Livestock contributes substantially to global greenhouse gas emissions, raising urgent questions about the sustainability of our food systems.
Responses range from technological innovations on farms to shifts in dietary habits, but their effectiveness varies widely across regions.
Addressing this complexity requires understanding the roles of different stakeholders and asking: which strategies can truly balance environmental sustainability with food security?
Why methane matters: The climate impact of livestock
Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas – more than 25 times stronger than carbon dioxide at trapping heat over a 100-year period.
Livestock, especially cattle, generate methane during digestion through enteric fermentation, a process that cannot be avoided.
As livestock production has expanded dramatically in recent decades, so too has methane output, intensifying climate risks. Elevated methane emissions drive more extreme weather, disrupt ecosystems, and accelerate global warming.
Recognising the scale of this problem is essential, because only with a clear understanding can we design strategies that reduce emissions while keeping food systems resilient.
From pastures to plates: How animal agriculture shapes emissions
The environmental impact of animal agriculture extends far beyond digestion. Feed production relies heavily on fertilisers, releasing nitrous oxide, another potent greenhouse gas.
Expanding cropland and pastures often means deforestation, which reduces the planet’s capacity to absorb carbon.
Once animals are raised, the supply chain of transporting, processing, and refrigerating meat and dairy further adds to emissions.
Waste management also poses challenges. If manure is not handled properly, it decomposes without oxygen and releases methane.
Taken together, these interconnected stages reveal why reducing livestock emissions requires a system-wide perspective rather than focusing on a single source.
As diets and consumption patterns change, transforming animal agriculture into a lower-emission system becomes a central challenge for climate action.
Tech fixes or diet shifts? Competing paths to lower methane
When it comes to solutions, two approaches dominate the debate.
One path relies on technological innovation, such as feed additives that suppress methane during digestion or anaerobic systems that capture methane from manure and convert it into biogas.
These approaches often attract support because they promise to reduce emissions without fundamentally changing the way food is produced and consumed.
The other path emphasises changing diets. Reducing meat and dairy consumption in favour of plant-based alternatives inherently lowers methane emissions, while also offering potential benefits for human health.
Advocates argue that shifting consumption patterns tackles the root cause by lowering demand for livestock products.
Both strategies have merits and drawbacks. Technology reduces emissions within current systems but may not address overconsumption, while dietary change goes further but faces cultural and political resistance.
The real challenge lies in combining these approaches rather than viewing them as mutually exclusive.
Global North vs South: Unequal burdens, unequal solutions
Although methane emissions are a global concern, responsibilities and capacities to address them are unevenly distributed.
In the Global North, industrialised agriculture and high levels of consumption mean that countries bear a larger share of methane output. At the same time, they have the resources to invest in advanced technologies and adopt sustainable practices.
By contrast, the Global South contributes less per capita but often suffers most from the consequences of climate change. Many smallholder farmers rely on traditional methods that can generate methane, yet they often lack access to mitigation tools or financial support.
This imbalance highlights the need for climate strategies that account for regional realities, ensuring that emission reductions do not worsen global inequalities.
Farmers, policies, and markets: Who drives change?
The trajectory of methane emissions is shaped by farmers, policymakers, and markets. Farmers make day-to-day choices about practices, guided by the incentives and regulations around them.
Policies can encourage sustainable farming but may also unintentionally reinforce emissions, for example, through subsidies that favour fossil fuels or livestock production.
Markets also exert influence. Growing consumer demand for sustainable food pushes producers to adapt, while multinational corporations shape supply chains in ways that can either hinder or support progress.
Ultimately, lasting change depends on alignment between these actors, with farmers receiving fair incentives, policies driving climate goals, and markets rewarding low-emission practices.
A just transition: Balancing climate goals with food security
Cutting methane cannot come at the expense of livelihoods or nutrition. For millions of people, livestock is central to income, culture, and diet. A just transition must therefore balance climate goals with the need for food security.
This balance requires investment in sustainable practices that reduce emissions while protecting yields. Innovation can strengthen agricultural resilience and improve productivity, ensuring that climate action enhances rather than undermines food systems.
Equally important is ensuring that marginalised communities are supported with resources and opportunities so that climate transitions do not deepen inequality.
Reducing methane in the global food system demands a multifaceted approach: better livestock management, technological innovation, shifts toward plant-based diets, and international collaboration that accounts for regional differences.
By recognising the interconnectedness of agricultural practices, global inequities, and stakeholder responsibilities, we can design solutions that are both effective and fair.
The path forward is a just transition – one that safeguards food security while meeting climate goals. Rethinking methane beyond the barn is about more than reducing emissions; it is about building a food system that is resilient, equitable, and sustainable for all.