Editing IPCC:AR6/SRCCL/Chapter-5 (section)

=== 5.7.3 Just Transitions to sustainability ===

<div id="section-5-7-3-just-transitions-to-sustainability-block-1"></div>

Research is limited on how land-use transitions would proceed from ruminant production to other socio-ecological farming systems. Ruminants have been associated with humans since the early development of agriculture, and the role of ruminants in many agricultural systems and smallholder communities is substantial. Ruminant production systems have been adapted to a wide range of socioeconomic and environmental conditions in crop, forestry, and food processing settings (Čolović et al. 2019 <sup>[[#fn:r1271|1271]]</sup> ), bioenergy production (de Souza et al. 2019), and food waste recycling (Westendorf 2000 <sup>[[#fn:r1272|1272]]</sup> ). Pasture cultivation in succession to crops is recognised as important to management of pest and diseases cycles and to improve soil carbon stocks and soil quality (Carvalho and Dedieu 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r1273|1273]]</sup> ). Grazing livestock is important as a reserve of food and economic stocks for some smallholders (Ouma et al. 2003 <sup>[[#fn:r1274|1274]]</sup> ).

Possible land-use options for transitions away from livestock production in a range of systems include (a) retain land but reduce investments to run a more extensive production system; (b) change land use by adopting a different production activity; (c) abandon land (or part of the farm) to allow secondary vegetation regrowth (Carvalho et al. 2019 <sup>[[#fn:r1275|1275]]</sup> and Laue and Arima 2016); and (d) invest in afforestation or reforestation (Baynes et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r1276|1276]]</sup> ). The extensification option could lead to increases rather than decreases in GHG emissions related to reduction in beef consumption. Large-scale abandonment, afforestation, or reforestation would probably have more positive environmental outcomes, but could result in economic and social issues that would require governmental subsidies to avoid decline and migration in some regions (Henderson et al. 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r1277|1277]]</sup> ).

Alternative economic use of land, such as bioenergy production, could balance the negative socioeconomic impact of reducing beef output, reduce the tax values needed to reduce consumption, and avoid extensification of ruminant production systems (Wirsenius et al. 2011 <sup>[[#fn:r1278|1278]]</sup> ). However, the analysis of the transition of land use for ruminants to other agricultural production systems is still a literature gap (Cross-Chapter Box 7 in Chapter 6).

Finally, it is important to recognise that, while energy alternatives produce the same function for the consumer, it is questionable that providing the same nutritional value through an optimised mix of dietary ingredients provides the same utility for humans. Food has a central role in human pleasure, socialisation, cultural identity, and health (Röös et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r1279|1279]]</sup> ), including some of the most vulnerable groups, so Just Transitions and their costs need to be taken into account. Pilot projects are important to provide greater insights for large-scale policy design, implementation, and enforcement.

In summary, more research is needed on how land-use transitions would proceed from ruminant production to other farming systems and affect the farmers and other food system actors involved. There is ''limited evidence'' on what the decisions of farmers under lower beef demand would be.

<span id="mobilising-knowledge"></span>