

Large-scale, commercial producers or farmers, auctioneers, marketing agents, feedlots or factory farms, abattoirs, wholesalers, retailers, and policies that uphold and entrench large-scale agrifood business, are main contributors to various global socioecological harms (Labuschagne et al., 2011). Industrial animal agricultural production is aimed at offering consumers low-cost protein at the till; therefore, it drives the consumption, and indeed the overconsumption, of animal-based products, with rampant and unaccounted-for social and environmental costs. In wealthy and emerging countries, overconsumption of meat and dairy is associated with rising rates of obesity and chronic disease, while the world’s poorest populations are unable to access adequate food, with up to 811 million people said to have been undernourished in 2021 (IPES-Food, 2022).

Animal agriculture, including meat, aquaculture, eggs and dairy farming, accounts for roughly 83% of the world’s farmland, but provides only 18% of the calories and 37% of proteins consumed (Poore and Nemecek, 2018).

Despite overwhelming and growing evidence of the health and environmental costs associated with industrial agricultural and food systems, agricultural and food policies maintain that industrial agriculture in general, and industrial animal production in particular, is necessary for global food security. Yet studies show that smallholder farms still produce over 70% of the world’s food off only 20% of the world’s arable land and are more productive than what the dominant narrative suggests, indicating that factory farming is, in fact, not necessary to feed the world’s growing population (Grain, 2014; Harvey et al., 2014; Herrero et al., 2013). Smallholder farmers continue to be the most productive and efficient. This is despite the stream of myths to the contrary, and in the face of their dwindling numbers due to smallholders, herders and indigenous peoples being moved off their land through large-scale agribusiness projects, in particular across the African continent (Grain, 2014).

Animal agriculture, including animal feed, is responsible for around 14,5% of total GHG emissions and nearly 60% of food systems emissions (Gerber et al., 2013).⁴ Beef production accounts for 41% of the sector’s emissions and also makes the largest contribution (33%) to the global water footprint of farm animal production (Mekonnen and Hoekstra, 2010). ⁵ Emissions associated with enteric fermentation and manure are direct sources of GHGs, while the production and transport of feed, including the fossil fuels used in manufacturing chemical fertilisers, as well as changes in land use, such as the conversion of forests to pasture and crop land, contribute indirectly (Hristov et al., 2013). About 44% of the emissions generated by animals are methane,⁶ which is released during enteric fermentation (eructation in ruminants) and from manure decomposition; 27% are in the form of carbon dioxide emitted during the production and transport of animal products and feed, and 29% are nitrous oxide,⁷ attributable to manure and fertiliser (Gerber et al., 2013). However, factory farms and abattoirs may generate the most GHG emissions in the production chain (Labuschagne et al., 2011). Factory farming is a consequence of the need to supply a seemingly ever-growing demand for ADPs by an expanding population, and accounts for the majority of meat production in South Africa (Ndlela and Murcott, 2021). Beyond the emissions from animal agriculture itself, widespread global deforestation and land cover change for grazing land and/or monocultures for animal feed lead to feedback loops that further affect climate change.

4 Figures for animal agriculture’s contribution to GHG emissions vary significantly. See https://thebreakthrough.org/issues/food-agriculture-environment/livestock-dont-contribute-14-5-of-global-greenhouse-gas-emis sions for more information.

5 These figures are for industrial meat production and do not consider country-specific or cultural factors. For example, it has been found that cattle farmed traditionally in African conditions account for 15% less emissions than the global estimates (Njuguna et al., 2023). Other figures suggest that extensive animal farming has greater GHG emissions.

6 Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas with a 100-year global warming potential 28 to 34 times that of carbon dioxide.

7 Nitrous oxide has a global warming potential 273 times that of carbon dioxide for a 100-year timescale.

8

Animal agriculture, which is growing and intensifying faster than crop production in almost all countries, is the largest sectoral source of water pollution (Mateo-Sagasta et al., 2017). Industrial animal agricultural systems, characterised by confined and densely populated animal operations, generate excessive amounts of manure and waste. The presence of pathogens, veterinary pharmaceuticals and antimicrobials, heavy metals and hormones (growth promoters) in manure poses significant risks to human and environmental health (Mateo-Sagasta et al., 2017). Animal waste, antibiotics and hormones, chemicals from tanneries, fertilisers and pesticides from feed crops as well as sediments from eroded pastures all contribute to, among others, eutrophication,⁸ creating dead zones in coastal areas; the degradation of coral reefs; human health problems; and the emergence of antibiotic resistance (Steinfeld et al., 2006).

The explosion in farm animal numbers, along with the geographical concentration of large-scale poultry and pig production, and the transport of animals over long distances, facilitates the emergence of new strains of influenza viruses, which can give rise to human pandemics (CIWF, 2013). More than 60% of human infectious diseases are caused by pathogens shared with wild or domestic animals. Overuse of antibiotics in animal production is a major contributor to infections from antimicrobial-resistant pathogens. Antimicrobial-resistant infections currently account for 700,000 deaths globally each year and are estimated to reach 10 million per year by 2050 (O’Neill, 2016).

The true cost of animal production is massively disconnected from the resources needed to produce cheap meat and other ADPs. Increased meat consumption, in particular, is associated with greater industrialisation of agricultural and food systems, and has widespread social and environmental effects. In addition, it displaces traditional agricultural and dietary systems, which have a far smaller ecological footprint and are able to feed a growing population in a more ethical, nutritious and ecologically sound way. The ecological, health and welfare implications of varying animal rearing approaches differ significantly. Yet despite international calls for the transformation of agricultural and food systems towards just agroecological approaches, South Africa continues to pursue export-oriented, industrialised animal production, driving further commodification and concentration of this sector, with poor linkages to nutritional, ecological and socioeconomic outcomes. In many other African countries, too, rapid growth in industrial animal production threatens traditional farming methods and local ecosystems (Koosis, 2024). This, therefore, necessitates a look at how the South African government is addressing these issues, and what lessons there are for the continent.

Government’s policy response

Agricultural policy and animal welfare

South African development policy prioritises job creation, the strengthening of agricultural commercialisation, and the integration of small-scale producers into export-oriented commercial value chains, as key pillars. Yet inequality among the South African population continues to grow, with the country holding the dishonourable title of being the world’s most unequal nation (World Bank, 2022).

Agricultural policies in South Africa are driven by overarching development policies – in particular the National Development Plan (2012), the Industrial Policy Action Plan (2011) and the Agricultural Policy Action Plan (APAP) (2015-2019) – that identify agriculture and agroprocessing as priority economic activities to stimulate and spur inclusive economic growth and mitigate the triple challenge of inequality, poverty and unemployment. The Medium-Term Strategic Framework of both 2015 and 2021 articulates the critical role that the agricultural and agroprocessing industries can play towards agrarian and economic transformation and job creation (Didiza, 2022). This is formalised in the Agriculture and Agroprocessing Master Plan (AAMP) of 2022. Overall, policies are market-centred with a strategic focus on growth through technical interventions and the market inclusion of “emerging” farmers (Bennie et al., 2024). Policies are oriented towards making so-called “underutilised land” productive by increasing the industrialisation and commercialisation of grain, horticulture and particularly also animals. With regard to animal agriculture, there is a general push towards increasing animal production (pigs, poultry, goats, sheep and cattle), as well as developing the aquaculture sector. Policies tend to regard animals merely as commodities to produce, trade and consume.

Taking the lead from the APAP, sector-specific policies and strategies emphasise transformation, redistribution, job creation, and production efficiencies. Sector policies such

Susan Nicol/World Animal Foundation

as the Livestock Development Strategy and the Poultry Master Plan are similar in that their main objectives are to increase industrial-scale production and processing, grow small-scale farming, create jobs, exports, and improve food (protein) affordability and security. Animals in agriculture are valued exclusively for their economic and consumptive use, with little attention being given to the conditions in which animals are kept, transported and slaughtered. The absolute promotion of industrial animal production also implies increasing industrial grain crop production to meet animal feed needs, such as the poultry–soya–maize value chain that is being specifically targeted in the poultry sector.

Together with extension services, there are government efforts aimed at supporting small-scale farmers to access finance and inputs in order to improve access to existing value chains. These efforts, such as the Comprehensive Agricultural Support Programme and the Ilima/Letsema programme, are articulated in the National Policy on Comprehensive Producer Development Support. As mentioned, the South African agricultural sector is highly polarised, with a small number of large-scale, highly commercialised farmers, a large number of small-scale (subsistence and smallholder) farmers, and some small and medium-scale commercial (emerging) farmers. Agricultural policies have focused on developing new commercial farmers, while withdrawing subsidies from existing large-scale commercial farmers and giving little attention to small-scale farmers (Queenan et al., 2020). Interwoven with this are policies on land redistribution. Land redistribution schemes in South Africa have effectively birthed a group known as “emerging farmers” (Oduniyi et al., 2020). This contingent comprises land reform beneficiaries who have been given institutional support, such as improved access to credit, extension and land rights, in a bid to transform them into commercial farmers. However, by supporting a small number of commercial-oriented farmers and neglecting a large number of small-scale farmers, these schemes ultimately maintain a polarised agricultural sector (Queenan et al., 2020). Similar to the approach in the broader sector, attempts to support emerging farmers also consider animals in agriculture as a mere commodity to develop and extract, with little concern for anything beyond productivity. Across the agricultural and agroprocessing industries, little transformation has taken place since democracy, and inequalities remain rife across racial lines.

