DOI: 10.

21451/1984-3143-AR882

Anim. Reprod., v.13, n.3, p.133-142, Jul./Sept. 2016

Global Challenges for the 21st Century: the Role and Strategy of the Agri-Food Sector
R. Webb1,3, J. Buratini2
1
Division of Animal Sciences, School of Biosciences, University of Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, UK.
2
Department of Physiology, Institute of Biosciences, São Paulo State University, Botucatu, SP, Brazil.

Abstract sustainability, technology.

Human activity is having an increasing global Introduction

impact on the environment, geology and ecosystems.
There is an 80% probability that world population will It has been proposed that the world is entering,
increase to between 9.6 billion and 12.3 billion by 2100 or may have even entered, the anthropocene epoch from
and could even reach 10 billion by 2056, 6 years earlier the holocene epoch, because human activity is having a
than projected. Historically, global production of food significant global impact on the Earth's environment,
has outpaced consumption growth. This is evidenced by geology and ecosystems (Zalasiewicz et al., 2015). In a
falling real prices of food, however this is now slowing, recent EU report (Expo Milano, 2015, EU Scientific
caused by constraints on supply and continued growth Steering Committee Recommendations) there was a
of demand. Paradoxically, as billions suffer food summary of some of the key global issues. For example,
insecurity through lack of food, more than 2 billion it stated that nearly 1 billion people are chronically
people, approximately 30% of the world’s population, hungry. In comparison, because of over consumption of
are overweight or obese and this percentage continues to food, coupled with reduced physical activity,
grow. It is also estimated that the world will need to approximately twice as many people are overweight.
close a significant food-gap by 2050, primarily because Furthermore in Paris in December 2015, 195 countries
of continued population growth and changing diets. agreed to try and keep global temperature rise to well
Increases in temperature of over two degrees Celsius are below the 2°C above pre-industrial levels, and to even
projected to have a negative impact on global yields of pursue efforts towards 1.5°C, since increases in
major crops. Agri-food production, including temperature of over two degrees Celsius are expected to
manufacture, food preparation and cooking, accounts have a negative impact on global yields of major crops
for approximately 30% of all greenhouse-gas emissions (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC),
and livestock production accounts for approximately 2012; 2013; Climate and Global Production Shocks
50% of this. The agricultural sector will increasingly be Report, 2015). Unfortunately however, the agricultural
driven by these global changes, including a rising world sector was largely absent from the talks in Paris (Benton
population, rapid development of emerging economies, and Bajželj, 2016). Hence the impact of enhanced
with western lifestyle aspirations, growing geopolitical human endeavor and activity, coupled with continued
instability around shortages of land, water and energy population growth, will result in increasing global
and ‘one health’ issues. However, a technological challenges throughout the 21st century. This paper
revolution is taking place, including breakthroughs in outlines a number of the global challenges, the impact
nutrition, genetics, informatics, satellite imaging, of livestock production and possible mitigation
remote sensing, meteorology, precision farming and low strategies, including the development and benefit of new
impact agriculture. These changes will hopefully technologies. These are discussed together with possible
continue to drive major global investment in agricultural strategies that countries, individually and in
technologies. It is of vital importance that countries collaboration, could develop to meet the challenges,
around the world recognize fully the opportunities and using examples of current programs in the UK and
challenges and provide the appropriate framework Brazil.
support, investment and infrastructure. In this regard,
increasing high quality livestock research will be The Global Challenges
essential to help address the looming food and
environmental challenges and is a message that animal The focus of this review is on population
scientists and veterinarians around the world need to be growth, food security, climate change and livestock
making to governments and funding agencies. Farming production. However the additional impact of other
practices globally will continue to change because of challenges, such as the links between animal and human
competing demands. Hence it is essential that the health, zoonotic diseases, and the increase in antibiotic
livestock sector benefits fully, both from continued resistance, need to be recognized.
improvements of current reproductive technologies and
in the application of future reproductive technologies to Population growth
meet these global challenges.
World population at time of writing currently
Keywords: food security, greenhouse gases, livestock, stands at around 7.5 billion, with a population growth of
_________________________________________
3
Corresponding author: bob.webb@nottingham.ac.uk
Tel: +44(115)951-6051
Received: May 25, 2016
Accepted: July 28, 2016
 Webb and Buratini. Global Challenges for the 21st Century.

