Livestock, 2040 climate targets and the CAP: it’s a numbers game

At the time of writing, the climate target proposal for 2040 is being debated, prior to its adoption by the European Parliament and the Council. It is a stepping stone – or a staging post – on the road to 2050, by which time the European Union is legally obliged to achieve climate neutrality.

The goal for 2040 is a net emissions reduction of 90% when compared to 1990, broadly in line with the European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change recommendation for 90-95% reductions. The target range means every sector will need to make big cuts in emissions, and agriculture is no exception.

Between 2005 and 2022, agricultural emissions fell by around 5%, and between 2022 and 2023 by an estimated further 2%. The agricultural sector accounts for approximately 12% of the EU’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, but this share is predicted to increase as other sectors decarbonise. Agricultural emissions are dominated by methane (61%) and nitrous oxide (36%), which are a result of natural biochemical processes and cannot be eliminated completely. Livestock systems are at the heart of the challenge, causing about two-thirds of agricultural emissions, with methane from enteric fermentation alone making up nearly half of the sector’s footprint.

Meeting the 2030, 2040, and 2050 climate goals means transitioning to more sustainable livestock systems. The question is not whether to act, but how.

Livestock emissions come from multiple sources: enteric fermentation, manure, feed production and energy use. Direct emissions are relatively well quantified, but indirect ones, such as those linked to land-use change or fertiliser use, are more complex. Both, however, matter.

Technological innovation has already improved emission intensity across key commodities such as pork, poultry, milk and cereals. Precision agriculture uses GPS, sensors and drones to apply water, fertilisers and pesticides only where needed, thereby reducing excess nitrogen that produces nitrous oxide emissions. Enhanced feed efficiency through balanced diets and higher-quality feed improves nutrient digestion, which lowers methane emissions per kilogram of meat or litre of milk. Cost-effective mitigation could further cut livestock emissions by about 25%. But while efficiency gains are important, they cannot fully offset the sheer scale of emissions linked to herd sizes and feed demand.

Policy responses increasingly encourage extensification, but trade-offs are context-specific. Extensive systems often enhance biodiversity and carbon storage, while intensive systems use land more ‘efficiently’ but require vast feed inputs. Neither model alone delivers climate neutrality. Acknowledging the challenges facing the EU’s diversity of livestock systems, the European Commission has established a dedicated workstream on livestock, a key component of the Vision for Agriculture and Food presented in February 2025. The workstream focuses on two main questions: how to build a fair and market-remunerative livestock supply chain, and how to adapt Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) support to encourage sustainable livestock systems.

For farmers, the debate is not abstract. Transitioning to more sustainable livestock systems means adapting business models, investing in new practices, and sometimes reducing herd numbers. This raises real concerns about income security and competitiveness, especially in a context of rising energy costs and global market pressures.

The CAP has an important role to play here, and in fact, already has policy tools that could be used to support more sustainable livestock systems. However, take-up has been slow to date. Meanwhile, mechanisms such as voluntary coupled support payments may have the unintended effect of locking in herd sizes, slowing emissions reduction. Although agriculture accounted for half of EU climate spending in 2014-2020, emissions barely budged.

To break this cycle, EU policy must deliver more targeted incentives and safety nets. Farmers need investment support, fair markets for sustainable products, and clear signals that reward them for delivering public goods. Without such backing, the costs of inaction will ultimately fall on producers themselves.

Sustainable supply is only part of the story. Demand also matters. High consumption of animal products drives emissions, land use and feed imports, while also influencing public health outcomes.

Reducing waste, shifting diets towards more plant-based foods, and ensuring transparency about the footprint of what we eat are all part of the solution. These questions are politically sensitive, but unavoidable. Without changes in consumption patterns, emissions reductions in production alone will not be enough to meet climate goals.

Animal welfare is another, often overlooked, link to emissions reduction. Improved welfare reduces animal stress while also cutting methane and nitrous oxide emissions from digestion and manure. Stress raises animals’ metabolic rates, increases emissions, and weakens immunity, making them more prone to illness and reliant on antibiotics. Improving welfare therefore benefits both animals and the environment by reducing disease, emissions, and the environmental costs of livestock production. Positioning animal welfare as part of the transition to sustainable livestock systems could help build public trust and consumer buy-in, while differentiating EU products in global markets.

The current 2040 climate target proposal leaves agricultural targets indicative. This means the strategy for emissions reduction in agriculture will be shaped through dialogue with farmers, industry and civil society.

This process will not be easy. Reducing herd numbers is politically contentious, but evidence increasingly shows it is necessary. Although it can be argued that animals reared in intensive systems may be more ‘efficient’ than extensive ones (that is, more food is obtained for a given quantity of emissions or land used), there are other considerations.

Many much-loved rural landscapes have been shaped over centuries by extensive livestock farming, which continues to support rural employment and farm businesses. However, intensive livestock operations can be visually intrusive, environmentally polluting, and may channel wealth away from local economies. While perceptions of landscapes and farming practices can evolve, and rural economies can adapt, balancing these factors will be essential to building consensus for a more sustainable food system. The central challenge is to make it fair: providing farmers with support, consumers with real choices, and society with resilient food systems.

The EU CAP Network’s Thematic Groups show what inclusive dialogue can achieve: bridging the gap between EU-level ambition and realities on the ground. Such collaboration is essential to ensure policies are both appropriately ambitious- and workable in practice. Emissions reduction is a necessity, and while scientific evidence can clarify how different animals and farming systems affect soils, water, the atmosphere and biodiversity, it cannot alone determine the course of action. Such decisions must also take into account ethical, cultural, ideological and political factors.

Ultimately, the transition to more sustainable livestock systems is not an existential threat to farmers, but in fact is essential for the sector’s long-term survival. Producers must be seen and supported as partners for change in minimising emissions from livestock production. Sustainable livestock systems, fair farm incomes, healthy diets and animal welfare are not competing goals, but interconnected elements of a just agricultural transition.

To move from debate to delivery, the time is right to convene forums on transitioning to sustainable livestock systems: gathering all stakeholders - farmers, scientists, policymakers and civil society representatives - around the table to chart a fair, practical and forward-looking path to 2040 and beyond.