Policies encourage intensified incorporation of small-scale and “emerging” farmers into commercial commodity production systems and supply chains (Bennie et al., 2024). For instance, by 2030, the AAMP envisages that subsistence and smallholder farmers will supply feedlots with an additional 155 000 weaners per annum, and medium and large farmers, largely in the former homelands, will supply an additional 250 000 (Bennie et al., 2024). While efforts to rectify historical and economic imbalances and inequities are indeed necessary, this conceptualisation may, in fact, reinforce polarisation, as discussed further below.

Current South African policies and laws fail to adequately consider and incorporate farm animal wellbeing.

There are many laws in the country that apply to animal agriculture9, including, importantly, the anti-cruelty provisions contained in section 2(1) of the Animals Protection Act of 1962.

9 These include the Fertilizers, Farm Feeds, Agricultural Remedies and Stock Remedies Act, 1947 (Act No. 36 of 1947); the Animals Protection Act, 1962 (Act No. 71 of 1962); the Animal Identification Act 2002 (Act No. 6 of 2002); the Fencing Act, 1963 (Act No. 31 of 1963); the Subdivision of Agricultural Land Act, 1970 (Act No. 10 of 1970); the Plant Improvement Act, 1976 (Act No. 53 of 1976); the Animal Improvement Act, 1998 (Act No. 62 of 1998); the Veterinary and Para-veterinary Professions Act, 1982 (Act No. 19 of 1982); the Perishable Products Export Control Act, 1983 (Act No. 9 of 1983); the Agricultural Pests Act, 1983 (Act No. 36 of 1983); the Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act, 1983 (Act No. 43 of 1983); the Animal Health Act, 2002 (Act No. 7 of 2002); the Agricultural Research Act, 1990 (Act No. 86 of 1990); the Agricultural Product Standards Amendment Act, 2023 (Act 12 of 2023) the Agricultural Produce Agents Act, 1992 (Act No. 12 of 1992), repealed by the South African Abattoir Corporation Repeal Act, 2005 (Act No. 17 of 2005); the South African Abattoir Corporation Repeal Act, 2005 (Act No. 17 of 2005); the Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1993 (Act No. 169 of 1993); the Marketing of Agricultural Products Act, 1996 (Act No. 47 of 1996); the Genetically Modified Organisms Act, 1997 (Act No. 15 of 1997); the Subdivision of Agricultural Land Repeal Act, 1998 (Act No. 64 of 1998); the Onderstepoort Biological Products Incorporation Act, 1999 (Act No. 19 of 1999); the Meat Safety Act, 2000 (Act No. 40 of 2000); the Land and Agricultural Development Bank Act, 2002 (Act No. 15 of 2002); the Sectional Titles Amendment Act, 2022 (Act 13 of 2022); Plant Health (Phytosanitary) Act, 2024 (Act 35 of 2024).; and the Preservation and Development of Agricultural Land Act, 2024 (Bill passed by the NCOP and sent to the President for assent).

Relevant examples of prohibited conduct include confinement that causes suffering, unnecessarily denying food or water, and deliberately or negligently keeping an animal in a dirty or parasitic condition. Although these provisions give some degree of protection, they are not sufficiently detailed in prescribing good standards of welfare for farm animals in relation to issues such as housing, transport and slaughter. The Animal Health Act of 2002 focuses on sanitary and health provisions, as well as animal product exports, but does not contain any welfare provisions. Legislation tends to focus on productivity and utilitarian aspects of animal production and food safety to meet household and national food and nutritional security, with ethics and wellbeing considerations largely absent (World Animal Protection, 2020). It is clear that animals in agriculture are viewed as commodities rather than sentient beings. Where welfare is mentioned, it is primarily in the interest of production and disease prevention. Over the past few years, however, animal infections have consistently raised concerns over the intersection between animal welfare and food safety, such as foot-and-mouth disease in cattle, African swine influenza in pigs, and avian influenza in chickens, among others.

Intensive animal agriculture and animal disease

Intensive animal production creates persistent challenges in controlling animal disease. Confining large numbers of genetically uniform animals in unsanitary and stressful conditions provides an ideal breeding ground for both viral and bacterial diseases, allowing their incubation, transmission and amplification (Stevenson, 2023). Moreover, the routine use of antimicrobials in intensive animal production to prevent disease has led to antimicrobial resistance in animals, which when transferred to people, undermines the efficacy of human medications (Stevenson, 2023).

Intensive animal production in South Africa has been materially affected by, inter alia, blue tongue, foot-and-mouth disease, highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) and African swine fever. Many of these diseases originate in wild animal populations, with intensive agricultural systems creating conditions for more virulent pathogens. In some instances, contagion has spread from farm animals to wild animals, to other farmed animal species, and even to humans (Bourke, 2024). Recurrent outbreaks have resulted in trade bans, restrictions on the transport of animals, and in some instances, the mass culling of animals, with considerable economic implications (Keck, 2024)10 .

To address these threats, government and industry responses have focused on improving biosecurity and biocontainment at production facilities, which is costly and difficult to maintain, and the use of prophylactic vaccines. As articulated by the Global Alliance for the Future of Food and IPES-Food (IPES-Food, 2017), even the most biosecure operation faces a series of potential disease transmission pathways, including via ventilation systems, insect carriers or production waste, as well as the underlying problem of increased disease susceptibility of animals in confined conditions (Graham et al., 2008; Leibler et al., 2009). While industrial animal production and its feed requirements are a major driver of climate change and land use change, climate change also exacerbates infectious disease risks.

10 In the case of HPAI, during the first outbreak of HPAI H5N8 in 2017, the total number of chickens culled in the broiler and layer industries was around 5,4 million, 4,7 million of which were from the egg industry (BFAP, 2018). The outbreak cost the industry over R1,8 billion. The economic implications of this outbreak resulted in extensive job losses and considerable shortages and subsequent price increases of poultry-related products (Heiberg, 2017; BFAP, 2018). No new HPAI outbreaks were reported until the detection of HPAI H5N1 in commercial chickens in April 2021. Over the following 12 months, the poultry sector was forced to cull 3,7 million birds after 145 bird flu outbreaks were recorded (Thukwana, 2022). HPAI H5N2 was detected in chickens of a small-scale farmer facility in KwaZulu-Natal in October 2022 (DALRRD, 2023). Over the years, outbreaks have continued. The 2023 outbreaks of H5 and H7 strains saw around 10 million chickens culled (FairPlay, 2024).

The current approach fundamentally fails to address the root causes of poor animal health, namely the conditions in which production animals are kept. This calls for the reform of animal agricultural practices, in particular by avoiding high stocking densities and large group sizes, minimising stress by ensuring that animals still have the ability to perform their natural behaviours, and avoiding animal selection for excessive production levels, as these practices are associated with an increased risk of immunological problems and pathologies (Stevenson, 2023). Beyond this, animal production and wellbeing needs to be situated within complex socioecological interactions as part of a greater paradigm shift towards just agroecological production systems.

The Meat Safety Act of 2000 contains a section on essential national standards. Subsections 11(h) to (l) apply to farm animal welfare, providing for humane handling, and requiring that only healthy animals be slaughtered for human consumption. The act provides for routine inspections by the national executive officer (section 15), who must be a departmental officer and a veterinarian designated by the Minister (section 2). Section 7 prohibits the slaughter of animals at places other than abattoirs, although this provision does not apply to slaughter for one’s own consumption or for cultural or religious purposes (subsection 7(2)(a)), making enforcement challenging (World Animal Protection, 2020).

The South Africa Bureau of Standards has produced codes on dairy cattle, feedlots, the handling and transportation of animals, sale yards, pig welfare, ostrich, and poultry. However, these standards are not publicly available for free, but need to be purchased. This lack of accessibility is a serious obstacle to maintaining and improving adequate animal welfare in the country (World Animal Protection, 2020). However, other industry bodies, such as the Livestock Welfare Coordinating Committee, have developed their own codes of welfare that are voluntary and non-binding. The self-regulation of industries using animals further impedes progress for animal welfare. Practices illegal in many countries continue in South Africa, including farrowing crates for sows, and cages for broiler chickens and egg-laying hens (World Animal Protection, 2020).

There are also concerns regarding food safety at the processing and retail ends of the spectrum, such as the 2017–2018 outbreak of listeriosis, which was linked to low-cost, ultraprocessed meat and dairy products (Salama et al., 2018). The risk of food-borne diseases may have greater significance in South Africa than elsewhere, given the proportion of the population suffering from poverty, malnutrition and HIV/Aids. The delay in controlling the listeriosis outbreak (and the failure to call to account those responsible) has raised questions around the capacity of surveillance, the risks associated with increased consumption of animal-based products, the choice and affordability of protein options for lower income groups, and the enforcement of regulations and standards in industrial processing as well as by smallholders and in local markets.