approximately 200,000 per day. At the dawn of continued population growth and changing diets.
agriculture, at approximately 8,000 B.C., the world
population was estimated to be 5 million, with a growth Food security
rate of less than 0.05% to reach about 2 to 300 million
by 1 A.D. A significant change occurred with the Food security, as defined by the FAO, occurs
industrial revolution at approximately 1,800 A.D. with when: all people, all of the time, have physical, social
the second billion being achieved in only 130 years. and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious
Peak annual growth rate occurred in the 1960s when it food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences
was approximately 2.2%, but it is currently declining for an active and healthy life. Despite progress there are
and is around 1.15% per year. The United Nations currently over 800 million people who are chronically
recently released population projections based on data hungry in the developing world, with more than 3
until 2012. Analysis of these data reveals that, contrary million children dying each year from the causes of
to previous projections, and despite the decline in birth under- and mal-nutrition and an estimated 160 million
rate, the world population is unlikely to stop growing under 5-year-old children who are stunted and will carry
this century. Indeed there is an 80% probability that the burden of this through their lives. Globally we are
world population will increase to between 9.6 billion far from being food secure (World Hunger and Poverty
and 12.3 billion by 2100 and could even reach 10 billion Facts and Statistics, 2015). Indeed it is estimated that
by 2056, 6 years earlier than projected. Much of the around 2 billion more people suffer from either iron
increase is expected to happen in Africa, in part because deficiency (World Health Organization - WHO, 2012)
of increased rates of fertility and a recent slowdown in or other micronutrient deficiencies caused primarily by
the pace of fertility decline. Also, the ratio of working- the lack of access to food and this is in most cases due
age people to older people is likely to decline to relative or absolute poverty. For example, limited
substantially in all countries, even those that currently access to food and rapid food price inflation can be a
have young populations (Gerland et al., 2014). Current cause of civil unrest and drive human migration.
mean world figures from the World Bank indicate that Paradoxically, as billions suffer food insecurity through
the proportion of people over the age of 65 is currently lack of food, more than 2 billion people, approximately
greater than 8%, but this increases towards 20% for 30% of the world’s population, are overweight or obese
some countries in Western Europe. and this percentage continues to grow (WHO, 2015).
Recent figures from the United Nations This is often associated with poverty and is a
Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population consequence of over-consumption of calories, the lack
Division show more women than ever now use family of access to appropriate nutrition, as well as a lack of
planning, with some poorer regions recording the fastest physical activity. Furthermore, caloric over-
pace of growth since 2000. In 2015 an estimated 64% of consumption progressively increases personal, public-
either married women or women living with a partner health and environmental costs and thereby increases
aged between 15 to 49 years used family planning, the pressure not only on the global food supply, but also
compared with 36% in 1970. However, despite the on national health systems. In summary, food and
success of the past 40 years it has been concluded that nutrition security is an issue for all societies.
investment in family planning is needed to keep up with Importantly however, the FAO estimates that there is
demand and meet the need of women who are unable to enough food in the world to provide every single person
access services (see Population Council). Furthermore each day with approximately 2,770 kcal (FAO, 2012;
in a recent comment in the Lancet (World Abortions World Hunger and Poverty Facts and Statistics, 2015).
1990 to 2014, 2016) it was concluded that additional Historically, global production of food has
knowledge, regarding the incidence of induced abortion, outpaced consumption growth as evidenced by falling
is needed to motivate and inform efforts to help women real prices of food. However, this “outpacing” is now
avoid unintended pregnancies and to monitor progress slowing because of constraints on supply, alongside
toward that end. It was estimated that abortion rates continued growth of demand (European Commission,
have declined significantly since 1990 in the developed 2011). For example, more people are demanding more
world, but not in the developing world. An important food that is more resource-intensive to produce such as
conclusion was that ensuring access to sexual and meat. In addition, in most places there is considerable
reproductive health care could help millions of women food wastage. On the supply-side, historic yield growth
avoid unintended pregnancies and ensure access to safe has slowed or even plateaued in recent years and this
abortion. has been the case for the UK. The acceptability of
In summary, despite the success in technological solutions to increasing yields is
contraceptive use, world population continues to grow, sometimes resisted, as has occurred in the EU
resulting in increased demand for food and resources. (European Commission, 2011). In addition, there is
The Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) food increased competition for land, water and other natural
demand projections and World Resources Institute resources, which may impact on global food production
(WRI; Ranganathan et al., 2016), estimate that the and climate change and is also threatening production
world will need to close at least a 60 percent “food gap” growth in many areas. A further constraint is that
between the crop calories available in 2006 and reducing the environmental impact of agriculture,
expected caloric demand in 2050 (Foley, 2011). In aquaculture and fisheries, including greenhouse gas
conclusion, the food gap will stem primarily from emissions, while maintaining production will probably

134 Anim. Reprod., v.13, n.3, p.133-142, Jul./Sept. 2016

 Webb and Buratini. Global Challenges for the 21st Century.

require changes in the way food is produced. is therefore concentrated in specific parts of the globe.
How can changing diets, including the type, This report stresses that extreme weather events, in
combination, and quantity of foods people consume, these regions, will have the largest impact on global
contribute to a sustainable food future? As discussed, food production. Furthermore, simultaneous extreme
global population is projected to grow to nearly 10 weather events in two or more of these regions, creating
billion people by 2050, with two-thirds of those people a ‘multiple bread basket’ failure, would represent a
projected to live in cities. In addition, at least 3 billion serious production shock. However, understanding the
people are expected to join the global middle class by underlying cause of extreme weather events in different
2030. As nations urbanize and citizens become production regions is currently under-researched.
wealthier diets change, with people generally increasing There is an urgent need to understand the
both their calorie intake and the share of resource- dynamics of meteorological events, such as the El Niño,
intensive foods, such as meat and dairy, in their diets. which may become even more extreme, in order to
Over the last 40 years, the worldwide consumption per quantify the likelihood of production shocks in major
capita of milk has doubled, and meat consumption has food-producing regions. Indeed it is projected that a
more than tripled (Kearney, 2010). catastrophe is developing currently in Africa because of
At the same time globalization, technological crop failure caused by the impact of El Niño. It has been
advances, business and economic changes, and estimated that 50 million people, across a number of
government policies are transforming entire food countries, could require food-aid during the next 12
chains. Multinational businesses are increasingly months. Initial modeling by a US-UK Taskforce
influencing what is grown and what people eat. (Extreme Weather and Resilience of the Global Food
Together, these are driving trends toward Western-style System Report, 2015) suggests that what would be
diets, which are high in calories, protein and animal- called an extreme food production shock in the late 20th
based foods. Indeed in China meat consumption has century, will become more common in the future. The
increased nine fold (Kearney, 2010). Although some of data suggest that a 1 in 200 year event for the climate in
this shift reflects health and welfare gains for many the late 20th century equates to a loss of approximately
people, including increased longevity, the scale of this 8.5% production, and over the next decades (2011 to
ongoing change in diet will make it harder for the world 2040), a 1 in 200 year event is about 15% larger in
to achieve a number of the United Nations sustainable magnitude and equivalent to the loss of 9.8% of calorie
development goals, which include reducing hunger, production. Furthermore, according to the model an
improving healthier lives, improved water management, event that would have been called 1 in 100 years over
combating climate change, and protecting terrestrial the period from 1951 to 2010 may become as frequent
ecosystems (Ranganathan et al., 2016). In summary as a 1 in 30 year event before the middle of the current
given recent trends, demand is likely to rise more century.
quickly than supply towards the middle of the 21st Agriculture and the production of food is a
century increasing the pressure to convert more land for very significant emitter of greenhouse gases, causing
farming. The combination of these drivers suggests that emissions of CO2 by agricultural machinery and the
emissions from the agri-food sector will continue to transportation of crops and animals, nitrous oxide from
grow. Changing some farming practices could offset the use of fertilizers (synthetic and manure), and
some of this increase, but achieving such changes will methane from livestock and flooded paddy fields for
be a challenge and require continued collaborative rice (Smith et al., 2014). Furthermore, the demand for
research and development across continents. food has led to a global expansion of farmland at a rate
of about 10 million hectares per year during the last
Climate change decade. Some of this cleared land was tropical
rainforest, adding more emissions and reducing the
The negative impact of climate change, capacity of land to absorb and store carbon. There have
including an increase in temperature of over two been a number of estimates of greenhouse gas emissions
degrees Celsius (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate from agriculture and food production that vary
Change - IPCC, 2012, 2013; Climate and Global depending on methodology. For example, the estimate
Production Shocks Report, 2015), on global yields of of 30% by Bajželj et al. (2013) includes the
major crops will probably be spread unevenly over the manufacture, preparation and the cooking of food. A
globe. It is projected that crop production in low more recent study calculated that agriculture, forestry
latitudes will experience negative effects, whereas in and other parts of the land use sector is responsible for
northern latitudes impacts may vary. The areas where just under a quarter (approximately 10 to 12 GtCO2eq
climate change is expected to threaten crop productivity per year) of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions,
the most (Wheeler and von Braun, 2013) include mainly from deforestation and agricultural emissions
countries in Africa and South Asia, that are home to from livestock, soil and nutrient management (Smith et
many of the world’s more than 800 million al., 2014). Furthermore, according to the Food and
undernourished people (FAO, 2014). Food production Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO,
of the globally most important commodity crops, maize, 2014), agri-food production and forestry was estimated
soybean, wheat and rice, comes from a relatively small to account for approximately 20% of all greenhouse-gas
number of major producing countries. The exposure of a emissions in the world (25% in America, 12% in
large proportion of global production of the major crops Europe, 15% in Africa, 4% in Oceania and 44% in

