The decision to leave the EU presents a major change and opportunity for UK farming. Many questions may be posed but it is clear that beef production in the UK will need to focus on economic and environmental competiveness and an absolute focus on delivering to market differentiation, added value and consumer focused markets. The demand for UK beef to the national market is high and significant opportunities exist to supply into growing global markets. The bulk of the growth in meat is predicted to occur in developing countries, with China, India and Brazil already representing two thirds of current meat production. Innovations and adoption of new approaches in beef production systems have lagged significantly behind progress in pig and poultry sector for many years. In the UK and further afield we are experiencing a transition to beef produced extensively but finished indoors in a more intensive manner. There is an urgent need for investment in research to support the further development of ‘sustainable and differentiated beef systems’, effective translation of associated science and technology into practice through knowledge exchange and training to elevate ‘skills’ in the industry and support further development of a high technology driven beef sector in the UK. Restructuring and refocusing beef production businesses are key to a viable and sustainable beef sector to meet the challenges in the post Brexit Britain. It must be an industry capable of delivering positively on many fronts, producing high quality products for consumers, farming in a sensitive and environmentally friendly manner in a ‘climate changed world’, resource efficient and delivering to maintain and enhance our countryside and rural communities.

This short paper will highlight some of the issues, which are central to supporting a competitive beef sector in the UK against the backdrop of the challenges posed by Brexit. The paper takes a wider look at some of the major issues influencing livestock production systems in general and the demand for livestock products.

Some key issues influencing future beef systems

Population: The expected growth in population to 9 billion people by 2050, with the associated increased demand for food, coupled with a reliance on intensification of farming systems, has and will continue to put pressure on natural resources to an extent which will not be sustainable (Godfray et al., 2010). Much of the population growth will occur in developing countries outside of the EU, and is expected to be associated with a rise in economic wealth in these countries, coupled with a rise in demand for livestock products. However, food choices are also influenced by religious beliefs, geography, health scares, provenance, acceptance of food production technologies and lifestyle choices (Hocquette & Chatellier, 2011). It is noteworthy that while population and economic growth is associated with increased demand for livestock products, as has been observed in China and Brazil, this effect can be diluted in other developing countries where strong religious or cultural beliefs prohibit consumption of particular foods (Alexandratos & Bruinsma, 2012). There is increasing demand for livestock products including beef, which are produced from efficient, environmentally friendly, high welfare and of ‘high quality’ by consumers in China and other countries in Asia. This, in conjunction with national markets, presents a major opportunity for UK beef industry.

Consumption: Meat consumption within the EU is high. Hocquette & Chatellier (2011) reported average meat consumption within EU-27 as 77 kg per capita in 2010, which exceeded meat consumption in other countries such as Russia, China and Japan. However, even within the EU, the influence of wealth on food choices is also apparent. In excess of 50% of livestock in the EU-28 exist in Germany, Spain, France and the United Kingdom (Eurostat, 2015a, 2015b). Furthermore, comparison of the less affluent new member states of the EU (NMS-12) to the EU-15 countries demonstrates a preference for pork over beef by the NMS-12, due in part to shorter production cycle and better feed efficiency compared to beef (Hocquette & Chatellier, 2011). Thus in European livestock sector and further afield, social, environmental and economic matters can also influence the preferences for products from different animal species.

Greenhouse gas emissions: The livestock sector contributes to around 18% of global GHG emissions, where methane and nitrous oxide are the main concerns (Steinfeld et al., 2006). Within the EU livestock sector in 2011, the dairy and beef sector contributed 70% of the livestock sector GHG emissions. When considered on a kilograms of product basis, the impact on average EU GHG emissions was in the order of beef > pork > eggs > poultry > dairy; however regional variation in production systems resulted in differences in these trends across the EU (Lesschen et al., 2011). The livestock sector contributes to GHG emissions via deforestation for grazing and crops, manure production, enteric fermentation by ruminants and fertiliser and fossil fuel use, and of these enteric fermentation is estimated to have greatest impact within the UK and EU. Extensive farming systems are generally associated with greater GHG emissions due to longer life cycles, but intensive systems generally exceed the adsorptive capacity of land for waste products, which pose a significant risk from contamination of water supplies and excess nitrogen deposition in soil(FAO, 2011). Furthermore intensification of farming systems decouples local agriculture from local resource, thus putting pressure on traded animals feeds and nutrient balance of the land (FAO, 2011). On the basis of the effect of cattle on GHG emissions, there are calls to reduce the global consumption of meat from ruminants in high income countries, but also to continue find ways to reduce GHG emissions by the livestock sector to slow the rate of climate change (Herrero et al., 2016; Springmann et al., 2016).