Many overlapping policies can be used to stimulate discussion on agroecological and territorial food systems transitions, and where to situate animal welfare beyond food safety and the prevention of zoonotic disease. South Africa’s White Paper on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of South Africa’s Biodiversity, for instance, offers points of entry, particularly on the ethics of care and how to apply this to both wild and domesticated animals (DFFE, 2023). Using the African philosophy of Ubuntu as its lens, the White Paper helps us understand the intersection between the wellbeing of ecosystems, animals and humans.11

11 The concept “Ubuntu” comes from the isiZulu phrase “Umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu”, which translates to “A person is a person through others” (commonly “I am because you are”). Ubuntu is a traditional African philosophy emphasising the interconnectedness of all individuals and their mutual responsibilities towards one another and their environment, and promotes compassion, dignity, reciprocity and mutuality

Farm animals must be specifically identified in discussions on the interactions between agricultural and food systems and broader ecosystems - particularly in terms of these animals’ impact on the health of societal and ecological systems as well as on-farm biodiversity. With a new Minister of Agriculture at the helm following the formation of South Africa’s Government of National Unity in 2024, this policy must be protected, strengthened and implemented.

Making the discussion around biodiversity and farm animals even more prudent is the 2019 amendment to the Animal Improvement Act (AIA) 62 of 1998, which added lion, cheetah, rhino and giraffe to the list of “farmable animals”, along with nearly 30 other wild animal species. The AIA was originally passed to allow for the utilisation of so-called genetically superior animals to improve animal production and performance in the interest of South Africa. South Africa has many indigenous animal breeds, and therefore changes in animal breeding, intellectual property rights, and the sale and marketing of animals, has implications on biodiversity, including agricultural biodiversity, as well as on cultural heritage and farmers’ rights.

Having expressed the intention to overhaul the current regulatory regime for animals, the DALRRD has

12 (CCT1/16) [2016] ZACC 46; 2017 (1) SACR 284 (CC); 2017 (4) BCLR 517 (CC) (8 December 2016). Available at https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACC/2016/46.html.

Senivpetro/Freepik

Further to this, section 24 of the Constitution states: “Everyone has the right – (a) to an environment that is not harmful to their health or wellbeing; and (b) to have the environment protected for the benefit of present and future generations through reasonable legislative and other measures that – (i) prevent pollution and ecological degradation; (ii) promote conservation; and (iii) secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources while promoting justifiable economic and social development” (RSA, 1996). As described above, industrial agriculture – and particularly industrial animal production, with its network of industrial input and supply chains – causes widespread environmental harms through air, soil and water contamination and pollution, which currently goes unaddressed and unaccounted for. More research is required to articulate the full range of social and environmental harms of industrial agriculture and animal production linked to intensive systems such as feedlots in South Africa. Nevertheless, it is clear that by failing to develop meaningful welfare and environmental health standards, these production systems impinge on the constitutional right cited above. Having entrenched this right in the Constitution, all legislation must ensure that development is compatible with the need to protect and improve the environment, which is currently not the case.

Food and nutritional security

Food and nutritional security is an intricate part of South Africa’s legal and policy framework. The right to food is entrenched in the Constitution under sections 27 and 28. Yet South Africa has neither a responsible nor coherent strategy, policy or regulatory system to realise the right to food as set out in the Constitution (Thow et al., 2018; Adeniyi et al., 2021). In 2013, the National Policy on Food and Nutrition Security, the Household Food and Nutrition Security Strategy as well as the Fetsa Tlala Integrated Food Production Initiative were approved. However, the absence of a framework act on food security renders existing policies legally non-binding and unenforceable, despite the constitutional obligation to ensure the right to food. Food and nutrition policy coherence in South Africa is notably lacking due to layered frameworks, weak government integration, and limited local government mandates (Kushitor et al., 2022; Thow et al., 2018)

Following on from the 2013 National Policy on Food and Nutritional Security, the National Food and Nutritional Security Plan (NFNSP) 2018–2023 was developed to provide a coherent framework to address food and nutritional insecurity in the country.13 The NFNSP aims to address South Africa’s triple burden of malnutrition, which includes undernutrition, micronutrient deficiencies, and overweight and obesity. However, the current plan has had little concrete outcomes in terms of improving food and nutritional security and realising the right to food as outlined in the Constitution (Massey, 2023). An evaluation was conducted in 2023 and culminated in very detailed recommendations (see Massey, 2023). Following this, a process is now underway to develop a new NFNSP for the country. Civil society involvement has been crucial in this process.

The NFNSP is based on the Food-Based Dietary Guidelines for South Africa, which promote the consumption of ADPs, recommending that dairy and meat, including fish, chicken, lean meat and eggs, should be eaten daily. While ADPs do play an important part in providing essential nutrients to the undernourished and vulnerable, the guidelines also point to the health implications of their overconsumption, which needs to be given greater attention.

Globally, food and nutritional security policies tend to focus on improving diets through narrowly defined, easily measurable means. Two aspects are generally emphasised, namely calories (calorific intake) and protein. Although protein is one of many nutrients lacking in the diets of those suffering from hunger and malnutrition, insufficient nutrition goes far beyond protein. Calorie-focused and protein-centric food security policies are used as part of flawed campaigns to feed growing populations – in this case reducing animals to meat, and meat to protein (IPES-Food, 2022). This fundamental aspect shaping global food systems also has relevance in the discussion on the “protein transition”, which focuses on the role of protein production in GHG emissions. It is essential that the revised NFNSP focuses on diverse protein-rich sources, linked to agricultural biodiversity and dietary diversity. As such, taking a relook into the country’s dietary guidelines, farmer support programmes and school feeding schemes, among others, would be useful.

Unpacking policy imperatives in South Africa: food security, job creation

South Africa is considered a food-secure country in terms of its production; yet current figures suggest that over 60% of South Africans are food-insecure (Simelane et al., 2023). As such, the country stands as a symbol of what is inherently wrong with current food systems. As a result, approximately seven million South Africans suffer from chronic hunger, and in 2016, 26,9% of children below the age of five were stunted. Despite initiatives such as the child support grant, child stunting rates have remained relatively unchanged over the past two decades (May et al., 2020; Adeniyi et al., 2021).

Currently, NCDs are the leading cause of death worldwide. Around 80% of global NCD deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), with global projections indicating that the biggest increase in NCD deaths will also occur here (WHO, 2023). South Africa, too, carries an increasing burden of NCDs related to diet and nutrition, such as overweight and obesity, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and certain cancers.

While the NFNSP recognises the disconcerting shift in diets and nutrition, including the rising risk of NCDs, indicators and policy actions seem disjointed, with poor linkages across the food system to date. Increasing corporate concentration and control across the food chain, including in the retail sector, means that large retailers heavily influence demand, production, branding and costs in the food value chain. This affects food accessibility, costs, variety and safety, and represents massive structural challenges that drive food insecurity and hunger, particularly as South Africans are net consumers of purchased foods. Limited dietary diversity is due to limited access and affordability of diverse and nutritious foods. In South Africa increased hunger is also related to an increased reliance on wage labour (IPES-Food, 2022; Oxfam, 2014). Food insecurity in the country is largely driven by rising food prices, high unemployment, and low and stagnating incomes. In 2022, approximately 28,2 million people – some 47% of the population, and a staggering 10 million more than the previous year – received social grants (Massey, 2023). While social grants are vital sources of funds for nearly half of the population, who rely on these funds to meet food and nutritional needs, the grants are also heavily criticised for being insufficient to meet the food poverty line.13 Vertical and horizontal integration of agricultural and food operations, with

increasing corporate control of food production in the country, has resulted in a deeply inequitable, unaffordable and malnourishing food system.

While job creation is a policy imperative, job types and quality are not addressed. Jobs in the animal agriculture sector are generally low-wage, secondary, and segmented along lines of race, gender and class (Bennie et al., 2024). Secondary labour markets are characterised by low wages, unequal bargaining power between workers and employers, a lack of collective bargaining, unskilled jobs, precarious job status, and little to no prospects of job upgrading (Bennie et al., 2024). In addition, as articulated above, it is unclear how small-scale and emerging farmers could be successfully included in commercial animal agricultural commodity supply chains. Currently, animal agriculture plays a central part in building resilience in rural livelihoods by offering diversified livelihood strategies and meeting various other needs. Including small-scale and emerging smallholders in volatile commercial value chains may put these smallholders in a more precarious and vulnerable position, unable to meet industry demands. This is particularly true in light of climate change, which will see producers bearing the brunt of increasing heat and other climate-related stresses.

Global and regional processes regarding animal agriculture and ADP consumption

Food systems are responsible for a third of global GHG emissions (Crippa et al., 2021), yet have been largely absent from negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) for the past 30 years. In 2022, at the UNFCCC’s 27th Conference of the Parties (COP), Decision 3/CP.27, on the Sharm el-Sheikh joint work on implementation of climate action on agriculture and food security, was adopted (UNFCCC, 2022). In 2023, one of the main outcomes of COP28 was the Declaration on Sustainable Agriculture, Resilient Food Systems, and Climate Action, which South Africa did not sign. The declaration, as well as the food systems roadmap of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), which was also released at COP28, falls short of meeting the necessary pathways for change, specifically avoiding terms such as ‘just transition’, ‘agroecology’ and ‘reduced animal food consumption’ (Verkuijl et al., 2024). At the recent COP29, there was no further progress on agriculture and/or food systems in the negotiations.