Anim. Reprod., v.13, n.3, p.133-142, Jul./Sept. 2016 135

 Webb and Buratini. Global Challenges for the 21st Century.

Asia). Overall however, producing and cooking the food improvements in human diets (Bajželj et al., 2014).
we eat results in approximately the same amount of
emissions as those produced from personal travel, Agri-Food Technology Strategy
lighting, heating and air conditioning and domestic
‘white goods’ combined. Agricultural science and technology is one of
the world’s fastest growing and exciting sectors within
Livestock production the global marketplace. As discussed, this market will
be driven by global changes including a rising world
The livestock sector supports about 1.3 billion population, rapid development of emerging economies
producers and retailers worldwide, and contributes 40 to with western lifestyle aspirations and growing
50% of agricultural gross domestic product (Herrero et geopolitical instability around shortages of land, water
al. 2016). These authors estimated that between 1995 and energy. In parallel a technological revolution is also
and 2005, the livestock sector was responsible for taking place, including breakthroughs in nutrition,
greenhouse gas emissions of 5.6 to 7.5GtCO2e per year genetics, informatics, satellite imaging, remote sensing,
which comprises approximately 50% of agricultural meteorology, precision farming and low impact
emissions. However, livestock accounts for up to half of agriculture. These changes will continue to drive major
the technical mitigation potential of the agriculture, global investment in agricultural technologies. It is of
forestry and land-use sectors. This will be through the vital importance that countries around the world
application of management options that sustainably recognize fully the opportunities and challenges and
intensify livestock production, promote carbon provide the appropriate framework support and
sequestration in rangelands, reduce emissions from investment.
manures, and through reduction in the demand for Recognizing these challenges, including the
livestock products. Although the mitigation potential of continuing reduction in food self-sufficiency in the
reductions in livestock product consumption is large, United Kingdom, the UK Government launched ‘A UK
their economic potential is unknown at present (Herrero Strategy for Agricultural Technologies’ (UK
et al., 2016). Government, 2013). In 2016 the strategy was expanded
Livestock, particularly ruminants, can eat a to incorporate the food production and retail sector, as
wider range of biomass than humans, although in the well as primary agricultural production, and is overseen
drive for greater efficiency, intensive systems of by the AgriFood Technology Council. This strategy is
livestock production have evolved to compete with aimed at improving the integration of UK’s science and
humans for high-energy crops such as cereals. In a study progressive food and farming businesses with the
by Wilkinson (2011), feeds consumed by livestock were Government’s support for trade, investment and
analyzed in terms of the quantities used and efficiency international development. The aim is to help unlock a
of conversion of grassland, human-edible crops and new phase of global leadership in agricultural
crop by-products into milk, meat and eggs, using the innovation. The vision of the strategy is that the UK
United Kingdom as an example of a developed livestock becomes a world leader in agricultural technology,
industry. It was concluded that by accounting for the innovation and sustainability; exploits opportunities to
proportions of human-edible and inedible feeds used in develop and adopt new and existing technologies,
typical livestock production systems, a more realistic products and services to increase productivity; and
estimate of efficiency could be made by comparing thereby contributes to global food security and
systems. Therefore increasing efficiency in livestock international development.
production and reducing the share of animal products in The mission of the strategy includes (1)
human consumption are two possible strategies to curb additional investment from both government and
the adverse environmental impacts of the livestock industry in agricultural research and innovation,
sector. In a recent study, Schrader et al. (2016) explored including the launch of four new research innovation
the opportunity for sustainable livestock production by centers (Agrimetrics, Crop Health and Protection,
modeling the impacts and constraints of a third strategy Livestock, Agricultural Engineering Precision) and
in which livestock feed components, that compete investment in a significant number of applied research
directly with human food crop production, are reduced. projects, supporting the speedier translation of research
Thus animals are fed only from grassland and by- into practice i.e. from farm to fork through agri-food
products from food production. They show that a supply chains; (2) promoting the UK’s expertise and
strategy focusing on feed components, which do not capacity in the agri-tech sector to stimulate investment,
compete directly with human food consumption, offers creating a new generation of spin-outs and start-up
a viable complement to strategies focusing on increased ventures, increasing export opportunities and new
efficiency in production and/or reducing the share of collaborations with emerging and developing
animal products in human consumption (Schrader et al., economies; (3) take a global lead in agricultural
2016). informatics and in establishing the metrics and
In conclusion, one of the key challenges in the techniques by which progress towards sustainable
livestock sector will be the development of intensification can be assessed; (4) encourage
technological advances in sustainable intensification. investment in change, including enhanced skills and
However, this approach will be only one mitigation knowledge transfer, exploitation of shared data and
route together with decreases in food waste and widespread adoption of best practice. In addition, the

136 Anim. Reprod., v.13, n.3, p.133-142, Jul./Sept. 2016

 Webb and Buratini. Global Challenges for the 21st Century.