Human health: Health concerns also lend support for reducing consumption of red meat in developed countries where over consumption, including that of meat, is linked to heart disease, obesity and cancer. In developing countries, increased meat consumption is likely to result in the improvements in health due to the provision of protein and micronutrients, such as vitamins A, B6, B12,D, iron, selenium and zinc (Scollan et al., 2014; Tilman & Clark, 2014).

Animal health: Within developed countries advances in veterinary services have seen a decrease in livestock diseases (Thornton, 2010). Emergence of new diseases can result in substantial livestock losses. Emergence of zoonotic diseases poses risks for both livestock and humans, as with the H5N1 influenza virus (Tilman et al., 2002). Prophylactic use of antibiotics in livestock production can result in antibiotic resistant disease strains, again posing significant risks for humans and livestock. Antimicrobial resistance is a major issue for society today. The World Health Organisation (WHO) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) are working closely in a ‘One Health’ approach to promote best practices to avoid the emergence and spread of antibacterial resistance, including optimal use of antibiotics in both humans and animals.Within this globalised world of today, there is a risk that diseases can rapidly spread across continents as a result of travel, migration and trade. Furthermore climate change has been linked to increased parasitic disease, and may in the future increase the prevalence of waterborne diseases due to increases in flooding and have other consequences such as the forced movement of people due to droughts which may assist the spread of disease (Thornton, 2010).

Key areas of focus for future beef systems

• Climate change: May have substantial effects of livestock production through for example extreme weather events, drought and floods, production losses, water availability, feed quality and quantity; host-pathogen interactions, disease epidemics. A focus on Climate-Smart beef systems is essential.

• Environmental impact: Reducing environmental impact on livestock production is essential. Lifecycle analysis of livestock production will continue to evolve as methodology for assessing environmental footprint improve. Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from beef systems vary largely ranging from 14–32 kg CO2 equivalents per kg of product, which is much greater than that of pork and poultry. Improvements in nutrition, genetics, health and welfare are essential to reduce emissions.

• Sustainability metrics: Novel approaches to describing and measuring ‘sustainability’ of livestock production systems are required which smartly integrate the economic, environmental and social dimensions (Kipling et al., 2016). Across these ‘aspects of sustainability’ many metrics have already been developed, while others are still in need of development, and from an industry-perspective, agreement is required on what needs to be measured and how.

Metrics required include:
• 1) Efficiency and productivity metrics: these include assessing yield per unit of input (where input could be water, energy, nutrient, pesticide, GHG, land), and assessing impact per unit of agricultural product (output).
• 2) Field-level metrics: metrics of soil carbon, structure, loss via erosion, impact of management on ground water, management of the marginal land and its value for promoting biodiversity or ecosystem services.
• 3) Landscape-level metrics: biodiversity and metrics for a range of ecosystem services including those supporting agriculture (pollination, pest control), water quality, and the cultural and amenity value.

•​ Improving the delivery of safe and high ‘quality’: Products produced from production systems, which are environmentally sound and of high welfare standards will become more important. This is related to the increasing prices for livestock products reflecting changes in global availability but also major increases in input costs. Price increases also raise consumer expectations and demand for quality.

• Improvements in efficiency: Emphasis on driving continuous improvements in efficiency is essential through exploiting integrated approaches and developments in genetics and nutritional research. Enhanced utilisation of useful ‘measurements’ and utilisation of ‘data’ to drive improvements in production systems. Precision feeding, for example taking into account characteristics such as the age and sex of animals when designing feed rations, and monitoring forage nutrient composition can lead to substantial increases in productivity.

• Carcass and meat quality assessment: There is an urgent need for the red meat sector to shift towards more customer focused products. There is a need to develop and implement cutting edge carcase evaluation techniques which measure both carcase yield and more innovatively eating quality. Current carcass classification and grading schemes evolved from a necessity to describe the carcass using standard terms to facilitate trading, however, the growth in world trade of meat and meat products and the transition from trading carcasses to marketing individual meal portions raises the need for an international language that can service contemporary needs, including product eating quality. Consumer research on the willingness to pay for eating quality shows that consumers will pay higher prices for better eating quality grades and in Australia the ‘Meat Standards Australia’ eating quality-grading system has generated substantial premiums to retailers, wholesalers and to the producer. Future grading schemes, which measure both carcass yield, and eating quality have the potential to underpin the development and implementation of transparent value-based payment systems that will encourage improved production efficiency throughout the supply chain. It is essential that the red meat sector in Wales seize the opportunity to create a step-change in the approach to assessing and payment for ‘quality’ based on consumer requirements in order to maximize the local market capture and compete in international red meat trade.