Climate change mitigation strategies tend to lead to practices with harmful or unknown effects on animal welfare, including genetic modification, intensive confinement, feed changes, and microbiome changes (Verkuijl, 2023; Shields and Orme-Evans, 2015). The next round of nationally determined contributions under the Paris Agreement on Climate Change in 2025 must ensure food systems, covering both food production and consumption, are addressed and integrated, and take the necessary steps to develop policy solutions across the food, climate and biodiversity nexus that address multiple sustainable development goals (SDGs)14 (Bridgers and Linn, 2024).

At the same time, climate-smart agriculture (CSA) has emerged and is aggressively promoted by large agribusiness. CSA was given a boost with the launch of the Agriculture Innovation Mission for Climate (AIM for Climate) at COP26 in Glasgow in 202115. Some of the biggest promoters of CSA include global corporate giants such as Bayer and McDonald’s. Sustainable livestock management is one of the pillars of CSA and includes practices such as pasture management, zero grazing, grassland restoration and management (e.g. silvopastoral systems), manure management (e.g. recycling and biodigestion) and crop–animal

14 In particular SDG 2 (zero hunger), 3 (good health and wellbeing), 12 (responsible consumption and production), 13 (climate action), 14 (life below water) and 15 (life on land), among others.

15 See https://www.aimforclimate.org/

integration. Conservation agriculture, as part of CSA, is widely supported by South Africa’s DALRRD. A Conservation Agriculture Policy has been on the table since 2017 and already forms part of farmer support programmes. Improving climate resilience is a significant component of many programmes, laws and policies and particularly now with the 2024 Climate Change Act. This includes the promotion of CSA practices such as conservation agriculture, which is primarily aimed at reducing soil disturbance through no-toll agriculture, with animals often integrated into the approach. However, many of these practices rely heavily on external inputs and corporate-controlled agricultural and food systems, with little attention paid to systemic issues and the role of smallholder farming practices, and few ecological benefits being realised. Moreover, the welfare and status of the animals remains unaddressed. Across all processes currently under way, including the development of a National Agroecology Framework for South Africa, the issue of animal welfare must be incorporated to align with broader sustainability and justice goals.

The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, adopted at the Convention on Biological Diversity in 2022, outlines biodiversity targets to be reached by 2030. Of particular relevance are targets 7 (reduce pollution), 10 (enhance sustainable agriculture) and 16 (enable sustainable consumption). Target 10 specifies “sustainable intensification”16 as a biodiversity-friendly practice. Intensification of animal farming may never truly be sustainable, unless there is simultaneous attention to the health and behavioural needs of animals (Shields and Orme-Evans, 2015). The shift towards the sustainable intensification of animal agriculture to reduce GHG emissions, deforestation and biodiversity loss requires the increased concentration and conferment of animals and their waste, opening up “potentially cascading risks for zoonotic disease emergence” (Hayek, 2022:1).

The United Nations Food Systems Summit (UNFSS) has galvanised work around food systems transitions. While the summit was heavily criticised for having a strong private-sector influence and for diverting resources away from processes already existing under the Committee on World Food Security, much work has developed at the country level in response. Worryingly, Africa’s position in the UNFSS emphasises the use of biotechnology to enhance animal breeds and seeds to improve yields, strengthen disease resistance, and other uses (AU and AU-NEPAD, 2021). The genetic engineering of animals raises deep ethical concerns in terms of testing, production and consumption. National biosafety laws will have to be scrutinised to understand the implications of this practice. It is also important to note that local animal breeds, which are better suited to local conditions and less susceptible to diseases, may have different health and welfare needs, which will have to be unpacked further as an alternative to biotechnology.

As a follow-up to the UNFSS, South Africa has a process under way in terms of food system transformation, in part linked to the revision of the NFNSP. The process has four pathways, namely to enhance sustainable local production for local consumption of safe, nutritious and indigenous foods; to promote social, economic and environmental resilience; to facilitate inclusive, sustainable and competitive value chains; and to promote food systems policies, legislation, planning and governance. Again, it is vital that civil society continues to engage in this process and helps to streamline the numerous, overlapping, and intersecting policy processes underway in relation to agricultural and food systems in South Africa.

A number of significant regional and global policies are guiding the development of agriculture, including animal production, in Africa. The Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP), adopted in 2003, is the overarching continental policy framework for agricultural transformation to increase food security and nutrition, and reduce poverty. Through the CAADP agenda, African leaders envisioned a food systems

16 Sustainable intensification does not have an agreed definition, but is commonly understood as increasing yield on the same area of land.

approach to attain agricultural-led economic transformation. In 2014, Africa renewed this commitment to agricultural transformation under the Malabo Declaration on Accelerated Agricultural Growth and Transformation with an expanded set of goals and targets to be achieved by 2025. The CAADP-Malabo goals and targets were also aligned with the ten-year implementation plan of the African Union’s Agenda 2063 as well as with the SDGs. Currently, no country is on track to meet the targets, and processes have been initiated to develop a post-Malabo declaration. South Africa’s poor performance in achieving its targets under the CAADP is influencing the way in which progress indicators and targets, including those of the NFNSP, are designed.

The Livestock Development Strategy for Africa 2015–2035, developed by the African Union’s InterAfrican Bureau for Animal Resources, specifies the need to promote animal welfare ethics and standards at farm level.17 This led the African Union to release the Animal Welfare Strategy for Africa in 2017. It would be useful to ascertain progress in this regard, determining whether guidelines and regional and national strategies are being developed, and whether/how this is being encouraged at the national level.

Overall, agribusiness in Africa is aggressively pushing for industrial animal production as part of the commodification, industrialisation and commercialisation of African agricultural and food systems. Industrial animal production is presented as the solution to deepening food and nutritional insecurity. Yet unsustainable and unjust value chains persist, with large-scale, export-oriented grain and feed production exacerbating matters. Across the continent, a number of factors, including land dispossession, conflicts and skyrocketing input and food costs, keep vulnerable smallholder farmers locked into unsustainable production practices and further deepen existing socioecological and socioeconomic crises. Judging by current trends, policymakers and authorities are neglecting these overlapping issues and their future implications because of the unwavering commitment to up production so as to increase trade nationally, continentally and globally, such as through the African Continental Free Trade Area Agreement. Intervention is urgently needed.

17 Under strategy 6.2.1.3.

Situating animals within a just agricultural and food systems transition

There is overwhelming evidence pointing to the disastrous impacts of global industrial animal production systems and supply chains, driving deforestation, land degradation, habitat destruction and unmitigated pollution. Yet the expansion of industrial animal production continues as part of a greater narrative that industrial agriculture is necessary to feed a growing global population. Industrial agriculture generally, and industrial animal agriculture in particular, is driving ecological collapse, climate catastrophes, and health and nutrition crises, among others. To meet global climate and biodiversity targets, it is vital to address the unecological and unjust nature of industrial animal production systems and input and supply chains. This would also imply curbing the unsustainable consumption of animal products to stay within planetary boundaries. The role of agricultural and food systems as a driver of our intersecting environmental and health crises has led many experts to call for a just agroecological transition in those systems (De Schutter, 2010; IPES-Food, 2016).

Such a just agroecological transition must have smallholder farmers, herders and fishers, among others, at its centre.

It requires adapting and adopting agroecological practices that actively promote human rights, particularly the rights of traditionally marginalised populations, including women and girls, indigenous populations, people of colour, and people with disabilities. It also requires integrating ecological and animal rights and welfare, while ensuring that food sovereignty meets food security needs, and guaranteeing that people working across the food system live in dignity and receive a liveable income (World Animal Protection, 2024). An intergenerational and interspecies lens will affect how we conceptualise and implement a just transition in our food systems towards locally produced wholefoods and nutritious, plant-rich diets.

Food systems transitions must be grounded in principles of distributional, procedural and restorative justice, among others (Tribaldos and Kortetmäki, 2022), as outlined by the Just Transition Framework for South Africa (Presidential Climate Commission, 2022).

Emma Photography/Pexels

Distributional justice seeks to reconcile social equity with sustainability in distributing the risks and benefits of the transition. Procedural justice, in turn, aims to ensure equal opportunities for people to participate in decision-making that affects them, while restorative justice aims to repair the harm done to victims. South Africa’s deep levels of inequality and marginalisation require the centralisation of justice in discussions around transitions, and considering inequalities and injustices along the lines of gender, class and race (Bennie et al., 2024). We must, however, extend the notion of justice towards all species and ecosystems as we consider the rights of workers, the right to a dignified livelihood and the right to food, water and a healthy environment insofar as these relate to the current unjust, extractive and inequitable agricultural and food system. Further work on the aforementioned linkages within a just transition is required to articulate aspects around labour justice, animal justice, and fairness across the food supply and value chain. What is certain, though, is that current operations are designed to maximise profit, while incurring widespread, unaccounted-for environmental and social costs and externalities that extend across the spectrum. This demands wholesale reform.