UK Government has just announced a £1.5 billion success of this technology is still limited by the efficacy
Global Challenges Research Fund, across the Research of the superovulation protocols, including the variability
Councils, to support cutting-edge research that of the follicular reserve (Mapletoft and Bó, 2011;
addresses the challenges faced by developing countries. Ireland et al., 2011) and the variation between Bos
There has also been a significant focus on skills given taurus and Bos indicus breeds (Morotti et al., 2015;
that it will be essential to have an increasingly skilled Sartori et al., 2016a), and in vitro embryogenesis
workforce to take full advantages of the rapid pace of protocols (Baruselli et al., 2015). The review paper of
technological progress, not only within the agricultural Sartori et al. (2016b), published in these proceedings,
sector, but also across other sectors such as informatics describes the development and magnitude of the
and engineering. reproductive technologies in use in Brazil, and also
Brazil has also promoted programs to mitigate discusses the technical bottlenecks that limit the impact
the environmental threats associated with the global on animal production efficiency. Among the current
challenges, as discussed, and to reduce food shortage limitations, special focus has been given to sub-optimal
within its boundaries. The Brazilian Agricultural protocols for oocyte maturation and embryo culture
Research Corporation (Embrapa) - Ministry of leading to low blastocyst development rates (averaging
Agriculture, Livestock and Food Supply launched a 25 to 50%), which compromise conception rates and
number of programs aiming to reduce poverty and successful pregnancy outcome. In addition, embryonic
hunger and also to stimulate agricultural technologies developmental competence is compromised further by
supporting environmentally safe food production. The inefficient freezing protocols. Once these bottlenecks
“Brazil Without Extreme Poverty” program, which aims are minimized, the impact of in vitro embryo production
to increase familiar agricultural production and to on livestock productivity is expected to increase
enhance/create markets for these products, and the significantly, particularly when used in combination
“Low Carbon Agriculture Plan” (ABC Plan) are perhaps with the development of DNA based strategies for
the most relevant and emblematic actions from the donor selection as indicated below.
Brazilian government within the context of the global Continuing, and indeed even an increase, in
challenges. A relevant program, with the ABC Plan livestock research and development will be essential to
directly linked to livestock production, is the National help address the looming food and environmental
Integrated Crop-Livestock-Forestry (ICLF) Policy, challenges and is a message that animal scientists
which targets the rehabilitation of degraded pastures and around the world need to be making to their
forests by the development of integrated systems. governments and funding agencies. However, the
In conclusion, it is essential that the livestock message should also be one of optimism, given the
sector can take full benefit of the funding initiatives that untapped potential of our farm species. The potential
are being launched worldwide and continue to develop yields of plant and animal farm species, including
new reproductive technologies to be better placed to constraints and opportunities in the 21st century, has
respond to the global challenges. been reviewed and considered extensively (Sylvester-
Bradley and Wiseman, 2005). For livestock the
Reproductive Technologies in the 21st Century opportunities include (i) increasing the proportion of
twin births in cattle, (ii) more precise control of
In 2012 Murphy made a presentation to the seasonality, litter size, lamb survival and puberty in
Sociedade Brasileira de Transferência de Embriões sheep, (iii) increased fecundity in pigs, (iv) increased
(SBTE) on ‘The future of animal reproduction’. The milk yield in dairy cows and sheep, (v) improving feed
accompanying review paper discussed a range of conversion efficiency, meat quality and growth in sheep
current technologies, including artificial insemination, and beef cattle. However, to obtain these benefits
including classical genetic selection approaches improved animal management, welfare and feeding
(Murphy, 2012). The review paper also stressed the strategies will be required (Sinclair and Webb, 2005;
major limitations to the use of these technologies in Webb et al., 2005; Garnsworthy and Thomas 2005). In
extensive production systems, together with the use of all species the predicted trends for increased yields,
additional technologies including prostaglandins to accompanied by increases in efficiency, are projected to
regress corpora lutea, progestagens to mimic luteal reduce environmental impact of animal agriculture,
function, regulation of follicular development with mainly through reductions in animal numbers required
estrogens or GnRH, and synchronization of ovulation for a given output of meat and dairy (Garnsworthy,
with either GnRH and/or estrogens (Bó et al., 2007; 2004). However it is important to realize that a more
Lamb et al., 2010; Baruselli et al., 2011). Although systems based approach to production will be required,
these technologies have a number of benefits, there still together with the incorporation of new physiological
remains substantial potential for improvement in the and genetic technologies. Furthermore, despite large
rate of successful pregnancy, despite these compounds genetic improvements in the quantitative traits of
being available for nearly 50 years. growth, production, and efficiency of farmed livestock
Other current technologies include the use of over recent decades, current evidence suggests that little
sexed semen and embryo transfer which has become variation has been lost and that improvements should
more widespread, particularly in South America who indeed be sustainable in the future (Hill, 2016).
leads the world (over 70%) in the number of in vitro Traditional marker-assisted selection did not
produced embryos (Blondin, 2015). However, the result in the widespread use of DNA information in

Anim. Reprod., v.13, n.3, p.133-142, Jul./Sept. 2016 137

 Webb and Buratini. Global Challenges for the 21st Century.

