What ends up on dinner plates could reshape farms around the globe.
New modelling published in Nature suggests a worldwide shift toward healthier diets, more efficient farming, and much less food waste could cut global farmland use by as much as 6 percent by 2050, compared with current trends. The analysis also found agriculture-related net CO2 emissions from land-use change could be 85 percent lower than they were in 2020.
The researchers said the changes would sharply reduce livestock production while boosting plant foods. By 2050, the total value of livestock production could fall by 42 percent, or $630 billion, compared with 2020. The global value of vegetables, fruits, nuts, and legumes could rise by 57 percent, or $890 billion.
The biggest drop would be in ruminant animals, including beef cattle, sheep, and goats. The global value of that sector could decline by 70 percent, or $274 billion, by 2050, with roughly 400 million fewer ruminant animals worldwide than in 2020.
The study was led by researchers from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, Cornell University, and 10 modelling teams. They examined what could happen if the world pursued a food system transformation similar to the one proposed by the 2025 EAT-Lancet Commission.
The 2025 EAT-Lancet Commission report concluded that a worldwide transition to healthy diets could prevent 15 million premature deaths every year. Earlier research has also estimated that the global food system creates $10 to $20 trillion in hidden costs annually, including health care expenses, environmental damage, and lost productivity.
Dr Matt Gibson, lead author, who began the work at Cornell University before joining the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, said: “Transforming food systems would deliver enormous potential benefits to our health and the environment but, as our results make clear, they would also lead to fundamental changes to global agriculture and affect the lives of millions of farmers and food producers.
“Rather than using these results as an excuse for inaction, it’s critical that governments rise to the challenge and make difficult decisions for the good of our health and the planet. This means confronting powerful groups that profit from the status quo and a global food system that currently fails both those who produce our food and those who should be nourished by it.”
The researchers said the shift would bring major economic changes, with some agricultural industries shrinking while others expand.
Daniel Mason-D’Croz, study co-author from Cornell University, said: “We should consider these scenarios not as a forecast of what will happen, but as a useful early guide of where challenges and opportunities may arise. Which sectors would need to contract, and which would need to expand. A transformation of this magnitude cannot begin in 2050. Foresight modeling like that highlighted in this study is a valuable tool to inform actions today for more sustainable, healthy, and just food systems tomorrow.”
The effects would vary widely across regions. In the United States, the total value of agricultural production could fall by 21 percent, or $76 billion, by 2050 compared with 2020. US crop production value could increase by 20 percent, or $40 billion, while livestock production value could decline by 73 percent, or $116 billion.
In India, total agricultural production value could rise by 46 percent, or $198 billion. Crop production value could increase by 65 percent, or $208 billion, while livestock production value could fall by 8 percent, or $10 billion.
In Europe, overall agricultural production value could decline by 35 percent, or $190 billion. Crop production value could decrease by 8 percent, or $22 billion, while livestock production value could fall by 66 percent, or $168 billion.
The researchers assumed consumers would shift to healthy diets without financial, cultural, or practical barriers. They said the scenarios represent only a selection of possible futures, and that additional studies are needed to examine other pathways based on different policy choices, economic conditions, and patterns of consumer behaviour.
Read more from Science Daily.