There is a need to unpack the impact of animal agriculture on current, intersecting socioecological crises. In policies, animals are appreciated primarily for their utilitarian value, as commodities. Animal welfare is generally understood as animal health within the context of production. Current discussions on agricultural and food systems transitions, where animal agriculture is discussed, is primarily in relation to their instrumental role in closing cycles and in creating more integrated or circular production systems (Meijboom et al., 2023). Yet animal agriculture touches on all of the HLPE’s 13 agroecological principles across both production and social equity aspects (HLPE, 2019) (see figure 1 below), with principle 4, “Ensure animal health and welfare”, specifically addressing this elephant in the room. As such, it is possible, and indeed necessary, to build on these intersections and explore how animal wellbeing and welfare can be firmly integrated across zones of production, processing and consumption to effectively advocate for just transitions in agricultural and food systems. Animal welfare and its linkage to justice and ethics within food systems transitions is a useful lens through which to articulate and probe into the future of food production and consumption. It has the potential to deepen the discussion around the interconnectedness of struggles for justice as a result of a deeply inequitable, unecological and unjust agricultural and food system.

Animal wellbeing and welfare must be firmly integrated across zones of production, processing and consumption to effectively advocate for just transitions in agricultural and food systems.

Figure 1: HLPE’s 13 Agroecological Principles (HLPE, 2019)

At the same time, those pushing for a “protein transition” too often reduce animals to carbon and/or methane emissions and fall back on “techno-fixes” such as lab-grown/clean meat and novel plant-based substitutes to encourage a shift to plant-based diets. While these options may result in reduced animal suffering, they do not necessarily fit within a just agroecological vision based on food sovereignty. The current discussion around a protein transition does nothing to address the power dynamics in an unsustainable and unjust food system. Instead, the meat and dairy industry and meat processing firms are simply expanding into plant-based substitutes and/or cellular meat production, and fishery firms into aquaculture (Howard et al., 2021). These shifts may very well reinforce the highly concentrated, unequitable, acontextual and neocolonial food system. Insufficient attention is paid to diversified agroecological production systems, territorial food networks and markets, and food environments that increase access to healthy and sustainable diets. This necessitates transformative behavioural and structural shifts. It requires sustainable food system transitions and not a protein transition (IPES-Food, 2022).

Over the past three decades, the South African government has been focusing on the industrialisation of agricultural practices. The discourse around just transitions has been confined to one about job creation, food security, and integrating smallholders into unequal, unsustainable and unethical production and supply chains. In all cases, animals are seen as mere commercial tools, while the production systems themselves are largely unaddressed.

Reforms to industrial agricultural systems are superficially dealt with, and discussion about animal wellbeing in production systems is sorely lacking.

The initial investment required to adopt animal agricultural practices that are more ethical, such as providing more space or implementing free-range systems, may be financially burdensome and pose a barrier to the inclusion of animal welfare – especially since these changes may lead to a temporary decrease in production, affecting farmers’ income and stability during the transition (Sardar et al., 2023). This will necessitate concerted efforts to raise awareness about the link between our food choices and animal welfare, as well as the broader implications for sustainability and health. While there are global trends to improve consumer awareness, formal policies and regulations will have to be laid down to ensure implementation, and not rely on individual choice and behaviour.

Population growth and rising incomes are expected to shift diets towards greater reliance on meat and ultraprocessed foods. Yet industrial agricultural production and expansion is associated with land degradation, climate change and other environmental costs, and from an animal welfare perspective, climate-related disasters are associated with significant animal stress and deaths (Thornton et al., 2009). This illustrates the interrelationship between human and animal health and welfare, and points to the need for a significant reduction in our reliance on ADPs in particular, and for changes in production practices across both extensive and intensive animal agriculture. Ultimately, our long-term ability to realise the right to food for all depends on it.

The One Welfare Framework coined by Rebeca García Pinillos might be a useful entry point, in that it makes explicit the link between animal welfare, human wellbeing, and the physical and social environment (CABI, 2018). The framework moves beyond the One Health Approach, which focused on the intersection between human, environmental and animal health, predominantly emphasising health aspects in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic and zoonotic spillovers,

with no attention to welfare considerations (Four Paws, 2021). However, neither of these instruments is situated within the discourse on food systems transitions. To find better ways to articulate what a just and ethical food systems transition might look like, it would be useful to build on the five freedoms for animals18 used in welfare discussions, and bridge these with agroecological principles, our duty of care with regard to nature, as well as our interdependence based on Ubuntu. This would also align with and expand on the United Nations Environment Programme’s Resolution 1 adopted at the United Nations Environment Assembly in 2022, recognising the linkage between animal welfare, the environment, and the SDGs (UNEP, 2022).

In many communities in South Africa, animals have multiple roles and functions: They provide food, textile, wool and labour, help fertilise soil, serve as financial and social capital, hold cultural value, and offer a way to utilise marginal land to bring income and food security to regions where livelihood opportunities are few and far between. The traditional animal production systems used in many of these regions are barely comparable to industrial animal production and value chains. Yet the two are regularly conflated, with very little discussion about just agroecological transitions, considering agrosilvopastoral systems, multi-paddock grazing, pastoralist systems, integrated multi-trophic aquaculture systems, artisanal fisheries, and other agroecological models.

If we are to transition to a more just ecological and humane agroecological future, we will need to consider the role of animal welfare in agricultural and food systems. This will be a useful lens through which to explore, in a more holistic and pluralist way, how ethics and justice form part of this transition, how to minimise harm to humans, animals as well as the planet, and how to maximise quality of life for all.

18 Freedom from hunger and thirst; freedom from discomfort; freedom from pain, injury or disease; freedom to express normal behaviour; and freedom from fear and distress. See https://www.animalhumanesociety.org/health/five-freedoms-animals.

Pathways to an alternative system, for discussion

In this section, we set out a few concrete recommendations for discussion to start moving towards bridging the gap in the discourse, in policy and practice. Policy actions must take into account the nexuses between climate, water, biodiversity, food insecurity and hunger, jobs and rural livelihoods in order to address these intersectional issues and political priorities.

Firstly, it is necessary to get the full picture of the social and environmental costs associated with industrial animal agricultural systems to inform decision-making. This information is sorely lacking in the South African context. This would include unpacking the link between broader sustainability goals and animal welfare.

Secondly, reforms to agricultural policy, farmer support programmes and extension programmes are required. These policies and programmes are currently oriented towards increased intensification, particularly of smaller-scale animal farming in communal areas, to feed into corporate supply chains. Such an approach increases vulnerability and prevents the much-needed shift away from the industrial and corporate-dominated sector. Revisiting and reforming agricultural extension programmes to include integrated, biodiverse agroecological approaches is necessary to better suit South African conditions.

Thirdly, linked to the above, there is a need to integrate animal welfare into agricultural and food policies and just agroecological transitions by building on traditional grazing protocols and regenerative rangeland practices, and developing locally relevant, cost-effective infrastructure. This requires a focus on small-scale integrated agricultural systems that adequately consider the health, welfare and wellbeing of animals in production systems.

Fourthly, facilitating a shift in production methods will demand working closely with the DALRRD to develop welfare standards for the diverse cattle, poultry and fish sectors, in particular differentiating between smallholder and industrial systems. Policy clarity is

crucial to ensure that welfare standards are adhered to, especially by large-scale agribusiness. In terms of smallholders, civil-society organisations and smallholder herders must work more closely with government to develop relevant training materials and field guides for extension workers. This would help bolster innovative local production to meet nutritional needs, and integrate animal welfare into various production practices.

Fifthly, to address food and nutritional insecurity, current policies must respond to shifting dietary patterns and associated NCDs, linked in part to the rising consumption of ADPs. The focus should be on local production, local markets, food safety, access and affordability, food environments, and dietary diversity. This must be coupled with the necessary, adequate regulations to reduce reliance on animal-derived foods and ensure the accessibility and affordability of nutrient-dense foods and plant-rich diets. As mentioned, taking a relook into the dietary guidelines, farmer support programmes and school feeding schemes, and their potential intersections, might be useful in this regard.

Conclusion: Towards equitable, humane and sustainable food systems

Animal-derived foods can form part of an equitable, humane and sustainable food system that is based on indigenous and traditional practices, knowledge and consumption patterns (World Animal Protection, 2024). This is vastly different from the current focus on industrialised, high-meat-based diets in industrialised countries – a trend that is growing rapidly in countries in the Global South. Already, South Africa has the highest meat consumption in Africa. A just transition in agricultural and food systems demands a radical move away from industrialised production with large agribusinesses at the helm. Such a transition recognises the role of culturally appropriate meat consumption and the economic, social, nutritional and cultural significance of traditional animal agricultural and pastoralist systems in African contexts and communities. Agrarian reform is central to restoring food systems (Grain, 2014). It acknowledges the essential role of smallholder farmers, pastoralists, small-scale fishers, women, indigenous peoples and peasants in providing healthy and nutritious food for the majority of the world. A just transition in agricultural and food systems offers an opportunity to address and advance the conditions and livelihoods of these groups.