animal breeding (Meuwissen et al., 2016). The main increased understanding of epigenetic effects (Sinclair
reason was that the traits of interest in livestock et al., 2007), will bring understanding, but both
production are much more complex than expected and opportunities and challenges, that can potentially be
are determined by thousands of genes with small effects included in livestock breeding programs. These include
on phenotype (Haley et al., 1993). However, advances the need for a relatively inexpensive technology to
in genotyping and sequencing a little over a decade ago sequence the epigenome on a large scale, and in large
have resulted in the development and application of numbers of individuals, to accurately estimate
genomic selection, which is arguably the most important epigenetic variance at a population level. Statistical
breakthrough in animal breeding since the development methods also need to be developed to incorporate whole
of best linear unbiased prediction in the 1940s (see methylome information together with large environment
Hickey et al., 2016). and DNA sequence information. Practical
Genomic selection assumes that all markers implementation must be carefully evaluated to
might be linked to a gene affecting the trait and successfully incorporate epigenetic information in
concentrates on estimating their effect, rather than livestock breeding, including mate selection, in order to
testing its significance. Three technological obtain genotypes that favor a certain epigenotype
breakthroughs resulted in the current widespread use of (González-Recio et al., 2015). In summary,
DNA information in animal breeding: (i) the multidisciplinary genetic and management/nutrition
development of genomic selection technology, (ii) the practices could result in the incorporation of favourable
discovery of massive numbers of genetic markers epigenotypes into populations, in addition to
(single nucleotide polymorphisms, SNPs), and (iii) technologies such as genome editing.
high-throughput technology to genotype animals for
hundreds or even thousands of SNPs in a cost-effective Conclusions
manner. The use of whole genome sequence data is
anticipated to have a significant impact on dairy and The food security, world population and
beef cattle, pigs, and poultry breeding (Meuwissen et climate change challenges are clear. Food security for
al., 2016). For example in sheep and goat breeding, the majority of the world’s population is about nutrition
rapidly reducing genotyping cost, coupled with a better for a healthy life, not calories to survive. Greater than
understanding of how to maximize benefits of genomic 50% of the world’s population are malnourished, either
selection should result in a dramatic rise in the adoption over- or under-weight, and the global economic burden
of these approaches (Rupp et al., 2016). In beef cattle of non-communicable diseases (Alleyne et al., 2013) is
the development of accurate genomic evaluations in growing rapidly. Indeed it is viewed as one of the major
beef populations are more difficult than in dairy challenges for sustainable development in the 21st
populations because of the presence of multiple breeds, century. For example, in many countries, poverty and
the poor extent of phenotyping, lack of the use of obesity are correlated, with inadequate diets in the urban
artificial insemination (Berry et al., 2016), and sheep poor being a significant issue, alongside other
and beef systems are generally lower-margin businesses developing world micronutrient and calorie deficiencies.
and hence tend to be slower adopters of technology. As discussed, the IPCC challenge is to limit
However, the ongoing development of low cost sensors, climate change to less than 2°C, which will require
such as ultra-wide band technology for estrous detection more sustainable consumption. As the emissions from
(Homer et al., 2013), and associated information agri-food are approximately 30% of global emissions,
technology for the generation and capture of phenotypes and are continuing to grow not shrink, the argument that
should have a positive impact. These types of demand is increasing and so we must grow more to
technologies, coupled with international initiatives, meet this demand is increasingly recognized as being
suggest that the necessary framework is in place for unsustainable. This will result in a stronger focus on the
further development of genomic predictions certainly demand-side measures, such as dietary change and
for beef, and possibly even for sheep (Berry et al., waste reduction.
2016). There has been much debate on dietary change
In addition and significantly, genome editing in and on livestock production. For example, there is
livestock populations of cattle, sheep and pigs, has ongoing discussion that humans should eat less meat,
resulted already in viable zygotes and living animals. particularly as the average person, in more than 90% of
The idea of genome editing appears straight forward, in the world’s countries and territories, consumed more
that base pairs at specific locations in the genome can be protein than the estimated daily requirement
deleted, changed or added (Hickey et al. 2016). (Ranganathan et al., 2016). Alternatively humans
Importantly, these changes are permanent and if made should eat more grass fed beef and sheep, in addition to
in germ line cells, are heritable and advances in this eating less meat, and/or eat more chicken versus eating
technology are occurring regularly. From an animal less red meat. The recent WRI report indicates that there
breeding perspective, roles for genome editing include is no current “protein crisis” as on average every region
(i) fix favorable alleles for monogenic traits (e.g. disease of the world consumes more protein than is required,
resistance, myostatin, polledness), (ii) removal of although it is expected that “demand driven desire” for
recessive alleles that impact on fertility and (iii) increase protein consumption will grow. It is clear that a
the frequency of favorable alleles for polygenic traits significantly more sustainable, or even a reduction, in
(Hickey et al., 2016). These advances, coupled with ruminant meat and dairy consumption will be

138 Anim. Reprod., v.13, n.3, p.133-142, Jul./Sept. 2016

 Webb and Buratini. Global Challenges for the 21st Century.