• Feed and food safety: The complex feed and food supply chains pose many serious issues and risks to the consumer. Contamination by chemical and microbiological threats can occur at many critical control points. Additional risks to the safety of feed and food by factors such as climate change, environmental pollution and fraud are considerable.

• Food fraud: Encompasses deliberate and intentional substitution, addition, tampering, or misrepresentation of food, food ingredients, or food packaging; or false or misleading statements made about a product for economic gain. The types of fraud include adulteration, tampering, product overrun, theft, diversion, simulation, and counterfeiting. The Elliott Review into the integrity and assurance of food supply networks (Elliott, 2014) in UK following the Horsegate incident provides an excellent framework on approaches to protect food businesses and deliver confidence to consumers.

• Product authenticity and traceability: Increased development of novel methods to assay the authenticity of livestock products beyond species-species difference towards the development of robust systems to underpin specific breeds linked to geographical origin and ideally individual farms.

The challenges for the beef industry are significant. However, equally the opportunities are high. There is a great opportunity to shape a new high tech industry focused on delivering the needs of consumers in the UK and select global markets who increasingly demand products from sustainable, environmentally sound, high welfare and responsible systems.

References

Alexandratos, N. and Bruinsma, J. (2012) World Agriculture towards 2030/2050: the 2012 revision. Rome, Food and Agriculture Organisation.

Elliott, C. (2014) Elliott Review into the Integrity and Assurance of Food Supply Networks – Final Report. DEFRA, UK.European Commission (2012) The common agricultural policy: a story to be continued. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.

Eurostat (2015a) Farm structure survey 2013 – main results. Http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Farm_structure_survey_2013_-_main_results[accessed 3 June 2016].

Eurostat (2015b) Agricultural production – animals. Http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statisticsexplained/index.php/Agricultural_production_animals [accessed 3 June 2016].

FAO (2011) Mapping supply and demand for animal-source foods to 2030. Rome, Food and Agriculture Organisation.

Godfray, H.C.J., Beddington, J.R., Crute, I.R., Haddad, L., Lawrence, D., Muir, J.F., Pretty, J., Robinson, S., Thomas, S.M. and Toulmin, C. (2010) Food Security: The Challenge of Feeding 9 Billion People. Science 327, 812–818.

Herrero, M., Henderson, B., HavlÌk, P., Thornton, P.K., Conant, R.T., Smith, P., Wirsenius, S., Hristov, A.N., Gerber, P., Gill, M., Butterbach-Bahl, K., Valin, H., Garnett, T. and Stehfest, E. (2016) Greenhouse gas mitigation potentials in the livestock sector. Nature Climate Change 6, 452–461.

Hocquette, J.-F. and Chatellier, V. (2011) Prospects for the European beef sector over the next 30 years. Animal Frontiers 1, 20–28.

Kipling, R.P., Bannink, A., Bellocchi, G., Dalgaard, T., Fox, N.J., Hutchings, N.J., Kjeldsen, C., Lacetera, N., Sinabell, F., Topp, C.F.E., van Oijen, M., Virkajärvi, P. and Scollan, N.D. (2016) Modeling European ruminant production systems: Facing the challenges of climate change. Agricultural Systems 147, 24–37.

Leakey, R. and Kranjac-Berisavljevic, G. (2009) Impacts of AKST (Agricultural Knowledge Science and Technology) on development and sustainability goals. In Agriculture at a crossroads – Global report (eds B.D. Mcintyre, H.R. Herren, J. Wakhungu & R.T. Watson), pp. 145–253. Island Press, Washington, DC.

Scollan, N.D., Dannenberger, D., Nuernberg, K., Richardson, I., Mackintosh, S., Hocquette, J.-F. and Moloney, A.P. (2014) Enhancing the nutritional and health value of beef lipids and their relationship with meat quality. Meat Science issue 3, 384–394.

Springmann, M., Godfray, H.C.J., Rayner, M. and Scarborough, P. (2016) Analysis and valuation of the health and climate change cobenefits of dietary change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113, 4146–4151.

Steinfeld, H., Gerber, P., Wassenaar, T.D., Castel, V., Rosales M., M. and Haan, C. De (2006) Livestock’s long shadow: environmental issues and options. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.

Thornton, P.K. (2010) Livestock production: recent trends, future prospects. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 365, 2853–2867.

Tilman, D. and Clark, M. (2014) Global diets link environmental sustainability and human health. Nature 515, 518–522.