BMPA is again representing the UK meat industry at COP30 and is this year co-hosting a panel event with Harper Adams University to discuss how sustainable livestock grazing can help balance competing priorities of land use, nutrition, emissions reduction and food security.

The discussion will be based around a recent article published in Animal Frontiers which brings together global case studies showing how ruminant livestock systems, from temperate grasslands in Ireland to semi-arid rangelands in Australia, are evolving rapidly through collaboration, data-led management, and integrated grazing and feeding strategies. We’re fortunate to be able to include one of the lead authors, Professor Michael Lee of Harper Adams University, on the discussion panel.

For the UK meat and livestock sector, the piece offers timely insights. The transformation required across the ruminant value chain is not a theoretical exercise but already underway in production systems around the world. Its central message is that the tension between nutrition, productivity and environmental performance is not irreconcilable; with the right management, ruminants can simultaneously deliver nutrient-dense food and measurable environmental gains.

The article highlights a crucial shift in thinking and contends that grazing systems must be managed with precision and adapted to the local environment. Adaptive grazing approaches, involving frequent movement of livestock and rest periods for pasture, consistently show improvements in soil carbon flux, water infiltration, biodiversity and animal performance. UK findings mirror this, with multispecies swards (pasture that contains a mixture of three or more species whose growth characteristics complement each other resulting in improved productivity), rotational grazing and silvopasture demonstrating large gains in soil organic carbon and reductions in emissions per unit of meat.

These improvements are not just ecological; they often translate into greater pasture growth, heavier carcass weights and more resilient year-round forage supply. The lesson for British processors and policymakers is that investing in upstream grazing innovation pays dividends throughout the supply chain.

Yet the review is clear that grazing alone does not meet the consistency and efficiency demands of modern meat supply chains. Intensive feeding systems, including feedlots in the US and Australia, are described not as environmental liabilities but as strategic tools that stabilise supply, reduce slaughter age, and lower emissions intensity through improved feed conversion and controlled manure management.

As UK sustainability discussions increasingly include the role of housed finishing systems, the article offers a useful reframing: the environmental outcome depends more on management quality than on whether an animal grazes or is fed indoors. Feedlots and supplementary feeding can support the resilience of grazing-based systems by bridging forage gaps, utilising human-inedible by-products, and improving overall life-cycle resource use.

Meat processors occupy a critical juncture as the link between farmers and retailers, and they face growing pressure to account for Scope 3 emissions. The review notes the rapid improvements already observed in abattoir energy use, waste management and the value-adding of co-products (the “fifth quarter”) which transform what might be waste into pharmaceuticals, fertilisers and high-value foods. For the UK, where the processing sector is already investing in renewable heat, biogas and water efficiency, the message is encouraging. Processors are essential to the sector’s sustainability story, not just passive recipients of upstream practices.

The authors also warn against viewing carbon sequestration as the single measure of system success. Soil carbon gains eventually plateau, vary widely with soil type, and can be lost through mismanagement. Instead, a holistic view, one that includes nutrient cycling, biodiversity, animal welfare, resilience to climate extremes and human nutrition, offers a more realistic and productive pathway. For UK policymakers, this reinforces the need for flexible frameworks that allow farmers to innovate locally rather than pushing blunt, one-size-fits-all land-use changes.

Ultimately, the review argues for full-lifecycle collaboration, that would see farmers, processors, feed suppliers and policymakers aligning around shared outcomes. For the UK meat and livestock industry, which sits within tightening environmental regulation and evolving consumer expectations, the message is hopeful but urgent. Progress is already being made globally, but competitive advantage, both environmentally and economically, will lie with those who can demonstrate credible, data-rich sustainability across the entire chain, from pasture to plate.