Invited review: A position on the Global Livestock Environmental Assessment Model (GLEAM).

The livestock sector is one of the fastest growing subsectors of the agricultural economy and, while it makes a major contribution to global food supply and economic development, it also consumes significant amounts of natural resources and alters the environment. In order to improve our understanding of the global environmental impact of livestock supply chains, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations has developed the Global Livestock Environmental Assessment Model (GLEAM). The purpose of this paper is to provide a review of GLEAM. Specifically, it explains the model architecture, methods and functionality, that is the types of analysis that the model can perform. The model focuses primarily on the quantification of greenhouse gases emissions arising from the production of the 11 main livestock commodities. The model inputs and outputs are managed and produced as raster data sets, with spatial resolution of 0.05 decimal degrees. The Global Livestock Environmental Assessment Model v1.0 consists of five distinct modules: (a) the Herd Module; (b) the Manure Module; (c) the Feed Module; (d) the System Module; (e) the Allocation Module. In terms of the modelling approach, GLEAM has several advantages. For example spatial information on livestock distributions and crops yields enables rations to be derived that reflect the local availability of feed resources in developing countries. The Global Livestock Environmental Assessment Model also contains a herd model that enables livestock statistics to be disaggregated and variation in livestock performance and management to be captured. Priorities for future development of GLEAM include: improving data quality and the methods used to perform emissions calculations; extending the scope of the model to include selected additional environmental impacts and to enable predictive modelling; and improving the utility of GLEAM output.

[1]  Pete Smith,et al.  Disaggregated N2O emission factors in China based on cropping parameters create a robust approach to the IPCC Tier 2 methodology , 2015, Atmospheric environment.

[2]  T. Hertel Global Trade Analysis: Modeling and Applications , 1999 .

[3]  Ardente Fulvio,et al.  Economic Allocation in Life Cycle Assessment: The State of the Art and Discussion of Examples , 2012 .

[4]  H. Steinfeld,et al.  Greenhouse gas emissions from ruminant supply chains – a global life cycle assessment , 2013 .

[5]  H. Steinfeld,et al.  Greenhouse gas emissions from pig and chicken supply chains – a global life cycle assessment , 2013 .

[6]  S. Hay,et al.  Mapping the Global Distribution of Livestock , 2014, PloS one.

[7]  Yosef Akhtman,et al.  The Selenga River delta: a geochemical barrier protecting Lake Baikal waters , 2017, Regional Environmental Change.

[8]  Julian M. Allwood,et al.  Importance of food-demand management for climate mitigation , 2014 .

[9]  Andrew P. Whitmore,et al.  Nitrous oxide emissions from fertilised UK arable soils: fluxes, emission factors and mitigation , 2015 .

[10]  E. Schmid,et al.  Climate change mitigation through livestock system transitions , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[11]  Anne Mottet,et al.  Marginal costs of abating greenhouse gases in the global ruminant livestock sector , 2015, Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change.

[12]  Pete Smith,et al.  The FAOSTAT database of greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture , 2013 .

[13]  H. Steinfeld,et al.  Tackling climate change through livestock : a global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities , 2013 .

[14]  N. K. Sakomura,et al.  Modeling energy utilization in broiler breeders, laying hens and broilers , 2004 .

[15]  P. Gerber,et al.  Climate change mitigation and productivity gains in livestock supply chains: insights from regional case studies , 2016, Regional Environmental Change.

[16]  Mario Herrero,et al.  Livestock and global change: Emerging issues for sustainable food systems , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[17]  M. Cellura,et al.  Economic Allocation in Life Cycle Assessment , 2012 .

[18]  H. Witzke,et al.  Greenhouse gas emission profiles of European livestock sectors , 2011 .

[19]  H. Witzke,et al.  Integrated assessment of nitrogen losses from agriculture in EU-27 using MITERRA-EUROPE. , 2009, Journal of environmental quality.

[20]  H. Griffiths,et al.  The potential for land sparing to offset greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture , 2016 .

[21]  H. Blonk,et al.  LCI data for the calculation tool Feedprint for greenhouse gas emissions of feed production and utilization , 2012 .

[22]  Klaus Butterbach-Bahl,et al.  Toward a protocol for quantifying the greenhouse gas balance and identifying mitigation options in smallholder farming systems , 2013 .

[23]  H. Steinfeld,et al.  Livestock's long shadow: environmental issues and options. , 2006 .

[24]  J. Bruinsma,et al.  World agriculture towards 2030/2050: the 2012 revision , 2012 .

[25]  D. Pelster,et al.  Greenhouse gas emissions from natural ecosystems and agricultural lands insub-Saharan Africa: synthesis of available data and suggestions for furtherresearch , 2016 .

[26]  W. de Vries,et al.  Impacts of European livestock production: nitrogen, sulphur, phosphorus and greenhouse gas emissions, land-use, water eutrophication and biodiversity , 2015 .

[27]  H. Haberl,et al.  Quantifying and mapping the human appropriation of net primary production in earth's terrestrial ecosystems , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[28]  M. Rosegrant International Model for Policy Analysis of Agricultural Commodities and Trade (IMPACT) Model Description , 2012 .

[29]  H. Steinfeld,et al.  Feed-milk-manure nitrogen relationships in global dairy production systems , 2013 .