Improved farm animal welfare can contribute to the economic viability of farms in several ways. Ever-increasing intensification of animal production adversely affects animal health, resulting in diseases, which reduces production efficiency by up to 33% (FAO, 2012). Healthier animals reduce the need for veterinary interventions and the associated costs (Hashem et al., 2020). Moreover, when animals are raised in conditions that meet their natural behavioural needs, they are less likely to develop harmful habits and behaviours that can lead to economic losses (Tucker et al., 2013). A sustainable food system must also consider the wellbeing and social equity of all relevant stakeholders, including farmers, farmworkers and local communities (Vargas-Bello-Pérez et al., 2017). Training programmes can help farmers understand and implement best practices for animal care. Furthermore, pasture-based systems can support local economies by encouraging the use of locally produced feed and reducing the need for large-scale feed imports (Miele and Lever, 2014). By embracing animal welfare as an integral part of sustainable and just food systems, we can move towards a more holistic approach to food production that benefits the environment, society and the economy (Sardar et al., 2023).

Addressing farm animal welfare is not only an ethical imperative, but also a key element of sustainable food production (Christensen et al., 2019). Farm animal welfare plays a significant part in achieving sustainability across all dimensions. As factory farming and poor husbandry practices are driving resource depletion and pollution, animal welfare is intrinsically linked to environmental sustainability (Garcia, 2017). Implementing practices that are more ethical and humane, such as pasture-based systems and rotational grazing, can reduce the environmental impact of animal agriculture (Hashem et al., 2020). Animals raised in healthier and more natural environments can also better contribute to ecological restoration and improve soil health, and therefore regenerate degraded land, reduce the need for chemical fertilisers, and sequester carbon, making agriculture more sustainable in the long run (Lever and Evans, 2017; Sardar et al., 2023). Sardar and colleagues (2023) highlight the transformative potential of embracing farm animal welfare in shaping a compassionate, resilient and sustainable food industry. Establishing animal welfare as a fundamental pillar of an agroecological agricultural and food system is not only beneficial for animals, but also for farmers, farm workers, consumers, and the planet as a whole. By realising these benefits, we can work towards building more resilient, equitable and ethical food production systems.

Adeniyi, D.A., Losch, B., and Adelle, C. 2021. Investigating the South African food insecurity paradox: a systematic review of food system governance in South Africa. DSI-NRF Centre of Excellence in Food Security. Food Security SA Working Paper Series. https://foodsecurity.ac.za/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/CoE-WP9_Systematic-Review-of-Food -System-Governance-in-SA_December-2021.pdf

African Centre for Biodiversity. 2024. Rising UPF consumption deepens Africa’s biodiversity, climate and pollution crises. https://acbio.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Fact-Sheet-6-final.pdf

Anastasiou, K., Baker, P., Hadjikakou, M., et al. 2022. A conceptual framework for understanding the environmental impacts of ultra-processed foods and implications for sustainable food systems, Journal of Cleaner Production, 368:133155. https://tinyurl.com/3aupzc5v

Athare, T.R., Pradhan, P., and Kropp, J.P. 2020. Environmental implications and socioeconomic characterisation of Indian diets, Science of the Total Environment, 737:139881. AU and AU-NEPAD. 2021. Africa Common Position on food systems: regional submission to the UN Food Systems Summit. https://www.nepad.org/file-download/download/public/134181

Bennie, A., Naidoo, L., Bowman, A., and Sandi, A. 2024. Opportunities and Challenges for a Just Transition in the South African Food System: Insights from the beef industry, Institute for Economic Justice and East Cape Agricultural Research Project Working Paper. https://www.iej.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Food-System-Working-Paper-Beef-Indus try.pdf

BFAP. 2021. BFAP Baseline Agricultural Outlook 2021-2030, Pretoria: Bureau for Food and Agriculture Policy. https://www.sagis.org.za/BFAP-Baseline-2021.pdf

BFAP. 2018. Economic impact of the 2017 highly pathogenic avian influenza outbreak in South Africa. A report by BFAP to the South African Poultry Association. https://www.bfap.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Economic-impact-of-HPAI_Final.pdf

Booysens, Y. 2013. Stronger regulation of livestock treatment needed. https://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/stronger-regulation-of-livestock-treatment-neede d-2013-03-08

Bourke, I., 2024. ‘Unprecedented’: How bird flu became an animal pandemic. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20240425-how-dangerous-is-bird-flu-spread-to-wildlife-a nd-humans

Bridgers, J., and Linn, A. 2024. Integrated approaches to climate, biodiversity and food security action. IISD. https://sdg.iisd.org/commentary/guest-articles/integrated-approaches-to-climate-biodiversit y-and-food-security-action/

CABI. 2018. One welfare: a framework to improve animal welfare and human well-being. ISBN: 978-1-78639-385-2.

Christensen, T., Denver, S., and Sandoe, P. 2019. How best to improve farm animal welfare? Four main approaches viewed from an economic perspective, Animal Welfare, 28(1): 95-106. https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/CDCAD6248AF5 DCE0FA828EABBD170500/S0962728600010745a.pdf/how_best_to_improve_farm_animal_wel fare_four_main_approaches_viewed_from_an_economic_perspective.pdf

Compassion in World Farming (CIWF). 2013, Zoonotic Diseases, Human Health and Farm Animal Welfare.

https://www.ciwf.org.uk/media/3756123/Zoonotic-diseases-human-health-and-farm-animalwelfare-16-page-report.pdf

Conner, D.S., Hamm, M.W., Smalley, S.B., and Williams, D. 2009. Pasture-Based Agriculture: Opportunities for Public Research Institutions, C.S Mott Group for Sustainable Food Systems, Michigan State University, Michigan. https://www.canr.msu.edu/foodsystems/uploads/files/AITFS_proceedings.pdf

Crippa, M., Solazzo, E., Guizzardi, D., et al. 2021. Food systems are responsible for a third of global anthropogenic GHG emissions, Nature Food, 2:198-209. https://www.ed.ac.uk/sites/default/files/atoms/files/food_systems_are_responsible_for_a_thir d_of_global.pdf

DALRRD. 2023. Avian Influenza: H5 and H7 outbreak update report, http://www.dalrrd.gov.za/images/outbreaks/Avian Influenza/Reports/h5-and-h7-update-26-may-2023-final.pdfDALRRD. 2021a. A profile of the South African beef market value chain. http://webapps1.daff.gov.za/AmisAdmin/upload/Beef%20Market%20Value%20Chain%20Prof ile%202021.pdf

DALRRD. 2022. South Africa yearbook 2021/22. https://www.gcis.gov.za/sites/default/files/docs/gcis/SAYB%202021_2022%20ONLINE%20VER SION.pdf

DALRRD. 2021b. South African animal feeds market analysis report. http://webapps1.daff.gov.za/AmisAdmin/upload/South%20African%20Animal%20Feeds%20 Market%20Analysis%20Report%202021.pdf

DALRRD. 2021c. Abstract of agricultural statistics. https://www.dalrrd.gov.za/phocadownloadpap/Statistics_and_Economic_Analysis/Statistical_I nformation/Abstract%202021.pdf

Da Silva, J.T., Garzillo, J.M.F., Rauber, F., et al. 2021. Greenhouse gas emissions, water footprint, and ecological footprint of food purchases according to their degree of processing in Brazilian metropolitan areas: a time-series study from 1987 to 2018, The Lancet Planet Health, (5):e775-85.

https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2542-5196%2821%2900254-0

Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE). 2023. White Paper on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of South Africa’s Biodiversity as approved by Cabinet. https://www.dffe.gov.za/sites/default/files/legislations/sabiodiversity2023whitepaper.pdf

De Schutter, O. 2010. Report submitted by the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Olivier De Schutter. A/HRC/16/49. https://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/food/docs/a-hrc-16-49.pdf

Didiza, A.T. 2022. Annual Performance Plan 2022-2023. Foreword by the Minister. Directorate Statistics and Economic Analysis (DSEA). 2016. Abstract of agricultural statistics, Directorate Statistics and Economic Analysis. Pretoria: Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries.

https://www.dalrrd.gov.za/images/Branches/Economica%20Development%20Trade%20and% 20Marketing/Statistc%20and%20%20Economic%20Analysis/statistical-information/abstract-2 024.pdf

FAO. 2012. Livestock and landscapes. Sustainability Pathways. https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/c93da831-30b3-41dc-9e12-e1ae2 963abde/content

FairPlay. 2024. The deadliest bird flu outbreak in South African history. Webinar. https://fairplaymovement.org/event/what-can-south-africa-learn-from-the-2023-bird-flu-crisi s/

Four Paws. 2021. One Welfare. https://www.four-paws.org.za/campaigns-topics/campaigns/pandemics-and-animal-welfare/ one-welfare

Four Paws. (n.d.). #LiveKinder for Farm Animals in South Africa. https://media.4-paws.org/b/a/a/e/baae6e0fe503d5dc8acca38174ae22f368804462/Four%20P aws%20-%20LiveKinder%20Farm%20Animal%20Report%20%281%29.pdf

Garcia, R. 2017. ‘One Welfare’: a framework to support the implementation of OIE animal welfare standards, Bulletin OIE, 2017: 3-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.20506/bull.2017.1.2589

Gerber, P.J., Steinfeld, H., Henderson, B., et al. 2013. Tackling climate change through livestock – A global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities, Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. https://www.fao.org/4/i3437e/i3437e.pdf

Graham, J.P., Leibler, J.H., Price, L.B., et al. 2008. The animal-human interface and infectious disease in industrial food animal production: Rethinking biosecurity and biocontainment, Public Health Reports. 123, 282–299.