indispensable for reaching the 2°C target, unless example, the population consume around twice as much
unprecedented advances in technology, such as the meat as is deemed healthy, whereas in the United States
green revolution that occurred 50 years ago (Borlaug, this number is three times. Hence a global switch
2000), are repeated (Hedenus et al., 2014). towards more plant-based diets would reduce global
There are three possible ways we could mortality by up to 10% and food-related greenhouse gas
respond to this sobering conclusion: (i) we carry on as emissions by as much as 70% by 2050 (Springman et
we are and miss the IPCC Paris targets, and therefore al., 2016). It means that adjusting diets and attitude to
perhaps lock us into 4 to 5°C of global warming by the waste has the potential to make the Paris targets more
end of the century. (ii) We rely on research and achievable. In a very recent modeling study, Herrero et
innovation to find ways to significantly increase yields al. (2016) concluded that the mitigation potential of
to reduce the rate of land conversion and develop reductions in livestock product consumption is large,
carbon capture and storage. (iii) We recognize that but their economic potential is unknown at present.
demand for food is driving emissions and work to make Finally, one further global challenge that will
changes meet the supply-side improvements halfway (T. have increasing impact during the 21st century, and has
Benton, 2016; University of Leeds). not been discussed in detail in this review, is the link
The first option is not a viable long-term between animal health and human health, zoonotic
strategy. The second option has possibilities, but there is diseases, and the increase in antibiotic resistance (see
little evidence of research budgets on the necessary Wegener, 2012). The epidemiology of antimicrobial-
scale that will be required being forthcoming, indeed resistant microorganisms at the human–animal interface
globally research budgets have been decreasing in some is complex, although it is estimated that the volume of
countries. Furthermore there is a significant gap antimicrobials used in food animals exceeds their use in
between mitigation potential and economic viability. humans worldwide. The One Health agenda (Gibbs,
Hence the third option seems, at least currently, the 2014) is gaining significant traction worldwide when it
better way forward. comes to addressing zoonotic transmission of pathogens
It is clear that our habits globally, with that are resistant to antimicrobials. There will be an
specific exceptions, have changed rapidly in recent increasing need to engage a wide range of stakeholders,
decades. More food is consumed per capita, generally not only researchers, but also farmers, veterinarians,
food is cheaper with respect to income, there is food safety professionals, medical doctors, as well as
significantly more choice and availability, and environment and wildlife experts in monitoring and
importantly there is significant waste. However, there controlling activities and coordinating responses to this
is no reason why habits could not change again to global challenge, that will definitely occur.
achieve a more sustainable lifestyle? A positive start It is clear that more research and investment
would be to reduce food waste. For example, on a are needed to increase the affordability and uptake of
global basis, about a third of food is lost in either mitigation practices, to moderate consumption of
fields and/or storage, or wasted in the supply chain and livestock products where appropriate, and to avoid
in our homes. Wasting food is not just a waste of negative impacts on livelihoods, economic activities and
valuable resources it also causes additional emissions the environment. Importantly however, limited take-up
when ending up in landfill sites. For example, food of new farming methods, together with high costs,
waste costs the average UK family, with children, means that a relatively small proportion of what is
approximately US $1,000 per year. technically possible is currently economically viable.
One option is to reduce consumption of Continued advances in the use of current reproductive
intensively produced meat and dairy. Raising livestock technologies, together with the development of new
is a less efficient way of producing food than growing reproductive technologies will be essential.
crops. Currently, a third of the crops we grow are fed to In conclusion, the future focus should be on the
livestock to produce meat, and nearly half of the development of system-based approaches (Randolph et
emissions from agri-food are related to meat production, al., 2007), together with the cost effective and welfare
more than the entire transport sector. If we used the land friendly use of new technologies and farming practices.
that is currently growing feed for animals to grow This strategy should ensure that the application of new
mainly food for humans, and consume only milk and technologies, that will certainly become available
meat from pasture/byproduct-fed animals, there is scope during the 21st century, should assist in maximizing the
for very significant reduction in emissions. If we efficiency and sustainability of livestock production and
continue to consume increasing amounts of non-pasture reduce environmental impact. In this regard, it is worth
fed animals, then the choice of meat is important remembering the comment that “It is not the strongest
because producing beef emits more than five times as of the species who survive, nor the most intelligent;
much as chicken and pork, although as discussed rather it is those most responsive to change” (attributed
previously, a robust assessment of feed efficiency is to L. C. Megginson when interpreting Charles Darwin’s
required (Wilkinson et al., 2011) in the context of Origin of Species, 1963).
obtaining more realistic estimates of emissions.
Increasingly, people around the world eat more Acknowledgments
calories than are good for them and as stated previously,
about two billion adults are either overweight or obese Professor Tim Benton, UK Champion for
and this number continues to grow. In Europe, for Global Food Security and Professor of Population

Anim. Reprod., v.13, n.3, p.133-142, Jul./Sept. 2016 139

 Webb and Buratini. Global Challenges for the 21st Century.

Ecology, University of Leeds, and Professor Geoff Available on: www.foodsecurity.ac.uk/assets/pdfs/

