Water footprint livestock
Pro Research Analysisby 
Searched over 200M research papers
Water Footprint of Livestock: An In-Depth Analysis
Introduction to Water Footprint in Livestock Production
The water footprint (WF) of livestock production is a critical metric for understanding the environmental impact of animal farming. It encompasses the total volume of freshwater used directly and indirectly to produce livestock products, including meat, milk, and eggs. This article synthesizes findings from multiple studies to provide a comprehensive overview of the water footprint associated with various livestock production systems.
Water Footprint Variability Among Livestock Products
Higher Water Footprint of Meat Compared to Dairy and Eggs
Research consistently shows that the water footprint of meat is significantly higher than that of milk or eggs. Among meats, beef has the largest water footprint, followed by sheep, goat, pork, and chicken1 2 4. This variation is primarily due to differences in feed conversion ratios, with ruminants like cattle, sheep, and goats having poorer feed conversion efficiency compared to monogastric animals such as poultry and swine1.
Feed Production as the Major Contributor
Feed production is identified as the largest contributor to the water footprint of livestock production, accounting for a substantial portion of the total water used1 3 4. For instance, in dairy farms, water used for feed production represents approximately 87% of the total water footprint of milk production3.
Geographic and Systematic Differences in Water Footprint
Regional Variability in Water Footprint
The water footprint of livestock production varies significantly across different geographic regions and production systems. For example, beef cattle production systems in New South Wales, Australia, show a wide range of water footprints due to differences in local water stress and farming practices2. Similarly, sheep and goat farming in Northern China also exhibit high water footprints, influenced by the type of feed and production system used4.
Impact of Production Systems
Livestock raised in non-irrigated, pasture-based systems generally have a lower water footprint compared to those in industrial systems. This is because industrial systems tend to consume and pollute more ground and surface water resources2 10. In New Zealand, for instance, beef cattle and sheep farming have relatively low water scarcity footprints due to efficient production practices and low annual water-stress levels7.
Strategies for Reducing Water Footprint
Efficient Feed and Water Management
Several strategies can help reduce the water footprint of livestock production. These include using low-water-footprint feeds, improving irrigation efficiency for crops used as livestock feed, and reducing water wastage in animal servicing activities1 3. For example, substituting high-water-demand feeds with alternatives like triticale silage can significantly lower the water footprint of dairy farms3.
Policy and Guidelines
The FAO Livestock Environmental Assessment and Performance (LEAP) Partnership has developed guidelines to monitor and improve the environmental performance of livestock supply chains. These guidelines recommend comprehensive assessments that include both water productivity and water scarcity footprints to provide a complete picture of water use efficiency and environmental impact6.
Conclusion
The water footprint of livestock production is a complex issue influenced by various factors, including the type of livestock, feed conversion efficiency, production system, and geographic location. While meat production, particularly beef, has a higher water footprint compared to dairy and eggs, there are significant opportunities to reduce this impact through better feed and water management practices. Implementing these strategies and adhering to international guidelines can help mitigate the pressure on global freshwater resources and promote sustainable livestock production.
Sources and full results
Most relevant research papers on this topic
Water footprint of livestock products and production systems: a review
The water footprint of livestock production decreases with intensification, with meat having a higher water footprint than milk or eggs, and feed production being the largest contributor.
Systematic ReviewWater footprint of livestock: comparison of six geographically defined beef production systems
Many low-input, pasture-based livestock production systems have little impact on freshwater resources, and their water footprint is similar to broad-acre cereals, challenging the general assertion that meat production drives water scarcity.
Highly CitedWater footprint and economic water productivity assessment of eight dairy cattle farms based on field measurement.
Using less water-required feed or importing feed from countries with low water consumption could lead to potential water savings in the Tunisian dairy sector of up to 16%.
Rigorous JournalWater Footprint Analysis of Sheep and Goat from Various Production Systems in Northern China
Sheep and goats in Shanxi, China, have a slightly higher water footprint than previously estimated, which can help reduce water consumption in animal husbandry and contribute to sustainable strategies.
Water footprint of a tropical beef cattle production system: The impact of individual-animal and feed management
The type of diet did not significantly affect carcass weight and live weight in a tropical beef cattle production system.
Building consensus on water use assessment of livestock production systems and supply chains: Outcome and recommendations from the FAO LEAP Partnership
The FAO LEAP Partnership developed guidelines for water use assessment in livestock production systems and supply chains, resulting in an international consensus on water use assessment methods.
Water footprint of beef cattle and sheep produced in New Zealand: water scarcity and eutrophication impacts
New Zealand beef cattle and sheep have low water scarcity footprints, potentially benefiting international marketing, but reducing eutrophication potential requires efficiencies and reduced irrigation.
Highly CitedAssessing water resource use in livestock production: A review of methods
Improved methods for assessing water resource use in livestock production should include both green and blue water resources, consider alternative uses, and consider local impacts.
Literature ReviewHighly CitedWater use by livestock: A global perspective for a regional issue?
Livestock farming contributes to water scarcity by 70%, and reducing feed irrigation can help reduce this impact.
Highly CitedA Global Assessment of the Water Footprint of Farm Animal Products
Animal products have a larger water footprint than crop products with equivalent nutritional value, and it is more water-efficient to obtain calories, protein, and fat through crop products than animal products.
Highly CitedTry another search
The role of technology in enhancing accessibility for people with disabilities.
The potential of urban vertical farms, hydroponics, and controlled environment agriculture in reducing food miles and promoting local food systems.
The safety and ethical considerations of brain-computer interfaces.
Vertebrae CT images deep learning
Using Learning and Study Strategies Inventory LASSI
What are the health benefits of engaging in regular strength training, regardless of age or fitness level?