Grain. 2014. Hungry for land. Small farmers feed the world with less than a quarter of all farmland.

https://grain.org/media/W1siZiIsIjIwMTQvMDYvMDQvMDdfMjlfMjNfODc0X0dSQUlOX0h1bm dyeV9mb3JfbGFuZC5wZGYiXV0

Greenberg, S., and Drimie, S. 2022. Agroecological initiatives in South Africa: Lessons and recommendations from three study sites Synthesis report, TAFS phase 2, Synthesis Report. https://foodsecurity.ac.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/TAFS-South-Africa_Phase-2-synthesis -report.pdf

Grobler, R. 2012. Regulating the environmental impacts of factory farming in South Africa: Legal perspectives. LLB dissertation, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa. https://dspace.nwu.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10394/9053/Grobler_R.pdf?sequence=1

Hadjikakou, M. 2017. Trimming the excess: environmental impacts of discretionary food consumption in Australia, Ecological Economics, 131:119-128. https://tinyurl.com/95rjtba2

Harvey, C.A., Rakotobe, Z.L., Rao, N.S., et al. 2014. Extreme vulnerability of smallholder farmers to agricultural risks and climate change in Madagascar, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, Achieving Food and Environmental Security: New Approaches to Close the Gap, vol. 369, No. 1639. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/epdf/10.1098/rstb.2013.0089

Hashem, N.M., Gonzalez-Bulnes, A., and Rodriguez-Morales, A.J. 2020. Animal welfare and livestock supply chain sustainability under the COVID-19 outbreak: An overview, Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 7: 582528. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.582528

Hayek, M.N. 2022. The infectious disease trap of animal agriculture, Science Advances|Review, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9629715/pdf/sciadv.add6681.pdf

Heiberg, T. 2017. South African egg output tumbles, jobs cut after avian flu. https://www.reuters.com/article/world/south-african-egg-output-tumbles-jobs-cut-after-avia n-flu-idUSL8N1MS5LJ/

Herrero, M., Grace, D., Njuki, J., Johnson, N., Enahoro, D., Silvestri, S., and Rufino, M.C. 2013. The Roles of Livestock in Developing Countries, Animal, 7(1): 3-18. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751731112001954/pdf?md5=dd5560ce3 f93c77e18cbc59d9f202040&pid=1-s2.0-S1751731112001954-main.pdf

HLPE. 2019. Agroecological and other innovative approaches for sustainable agriculture and food systems that enhance food security and nutrition. https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/ff385e60-0693-40fe-9a6b-79bbef 05202c/content

Holmes, M.D., Dalal, S., Sewram, V., et al. 2018. Consumption of processed food dietary patterns in four African populations. Public Health Nutrition, 21 (8), 1529–1537. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10261518/pdf/S136898001700386Xa.pdf

Howard, P.H., Ajena, F., Yamaoka, M., and Clarke, A. 2021. “Protein” Industry Convergence and Its Implications for Resilient and Equitable Food Systems. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 5:684181. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sustainable-food-systems/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2021.6 84181/pdf?isPublishedV2=false

Hristov, A.N., Oh, J., Lee, C., Meinen, R., et al. 2013. Mitigation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Livestock Production—A Review of Technical Options for Non-Co2 Emissions. FAO; Rome, Italy. https://www.uncclearn.org/wp-content/uploads/library/fao180.pdf

IPBES. 2019. Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3553458

IPES-Food. 2022. The politics of protein: examining claims about livestock, fish, ‘alternative proteins’ and sustainability. https://www.ipes-food.org/_img/upload/files/PoliticsOfProtein.pdf

IPES-Food. 2017. Unravelling the Food–Health Nexus: Addressing practices, political economy, and power relations to build healthier food systems, The Global Alliance for the Future of Food and IPES-Food.

https://www.ipes-food.org/_img/upload/files/Health_FullReport(1).pdf

IPES-Food. 2016. From uniformity to diversity: a paradigm shift from industrial agriculture to diversified agroecological systems, International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems. https://www.ipes-food.org/_img/upload/files/UniformityToDiversity_FULL.pdf

Keck, F. 2024. African swine fever: are there better ways to manage the disease than Italy’s mass pig culls?

https://theconversation.com/african-swine-fever-are-there-better-ways-to-manage-the-disea se-than-italys-mass-pig-culls-231745

Kolahdooz, F., Spearing, K., and Sharma, S. 2013. Dietary adequacies among South African adults in rural KwaZulu- Natal, PLoS One, 8(6). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0067184

Koosis, A. 2024. Challenging factory farming in Africa: a call for sustainable alternatives. https://faunalytics.org/challenging-factory-farming-in-africa-a-call-for-sustainable-alternative s/#

Kushitor, S.B., Drimie, S., Davids, R., et al. 2022. The complex challenge of governing food systems: the case of south African food policy, Food Security: 14:883-896. https://tinyurl.com/mrxc9wb7

Labuschagne, A., Louw, A., and Ndanga, L.Z.B. 2011. A consumer-orientated study of the South African beef supply chain, Agrekon, 50(1):71-88. https://journals.co.za/doi/epdf/10.10520/EJC18458

Leibler, J.H., Otte, J., Roland-Holst, D., et al., 2009. Industrial food animal production and global health risks: Exploring the ecosystems and economics of avian influenza, EcoHealth, 6, 58–70.

Lever, J., and Evans, A. 2017. Corporate Social Responsibility and Farm Animal Welfare: Towards Sustainable Development in the Food Industry? CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. In: Samuel O. Idowu and Stephen Vertigans (Eds.), Stages of Corporate Social Responsibility: 205-222. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43536-7_10

Mahlobo, B.T. 2016. Multi-criteria livestock assessment for sustainability of smallholder farms in Kwa-Zulu Natal (Masters’ thesis). Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:130197257

Malatji, D.P., Tsotetsi, A.M., Van Marle-Koster, E., and Muchadeyi, F.C. 2016. A description of village chicken production systems and prevalence of gastrointestinal parasites: Case studies in Limpopo and KwaZulu-Natal provinces of South Africa. Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research, 83(1), a968. https://doi.org/10.4102/ojvr.v83i1.968

Malusi, N., Fallowo, A., and Idamokoro, E. 2021. Herd dynamics, production and marketing constraints in the commercialisation of cattle across Nguni Cattle Project beneficiaries in the Eastern Cape, South Africa, Pastoralism: Research, Policy and Practice, 11:1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13570-020-00186-x

Massey, E. 2023. Implementation Evaluation of the National Food and Nutrition Security Plan. Summary report. Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation and Genesis Analytics. https://static.pmg.org.za/240223_Genesis_DPME_NFNSP.pdf

Mateo-Sagasta, J., Zadeh, S.M., Turral., H., and Burke, J. 2017. Water pollution from agriculture: a global review, FAO and IWMI. http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/Publications/wle/fao/water-pollution-from-agriculture-a-global-re view.pdf

May, J., Witten, C., and Lake. L. 2020. Food and nutrition security, South African Child Gauge 2020. Children’s Institute and University of Cape Town. https://innovationedge.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/ChildGauge_2020_screen_final.p df

Mbatha, C.N. 2021. Livestock production and marketing for small emerging farmers in South Africa and Kenya: comparative lessons, South African Journal of Agricultural Extension, 49(1): 141- 161. https://scielo.org.za/pdf/sajae/v49n1/13.pdf

Meijboom, F.L.B., Staman, J., and Pothoven, R. 2023. From blind spot to crucial concept: on the role of animal welfare in food system changes towards circular agriculture, Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 36:14. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10806-023-09909-7.pdf

Meissner, H.H., Scholtz, M.M. and Palmer, A.R. 2013. Sustainability of the South African livestock sector towards 2050. Part 1: worth and impact of the sector, South African Journal of Animal Science, 43(3): 282-297. https://www.sasas.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Meissner1.43-Issue3.pdf

Mekonnen, M., and Hoekstra, A.Y. 2010. The green, blue and grey water footprint of animals and animal products. Value of water research report 48. UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education. Delft, The Netherlands. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1075&context=wffdocs

Miele, M., and Lever, J. 2014. Improving animal welfare in Europe: Cases of comparative bio-sustainabilities. Sustainable Food Systems: Building a New Paradigm. Routledge 143-165. https://tinyurl.com/5yxtd7pt

Mockshell, J., and Ritter, T.N. 2023. Ultra-processed food environments: aligning policy beliefs from the State, market and civil society. In: Resnick, D., and Swinnen, J. (Eds.), The political economy of food system transformation: pathways to progress in a polarized world. Chapter 7. International Food Policy Research Institute. Oxford University Press. United Kingdom. https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstreams/2392bf0c-6cd2-44cf-b35f-eca97ff1e7ed/download

National Department of Health (NDoH), Statistics South Africa (Stats SA), South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC), and ICF. 2019. South Africa Demographic and Health Survey 2016. Pretoria, South Africa, and Rockville, Maryland, USA: NDoH, STATS SA, SAMRC, and ICF. https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR337/FR337.pdf

Ndlela, T.S., and Murcott, M.J. 2021. Innovative regulation of meat consumption in South Africa: an environmental rights perspective. Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal (PELJ). 1: ISSN 1727-3781. https://scielo.org.za/pdf/pelj/v24n1/07.pdf

Njuguna, L., Arndt, C., Crane, T., et al. 2023. Measuring greenhouse gas emissions and tracking adaptation to climate change in Africa’s livestock sector. https://www.giz.de/en/downloads/giz-2023-en-PCSL-GHGemissions-CC-adaptation-livestock-sector-EA.pdf.