Simm, AgriFood Technical Council and SRUC, extreme-weather-resilience-of-global-food-system.pdf.
Edinburgh, for information and insightful discussion. Foley JA. 2011. Can we feed the world; sustain the
planet? Sci Am, 305:60-65.
References Food and Agriculture Organization. 2012. World
agriculture towards 2030/2050: The 2012 Revision.
Alleyne G, Binagwaho A, Haines A, Jahan S, Nugent ESA Working Paper No. 12-03, Rome. Available on:
R, Rojhani A, Stuckler D. 2013. Non-communicable http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/esa/Global_pers
diseases 1. Embedding non-communicable diseases in the epctives/world_ag_2030_50_2012_rev.pdf.
post-2015 development agenda. Lancet, 381:566-574. Food and Agriculture Organization. 2014. Climate
Bajželj B, Allwood JM, Cullen JM. 2013. Designing change. Available on: http://www.fao.org/resources/
climate change mitigation plans that add up. Environ Sci infographics/infographics-details/en/c/218650.
Technol, 47:8062-8069. Food and Agriculture Organization, International
Bajželj B, Richards KS, Allwood JM, Smith P, Fund for Agricultural Development, World Food
Dennis JS, Curmi E, Gilligan CA. 2014. Importance Programme. 2014. The state of food insecurity in the
of food-demand management for climate mitigation. world, 2014. Strengthening the enabling environment
Nat Clim Change, 4:924-929. for food security and nutrition. Rome. Available on:
Baruselli PS, Ferreira RM, Sales JN, Gimenes LU, http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4030e.pdf.
Sá Filho MF, Martins CM, Rodrigues CA, Bo GA. Garnsworthy PC. 2004. The environmental impact of
2011. Timed embryo transfer programs for management fertility in dairy cows: a modelling approach to predict
of donor and recipient cattle. Theriogenology, 76:1583- methane and ammonia emissions. Anim Feed Sci
1593. Technol, 112:211-223.
Baruselli PS, Vieira LM, Batista EOS, Ferreira RM, Garnsworthy PC, Thomas PC. 2005. Yield trends in
Sales JNS, Gimenes LU, Torres-Junior JRS, Martins UK dairy and beef cattle. In: Sylvester-Bradley R,
CM, Sá Filho MF, Bó GA. 2016. Updates on embryo Wiseman J. Yields of Farmed Species. Cambridge:
production strategies. Anim Reprod, 12:375-382. Nottingham University Press. pp. 435-462.
Benton T, Bajželj B. 2016. Where was food in the Gerland P, Raftery AE, Ševčíková H, Li N, Gu D,
COP21 Paris agreement. Available on: Spoorenberg T, Alkema L, Fosdick BK, Chunn J,
http://www.foodsecurity.ac.uk/ blog/2016/04/where- Lalic N, Bay G, Buettner T, Heilig GK, Wilmoth J.
was-food-in-the-cop21-paris-agreement. 2014. World population stabilization unlikely this
Berry DP, Garcia JF, Garrick DJ. 2016. century. Science, 346:234-237.
Development and implementation of genomic Gibbs EPJ. 2014. The evolution of one health: a decade
predictions in beef cattle. Anim Front, 6:32-38. of progress and challenges for the future. Vet Rec,
Blondin P. 2015. Status of embryo production in the 174:85-91.
world. Anim Reprod, 12:356-358. González-Recio O, Miguel AT, Bach A. 2015. Past,
Bó GA, Cutaia L, Peres LC, Pincinato D, Marana D, present, and future of epigenetics applied to livestock
Baruselli PS. 2007. Technologies for fixed-time breeding. Front Genet, 6:305-313.
artificial insemination and their influence on Haley CS, Lee GJ, W b e b R, Knott SA. 1993.
reproductive performance of Bos indicus cattle. Soc Evidence on the genetic control of LH release in
Reprod Fertil Suppl, 64:223-236. response to GnRH from crosses between selected lines
Borlaug NE. 2000. Ending world hunger. The promise of sheep. Livest Prod Sci, 37:153-167.
of biotechnology and the threat of antiscience zealotry. Hedenus F, Wirsenius S, Johansson DJA. 2014. The
Plant Physiol, 124: 487-490. importance of reduced meat and dairy consumption for
Climate and Global Crop Production Shocks Report. meeting stringent climate change targets. Climatic
2015. Resilience taskforce sub-report. Available on: Change 124:79-91.
www.foodsecurity.ac.uk/assets/pdfs/climate-and-global- Herrero M, Henderson B, Havlík P, Thornton PK,
crop-production-shocks.pdf. 28 pp. Conant RT, Smith P, W rsenius i S, Hristov AN,
European Commission. Standing Committee on Gerber P, Gill M, Butterbach-Bahl K, Valin H,
Agricultural Research. 2011. Sustainable food Garnett T, Stehfest E. 2016. Greenhouse gas
consumption and production in a resource-constrained mitigation potentials in the livestock sector. Nat Climate
world. 147 pp. Available on: https://ec.europa.eu/ Change, 6:452-461.
research/agriculture/scar/pdf/scar_feg_ultimate_version. Hickey JM, Whitelaw BC, Gorjanc G. 2016.
pdf. Promotion of alleles by genome editing in livestock
European Commission. Joint Research Centre. 2015. breeding programmes. J Anim Breed Genet, 133:83-84.
New ways of providing knowledge to tackle food Hill WG. 2016. Is continued genetic improvement of
nutrition security. What should the EU do? Expo 2015: livestock sustainable? Genetics, 202:877-881.
EU Scientific Steering. Committee: Recommendations. Homer EM, Y. Gao Y, Meng X, Dodson A, Webb R,
64 pp. doi: 10.2788/877760. Garnsworthy PC. 2013. Technical note: a novel
Extreme weather and resilience of the global food approach to the detection of estrus in dairy cows using
system. 2015. Final Project Report from the UK-US ultra-wideband technology. J Dairy Sci, 96:6529-6534.
Taskforce on Extreme Weather and Global Food System Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2012.
Resilience, The Global Food Security Programme, UK. Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to

140 Anim. Reprod., v.13, n.3, p.133-142, Jul./Sept. 2016

 Webb and Buratini. Global Challenges for the 21st Century.

