A new report suggests that growing human-grade crops to feed animals in factory farms wastes more food than any other sector, threatening nutrition security and climate targets.
Around a third of all food produced is wasted or lost, and research from across the world shows that this is most prevalent at the household level.
But a new study offers a different perspective, suggesting that the factory farming of animals for meat, dairy, and eggs is the leading driver of food waste. This is thanks to the inefficiency of feeding human-grade grains to livestock: for every 100 calories of these crops fed to animals, just three to 25 calories of meat are produced.
If we stop growing grains for animals and use them for direct human consumption instead, an extra two billion people (a quarter of the world’s population) can be fed each year – for context, the UN estimates that around 673 million experienced hunger in 2024, and 2.3 billion faced some form of food insecurity.
According to the UNEP and food waste charity WRAP, households throw away 631 million tonnes of food annually. But the new report by Compassion in World Farming found that the factory farming sector is responsible for the wastage of 766 million tonnes of grains.
What’s even worrying is that if we keep things the way they are, the world would need nearly twice (89%) more grains to continue feeding factory-farmed animals by 2040.
“It is simply scandalous that while hundreds of millions of people go hungry and we face a triple planetary crisis, we are allowing hundreds of millions of tonnes of food to be wasted every year by being fed to factory-farmed animals,” said Peter Stevenson, chief policy advisor at Compassion in World Farming.
The organisation is calling on governments to adopt policies that prioritise food production for humans over animal feed. “As well as being the world’s biggest form of animal cruelty, fuelling climate change and killing nature, factory farming wastes food on a colossal scale, undermining global food security,” he added.
Feed production the primary driver of meat’s climate impact
The report recalls how some experts, including the UN FAO, argue that industrial animal production is needed in the Global South to boost food access. However, livestock’s poor conversion of grains into meat and milk means that factory farming instead “undermines” food security.
One study shows that for every 100g of grain protein fed to animals, humans only get about 10g of the macronutrient from the resulting beef, 15g from pork, and 34g from poultry. Another paper suggests that the conversion rate for dairy and eggs lies at 43g and 35g of protein, respectively. Overall, 45% of the world’s grains go to animal feed.
While not a grain, soy is also a major culprit. Its impact on tropical deforestation is well-known, but Compassion in World Farming points out that 77% of global soy production is reserved for animal feed. Much of the remaining amount is used for biofuels, industry, or oils – only 6% goes to human food applications, like soy milk or tofu.
Meanwhile, feed production is the major source of poultry and pig meat’s environmental impacts. The report states that 99% of the land used to farm these animals is a result of growing grains to feed them. Feed crops and the associated land use change further account for 67-91% of industrial chicken production emissions, and 41-68% of emissions from pig farming.
Food waste is estimated to account for up to a tenth of global emissions, and the livestock industry up to 20%. The difference between conventional food waste and the grains lost by feeding animals varies across the world, but is alarming in many regions.
For example, in Spain, food waste linked to the livestock industry is over five times greater than the amount generated by humans. In absolute terms, China has the biggest gap, with 61 million tonnes of food discarded by humans, compared to 203 million tonnes of grains lost by feeding animals each year.
Producing food for humans over animal feed has massive land benefits
Compassion in World Farming acknowledges that not all grains used as feed are suitable for human consumption, but it isn’t proposing that all those grains be eaten by people anyway. Instead, it’s focusing on the amount of arable land that would be freed up if the grains are no longer grown as feed.
Its calculations account for the fact that around 50% of the land freed up would be needed to grow other crops for direct human consumption, in order to replace the amount of animal-sourced food that would be lost. The net savings, therefore, amount to 175 million hectares of arable land (about the size of Mexico or Indonesia).
Looking regionally, ending grain production for factory farming could release 15 million hectares of arable land in the EU, where 124 million tonnes of grains are wasted by being fed to animals every year (enough to feed 247 million more people).
Likewise, in the US, the livestock industry is responsible for 160 million tonnes of food waste (nearly 2.5 times as much as humans), but stopping grain production for animal feed would save seven million hectares of land and could help feed an extra 288 million Americans.
The report outlines several benefits emanating from this shift. For instance, it would allow us to grow more produce, legumes, nuts and seeds, which global experts have highlighted as key components to a diverse and healthy diet.
But Compassion in World Farming argues that these crops should not be grown in monocultures or with agro-chemicals, but instead in regenerative systems. The transition away from feed production would make it more feasible to shift to agroecology, which tends to boost yields in the Global South.
And while agroecology is linked to lower yields than intensive agriculture in the Global North, “this would not be problematic if less grain was needed as animal feed”, the report outlicnes.
Aside from the food security benefits, there are economic considerations too. In a business-as-usual scenario, using human-edible crops to feed animals would entail annual costs of $1.3T globally. And this may be greater when you consider the cost of arable land and energy use, costs in respect of pollinator loss, the impact of pesticides on biodiversity, and loss of livelihoods and increased risk of conflict due to soil erosion.
Governments must step up to shift away from livestock feed
So if not grains, what is the best way to feed animals? The publication proposes pasture or grassland, byproducts like brewer’s grain or citrus pulp, “unavoidable food waste” (such as unwanted bakery waste, fruits or vegetables), and crop residues.
That does mean lower outputs of meat and milk, and this isn’t a bad thing – the world is overconsuming animal protein, and cutting back on these foods is crucial to global climate and public health goals.
In fact, Compassion in World Farming says lowering the use of grain and soy as animal feed, and subsequently reducing meat and dairy intake in favour of plant-based foods, can have multiple co-benefits. It would help restore biodiversity and rebuild soil quality, preserve forest cover, release pressure on wildilfe, and slash the risk of future pandemics.
The report lists a range of policy proposals to help transition away from livestock feed production. For starters, governments must impose rules to prevent any increase in the use of human-grade grain and soy as feed. They should also adopt a land-first policy that prioritises the production of food for direct human consumption.
Importantly, public subsidies should not be available for animal feed or industrial livestock production. But it may not be easy to identify if crops are being grown for animals or humans, so a tax on compound animal feed may be the next best bet, with all the proceeds going to farmers who adhere to high environmental and welfare standards.
Speaking of financial aids, commercial and multilateral development banks are big investors in livestock and feed producers, and policies should require them to stop funding these businesses.
Public awareness programmes and dietary guidelines should highlight the resource inefficiency and environmental degradation associated with growing grains for animal feed, and public bodies (like schools and hospitals) should only use animal products that aren’t derived from these practices.
Finally, governments should encourage the adoption of plant-rich, flexitarian diets, with clear targets to reduce animal protein consumption in line with global sustainability targets. These should be supported by a holistic action plan coordinated across public departments.
“Governments must stop propping up wasteful grain-based factory farming with public money through subsidies and adopt fair policies that prioritise food over feed,” said Stevenson.
The post Factory Farming is the Leading Cause of Food Waste That Could Feed Two Billion People appeared first on Green Queen.
This post was originally published on Green Queen.