Oduniyi, O.S., Rubhara, T.T., and Antwi, M.A. 2020. Sustainability of livestock farming in South Africa. Outlook on production constraints, climate-related events, and upshot on adaptive capacity. Sustainability, 12, 2582. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2582/pdf?version=1586430208

O’Neill J. 2016. Tackling drug-resistant infections globally: final report and recommendations. Review on Antimicrobial Resistance. https://amr-review.org/sites/default/files/160525_Final%20paper_with%20cover.pdf

Oxfam. 2014. Hidden hunger in South Africa. https://oi-files-d8-prod.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/file_attachments/hidden_h unger_in_south_africa_0.pdf

Poore, J., and Nemecek, T. 2018. Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science. 360(6392): 987-992. https://tinyurl.com/4mnf75dj

Popkin, B.M., and Gordon-Larsen, P. 2004. The nutrition transition: worldwide obesity dynamics and their determinants. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 28, Suppl. 3, S2–S9. https://tinyurl.com/4u4zfa5h

Popkin, B.M. 2001. The nutrition transition and obesity in the developing world. J. Nutr., 131, 871–873.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022316622147590/pdfft?md5=6fe175cf6 584cbc2ff9330946008f7a3&pid=1-s2.0-S0022316622147590-main.pdf

Presidential Climate Commission. 2022. A framework for a just transition in South Africa. https://pccommissionflo.imgix.net/uploads/images/22_PAPER_Framework-for-a-Just-Transitio n_revised_242.pdf

Queenan, K., Sobratee, N., Davids, R., Mabhaudhi, T, Chimonyo, M., Slotow, R., Shankar, B., and Häsler, B. 2020. A systems analysis and conceptual system dynamics model of the livestock-derived food system in South Africa: A tool for policy guidance. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 9(4), 275–298. https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2020.094.021

Reardon, T., Tshirley, D., Liverpool-Tasie, L.S.O., et al. 2021. The processed food revolution in African food systems and the double burden of malnutrition. Global Food Security. 28: 1-19. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211912420301206/pdfft?md5=188f878e 19e895734c232331645f55df&pid=1-s2.0-S2211912420301206-main.pdf

Republic of South Africa (RSA). 1996. Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. https://www.justice.gov.za/constitution/SAConstitution-web-eng.pdf

Rich, K.M., Schaefer, A., Thapa, B., et al. 2022. An overview of meat processing in Africa. Chapter 4 in ReSAKSS Annual trends and outlook report. https://www.resakss.org/sites/default/files/2022_ator_individual_chapters/Chapter%204_ReS AKSS_AW_ATOR_2022.pdf

Salama, P.J., Embarek, P.K.B., Bagaria, J., and Fall, I.S. 2018. Learning from listeria: Safer food for all. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29900862/

Sardar, M.A., Khan, M.I.A., Salman, M., and Ullah, I. 2023. Farm animal welfare as a key element of sustainable food production, Letters in Animal Biology, 3(2):1-8. https://liabjournal.com/index.php/liab/article/view/116/39

Shields, S., and Orme-Evans, G. 2015. The impacts of climate change mitigation strategies on animal welfare. Animals, 5(2), 361–394. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4494406/pdf/animals-05-00361.pdf

Simelane, T., Mutanga, S.S., Hongoro, C., et al. 2023. National Food and Nutrition Security Survey: National Report. HSRC: Pretoria Song, G., Li, M., Semakula, H.M., and Zhang, S. 2015. Food consumption and waste and the embedded carbon, water and ecological footprints of households in China, Science of the Total Environment, 529:191–97.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969715301273

Stats SA. 2022. Census 2022: Agricultural Households. https://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/Report-03-11-01/Report-03-11-012022.pdf

Stats SA. 2020. Census of Commercial Agriculture, 2017: Financial and Production Statistics. Pretoria: Statistics South Africa. https://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/Report-11-02-01/Report-11-02-012017.pdf

Steinfeld, H., Gerber, P., Wassenaar, T., et al. 2006. Livestock’s Long Shadow: environmental issues and options. The Livestock Environment and Development Initiative. FAO. Rome, Italy. https://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e.pdf.

Stevenson, P. 2023. Links between industrial livestock production, disease including zoonoses and antimicrobial resistance, Animal Research & One Health, 1 (1): 137-144 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1002/aro2.19?download=true

Steyn, N.P., and Mchiza, Z.J. 2014. Obesity and the nutrition transition in sub-Saharan Africa. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1311: 88–101. https://nyaspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/nyas.12433

Thornton, P.K., Van de Steeg, J., Notenbaert, A., and Herrero, M. 2009. The impacts of climate change on livestock and livestock systems in developing countries: A review of what we know and what we need to know. Agricultural Systems, 101(3):113-127. https://tinyurl.com/2b236z3m

Thow, A.M., Greenberg, S., Hara, M., Friel, S., Du Toit, A., and Sanders, D. 2018. Improving policy coherence for food security and nutrition in South Africa: a qualitative policy analysis, Food Security: 10:1105-1130. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12571-018-0813-4.pdf

Thukwana, N. 2022. South Africa reported 145 outbreaks of avian flu and culled 3.7 million birds in 12 months.

https://www.news24.com/news24/bi-archive/south-africa-has-145-avian-influenza-cases-bet ween-april-2021-and-march-2022-37-million-birds-killed-2022-6

Tribaldos, T., and Kortetmäki, T. 2022. Just transition principles and criteria for food systems and beyond, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 43, pp. 244-256. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210422422000399/pdfft?md5=581cde8c 92b247d38160d9ac0dfbf350&pid=1-s2.0-S2210422422000399-main.pdf

Tucker, C.B., Mench, J.A., and Keyserlingk, M.V. 2013. Animal welfare: an integral component of sustainability. In: Sustainable animal agriculture. CAB International, Wallingford, UK: 42-52.

UNEP. 2022. Resolution adopted by the United Nations Environment Assembly on 2 March 2022. UNEP/EA.5/Res.1.

https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/39795/ANIMAL%20WELFARE%e2% 80%93ENVIRONMENT%e2%80%93SUSTAINABLE%20DEVELOPMENT%20NEXUS.%20English.p df?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

UNFCCC. 2022. Report of the Conference of the Parties on its twenty-seventh session, held in Sharm el-Sheikh from 6 to 20 November 2022. Decision 3/CP.27, FCCC/CP/2022/10/Add.11. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cp2022_10a01_E.pdf?download

Vargas-Bello-Pérez, E., Miranda-de la Lama, G.C., Teixeira, D.L., et al. 2017. Farm animal welfare influences on markets and consumer attitudes in Latin America: The cases of Mexico, Chile and Brazil, Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 30: 697-713. https://repositorio.uchile.cl/xmlui/bitstream/handle/2250/148927/Farm-Animal-Welfare.pdf? sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Verkuijl, C., Dutkiewicz, J., Schere, L., et al. 2024. FAO’s 1.5°C roadmap for food systems falls short. Nature Food, 5:264-266. https://ent.news/2024/3/1697.pdf

Verkuijl, C. 2023. Will animal welfare be COP 28’s sacrificial lamb? https://www.sei.org/perspectives/will-animal-welfare-be-cop28s-sacrificial-lamb/

Wanyama, R., Gödecke, T., Chege, C.G., and Qaim, M. 2019. How important are supermarkets for the diets of the urban poor in Africa? Food Security, 11 (6), 1339–1353. World Animal Protection. 2024. The just transition from industrial animal production to equitable, humane and sustainable food systems.

https://www.worldanimalprotection.org/siteassets/just-transition/just-transition-white-paper .pdf

World Animal Protection. 2020. Animal Protection Index (API). Republic of South Africa: ranking E.

https://api.worldanimalprotection.org/sites/default/files/api_2020_-_south_africa_0.pdf

World Bank. 2022. Inequality in Southern Africa: An Assessment of the Southern African Customs Union.

https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099125303072236903/pdf/P1649270c02a1f0 6b0a3ae02e57eadd7a82.pdf?_gl=1*u46h9n*_gcl_au*MTYwMzgxMzAyNi4xNzE4MDE4MzI1

World Health Organization (WHO). 2023. Noncommunicable diseases. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/noncommunicable-diseases