advance climate change adaptation. A Special Report of Sanches BV, Figueiredo ACS, Baruselli PS. 2016b.
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Edited Update and overview on assisted reproductive
by CB Field, V Barros, TF Stocker, D Qin, DJ Dokken, technologies (ARTs) in Brazil. Anim Reprod, 13:300-
KL Ebi, MD Mastrandrea, KJ Mach, G-K Plattenr, SK 312.
Allen, M Tignor, PM Midgley. Cambridge, UK; Sinclair KD, Webb R. 2005. Reproductive rate in farm
Cambridge University Press. 582 pp. animals: strategies to overcome biological constraints
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2013. through the use of advanced reproductive technologies.
Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. In: Sylvester-Bradley R, Wiseman J. Yields of farmed
Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth species. Cambridge, UK: Nottingham University Press.
Assessment Report of the Intergovern- mental Panel on pp. 51-88.
Climate Change. Edited by TF Stocker, D Qin, G-K Sinclair KD, Allegrucci C, Singh R, Gardner DS,
Plattner, M Tignor, SK Allen, J Boschung, A Nauels, Y Sebastian S, Bispham J, Thurston A, Huntley JF,
Xia, V Bex, PM Midgley. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Rees WD, Maloney CA, Lea RG, Craigon J, McEvoy
University Press. pp 1-1535. TG, Young LE. 2007. DNA methylation, insulin
Ireland JJ, Smith GW, Scheetz D, Jimenez-Krassel resistance, and blood pressure in offspring determined
F, Folger JK, Ireland JL, Mossa F, Lonergan P, by maternal periconceptional B vitamin and methionine
Evans AC. 2011. Does size matter in females? An status. Proc Nat Acad Sci, 104:19351-19356.
overview of the impact of the high variation in the Smith P, Bustamante M, Ahammad H, Clark H,
ovarian reserve on ovarian function and fertility, utility Dong H, Elsiddig EA, Haberl H, Harper R, House J,
of anti- Mullerian hormone as a diagnostic marker for Jafari M, Masera O, Mbow C, Ravindranath NH,
fertility and causes of variation in the ovarian reserve in Rice CW, Robledo Abad C, Romanovskaya A,
cattle. Reprod Fertil Dev, 23:1-14. Sperling F, Tubiello F. 2014. Agriculture, Forestry and
Kearney J. 2010. Food consumption trends and drivers. Other Land Use (AFOLU). In: Edenhofer O, Pichs-
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci, 365:2793-2807. Madruga R, Sokona Y, Farahani E, Kadner S, Seyboth
Lamb GC, Dahlen CR, Larson JE, Marquezini G, K, Adler A, Baum I, Brunner S, Eickemeier P,
Stevenson JS. 2010. Control of the estrous cycle to Kriemann B, Savolainen J, Schlömer S, von Stechow C,
improve fertility for fixed-time artificial insemination in Zwickel T Minx JC. (Ed.). Climate Change 2014:
beef cattle: a review. J Anim Sci, 88:E181-E192. Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working
Mapletoft RJ, Bó GA. 2011. The evolution of Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
improved and simplified superovulation protocols in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
cattle. Reprod Fertil Dev, 24:278-283. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Meuwissen T, Ben Hayes B, Goddard M. 2016. Available on: https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-
Genomic selection: a paradigm shift in animal breeding. report/ar5/wg3/ipcc_wg3_ar5_chapter11.pdf.
Anim Frontiers, 6:6-14. Springmann M, Mason-D’Croz D, Robinson S,
Morotti F, Barreiros TRR, Machado FZ, S.M. Garnett T, Godfray HCJ, Gollin D, Rayner M,
González SM, Marinho LSR, Seneda MM. 2015. Is the Ballon P, Scarborough P. 2016. Global and regional
number of antral follicles an interesting selection health effects of future food production under climate
criterium for fertility in cattle? Anim Reprod, 12:479-486. change: a modelling study. Lancet, 387:1937-1946.
Murphy BD. 2012. Research in animal reproduction: Sylvester-Bradley R, Wiseman J. 2005. Yields of
Quo vadimus? Anim Reprod, 9:217-222. Farmed Species. Cambridge, UK: Nottingham
Randolph TF, Schelling E, Grace D, Nicholson CF, University Press. 1-651 pp.
Leroy JL, Cole DC, Demment MW , Omore A, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Zinsstag J, Ruel M. 2007. Invited review: role of Change. Conference of the Parties 21st Session, Paris
livestock in human nutrition and health for poverty 30 November to 11 December 2015. Adoption of the
reduction in developing countries. J Anim Sci, 85:2788- Paris Agreement. Available on: http://unfccc.int
2800. /resource/docs/2015/cop21/ eng/l09r01.pdf.
Ranganathan J, Vennard D, Waite R, Dumas P, Schader C, Muller A, El-Hage Scialabba N, Hecht J,
Lipinski B, Searchinger T. 2016. GLOBAGRI-WRR Isensee A, Erb K-H, Smith P, Makkar HPS, Klocke
Model Authors. Shifting diets for a sustainable future. P, Leiber F, Schwegler P, Stolze M, Niggli U. 2016.
Installment 11 of “Creating a Sustainable Future”. Impacts of feeding less food-competing feedstuffs to
World Resources Institute. 90 pp. Available from: livestock on global food system sustainability J R Soc
http://www.wri.org/publication/shifting-diets. Interface, 12:20150891. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/
Rupp R, Mucha S, Larroque H, McEwan J, rsif.2015.0891.
Conington J. 2016. Genomic application in sheep and UK strategy for agricultural technologies. 2013. 52 pp.
goat breeding. Anim Frontiers, 6:39-44. Available on: www.gov.uk/government/uploads/
Sartori R, Gimenes LU, Monteiro Jr PLJ, Melo LF, system/uploads/attachment_data/file/227259/9643-BIS-
Baruselli PS, Bastos MR. 2016a. Metabolic and UK_Agri_Tech_Strategy_Accessible.pdf.
endocrine differences between Bos taurus and Bos UK Government. 2013. A UK Strategy for
indicus females that impact the interaction of nutrition Agricultural Technologies. 56 pp. Available on:
with reproduction. Theriogenology, 86:32-40. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-
Sartori R, Prata AB, Monteiro Jr PLJ, Viana JHM, agricultural-technologies-strategy.
Vilela ER, Pereira MH, Vasconcelos JLM, Pontes G, Webb R, Stubbings L, Gregson K, Robinson JJ.

Anim. Reprod., v.13, n.3, p.133-142, Jul./Sept. 2016 141

 Webb and Buratini. Global Challenges for the 21st Century.

2005. Yields of sheep: physiological and technological World Health Organisation. 2015. Obesity and
limitations. Pages 463-494. In: Sylvester-Bradley R, overweight. Fact sheet Number 311. Available on:
Wiseman J. Yields of Farmed Species. Cambridge, UK: www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs311/en.
Nottingham University Press. World Hunger and Poverty Facts and Food
Wegener HC. 2012. A15: Antibiotic resistance - Statistics. 2015. Available on: www.worldhunger.org/
linking human and animal health. National Academy 2015-world-hunger-and-poverty-facts-and-statistics/#
Press. Available on: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ micronutrients1.
books/NBK114485. Zalasiewicz J, Waters CN, Williams M, Barnosky
Wheeler T, von Braun J. 2013. Climate change AD, Cearreta A, Crutzen P, Ellis E, Ellis MA,
impacts on global food security. Science, 341:508-513. Fairchild IJ, Grinevald J, Leinfelder R, McNeill J,
Wilkinson JM. 2011. Re-defining efficiency of feed Poirier C, Richter D, Steffen W, Vidas D, Wagreich
use by livestock. Animal, 5:1014-1022. M, Wolfe AP, Zhisheng A. 2015. When did the
World Health Organisation. 2012. Micronutrient Anthropocene begin? A mid-twentieth century
deficiencies. Available on: www.who.int/nutrition/ boundary level is stratigraphically optimal. Quat Int,
topics/ida/en. 383:204-207.

142 Anim. Reprod., v.13, n.3, p.133-142, Jul./Sept. 2016