Intensive farming may actually reduce risk of pandemics

Scientists evaluated the evidence that intensive livestock farming is causing pandemics, with surprising results. They find that intensive livestock farming could actually reduce the risk of future pandemics, compared to non-intensive farming.

Those calling for a move away from intensive farming often fail to consider the counterfactual

Harriet Bartlett

In a paper, published earlier this week in Royal Society Open Science, Harriet Bartlett and colleagues found that there is a lack of sufficient evidence to conclude which way of farming is least risky and that there is evidence that the move away from intensive farming might actually increase the risk of pandemics. They call for more research to be done before changing policies or incentivising a particular type of farming.

“High-yield or ‘intensive’ livestock farming is blamed for pandemics, but those calling for a move away from intensive farming often fail to consider the counterfactual – the pandemic risk of farming less intensively and particularly the consequences for land use,” says the lead author, Harriet Bartlett.

Globally, we are now producing four times more meat than we did in the 1960s. Most of our meat, eggs and dairy now come from intensive farms, but such farms are thought be risky due to their crowded conditions which increase the chance of diseases ‘taking off’ and spreading rapidly.

However, intensive farms need less land than extensive (e.g. ‘free range’) farms to produce the same amount of food – both to grow their feed and to rear their animals. This is key because growing demand for livestock products has caused dramatic habitat loss, which means we are now farming in places where livestock and people are coming into frequent contact with wildlife. This contact with increasingly disturbed, stressed, and infected wildlife makes the spillover of zoonotic viruses into people or livestock more likely.

If we were to switch from the current system to one based on extensive farming, we would need substantially more land to meet demand – resulting in the conversion of habitat roughly the size of Brazil and India between 2009 and 2050. This could increase the contact between people, livestock and stressed wildlife – including wildlife that might well host the next pandemic virus.

Intensive farms may have a greater risk of takeoff, but extensive farms may have greater risk of spillover.

Worryingly, we simply do not know which risk is more important for preventing future pandemics, and so it is currently impossible to determine which types of farms carry least risk overall.

COVID19 has demonstrated the huge potential impact of zoonotic diseases, and this study highlights that more research is urgently needed to identify how we minimise the risk of another pandemic.

Reference:

Bartlett H, Holmes MA, Petrovan SO, Williams DR, Wood JLN, Balmford A. 2022 Understanding the relative risks of zoonosis emergence under contrasting approaches to meeting livestock product demand. R. Soc. Open Sci. 9: 211573. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.211573

/University Release. This material from the originating organization/author(s) may be of a point-in-time nature, edited for clarity, style and length. The views and opinions expressed are those of the author(s).View in full here.