At COP30, 28 low-income nations urged high-income countries to adopt a GHG pricing mechanism targeting industrial meat production.
They cited overconsumption and disproportionate emissions.
They called for at least 20 per cent of revenues to support a Loss and Damage Fund.
If wealthy nations won’t reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from industrial livestock sector voluntarily, they must pay for the climate damage it causes by way of a GHG emission pricing mechanism. This is what 28 low-income countries across Africa and Pacific demanded in the just concluded COP30, from high-income countries, that see overconsumption of meat.
Countries like Nigeria, Fiji, Uganda, Chad, Papua New Guinea, Liberia, among others signed a ‘Belém Declaration on GHG Emission Pricing on Agri-Food Systems’. It called on high-income countries and major economies, including the European Union commission, 30 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) member states and China, to introduce GHG pricing mechanisms in their industrial meat production.
These countries — from Fiji to Vanuatu, and from Kiribati to Papua New Guinea — together represent roughly 14 million people who are already experiencing the daily impacts of climate change.
The countries, supported by 80 non-governmental and international organisations, urged that the polluter-pays principle be applied so that at least 20 per cent of the revenue raised through the pricing mechanism is channelled into the Loss and Damage Fund to support developing nations suffering the impacts of the climate crisis.
The joint call from seven African countries and 21 Pacific nations was made during the 30th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP30) in Belem, Brazil.
“The signatories are low-income countries. The seven African countries that signed represent 30 per cent of all African people,” said Jeroom Remmers, director and founder of TAPP Coalition, which initiated the declaration. It also includes 21 small island pacific states who face sea level rise caused by meat and dairy eaten across the world, he added. “It is not only fossil fuels that are causing sea-level rise.”
Agriculture and food system are responsible for one-third of all global GHG-emissions; livestock production generates the majority of these emissions. The climate footprint of beef (70 kilogrammes of GHG emissions / kg food), pork (12 kg GHG emissions / kg) and chicken (9.9 kg GHG emissions / kg) was relatively high compared to other food proteins, like legumes (2 kg / kg), nuts (0.4 kg / kg), among others, according to the declaration.
“It is time to move away from this inefficient way of producing protein,” said Tim Reysoo from Tapp Coalition.
“When we talk of global inequity, we only talk in context of fossil fuel. Rich industrialised countries have used by far more fossil fuels to enhance their economies and industry but a similar argument can be made that these countries, to this day, have consumed a large amount of animal protein in the world,” he said.
Developing nations are frequently scrutinised for livestock-related emissions; India, for example, is often cited for high methane emissions due to its sizeable cattle population, yet these countries largely rely on smallholder, low-input systems rather than the industrial, high-emission livestock production dominant in the global North.
There is also a huge imbalance in meat and dairy consumption between high and low income countries. On average, meat consumption was 71.4 kg per capita per year in the OECD countries and 61.98 kg per capita per year in China.
This was at least four times more than that recommended by the EAT Lancet Planetary Health Diet, which suggests to eat no more than 301 grammes of meat per week and that equals nearly 16 kg per person per year.
In contrast, the consumption was 26.6 kg per capita per year in developing countries. The signatory countries in the declaration have asked that any future COP should include “transitioning away from animal protein overconsumption”.
It’s not about stopping meat altogether but reducing overconsumption, said Remmers.
Meanwhile, in a business as usual scenario, the total global herd size in livestock units was projected to rise by over 50 per cent by 2050 (from 2012 baseline), according to the Food and Agriculture Organization.
This does not align with the Paris Climate Agreement goal of Net Zero emissions by 2050. Livestock production was responsible for 80 per cent of global land use, Reysoo noted.
Introducing a meat and dairy tax in high-income countries, he added, would not only curb emissions but also free up vast areas of land that could be restored or rewilded, increasing the world’s natural capacity to absorb carbon.