Summary

Half of the world’s habitable land is used for agriculture, with most of this used to raise livestock for dairy and meat. Livestock are fed from two sources – lands on which the animals graze and land on which feeding crops, such as soy and cereals, are grown. How much would our agricultural land use decline if the world adopted a plant-based diet?

Research suggests that if everyone shifted to a plant-based diet we would reduce global land use for agriculture by 75%. This large reduction of agricultural land use would be possible thanks to a reduction in land used for grazing and a smaller need for land to grow crops. The research also shows that cutting out beef and dairy (by substituting chicken, eggs, fish or plant-based food) has a much larger impact than eliminating chicken or fish.

  • NumbersCanBeFun@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    These all or nothing polls are useless. Sure it shows potential but you aren’t going to get everyone to do anything. It’s not possible. There is always going to be a handful of holdouts in any situation that just don’t want to do it. I’m one of those people.

    The argument to not eat meat is lost on me. You can get me to recycle, go for sustainable farming, I work in green energy but meat? I’ll take my burger medium rare please. Don’t try to convince me otherwise. Im not going to eat vegan.

    • LostCause@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It‘s not all or nothing, if you had clicked the link actually you would have seen a lot of “it‘s not all or nothing” in there, I‘m not gonna cite it all, but here is one example:

      But importantly large land use reductions would be possible even without a fully vegan diet. Cutting out beef, mutton and dairy makes the biggest difference to agricultural land use as it would free up the land that is used for pastures.

      And fair enough, maybe you won‘t be convinced ever and happily chow down on beef burgers until the bitter end, but if it can convince some people to at least choose chicken instead or even just reduce their beef use as much as they can live with, then it‘s a already a useful study regardless of the holdouts.

      • NumbersCanBeFun@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Reads comment expecting a fight…

        Okay, fair point I should have read it more thoroughly

        Also another fair point. I can agree to everything you said here. Cheers friend.

    • axsyse@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      They aren’t useless. It can often be useful to know what the extremes are, as a middle-ground approach would lie somewhere in between. Like, if switching wholly away from animals would free up 3 billion hectares, would switching about halfway free up about 1.5 billion hectares?

      Obviously it’s not necessarily that simple but still, knowing the statistics at various extremes allows you to weigh your options, so you can compromise by combining various approaches at varying degrees and hopefully get a “good enough” outcome. The researchers here aren’t necessarily saying “all you meat lovers need to just give up meat already, look at how much land we can free up!”, rather they’re saying “hey policymakers, if we reduce our reliance on animals by around a third, we can free up a billion hectares of valuable agricultural land.”

      • NumbersCanBeFun@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Being vegan isn’t wrong or evil. It’s a dietary choice I think is right for some people. I’m here to educate myself and to offer an opposing opinion which is healthy for an idea to flourish.

        The only time I’m had run ins with any vegans is when they call me a murderer. Listen I was a military veteran. You want to label me that for my time of service. That’s fair. But murdering an animal? I’ve never done that. I love animals, even cows. I’m a big believer in sustainable and healthy farming for animals.

        • eric@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Just because you don’t actually do the murdering doesn’t mean you are not responsible for the murder. Those animals that you eat are murdered to create supply for the meat demand that you contribute to. If you stop eating meat, demand goes down by one meat-eater which will decrease the number of animals that are killed. Even though you aren’t slaughtering animals, you are still responsible for the deaths caused by the meat you eat, kind of like how a mob boss is still culpable for murders that they order. Or how the global leaders that send armed forces out to murder people in other countries are considered murderers even though they never personally pull the trigger.

          And before you assume I’m a vegan, I’m not, but I feel quite a bit of guilt for the animal lives that I’m responsible for taking. I’m reducing my meat intake (no meat 2-3 days a week) because every little bit helps to reduce demand for meat and the deaths it directly causes.

        • inasaba@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Okay. I don’t really care about any of your excuses written here. If you aren’t a vegan, and don’t want to be a vegan, and have negative opinions of vegans, then why do you subject yourself to looking at vegan discussion spaces?

          Go outside.

    • Ann Onymous@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Making animals suffer for my culinary choices is good, actually

      Hope you don’t mind if I hang your beloved pets up by their feet, cut their throats, and tear their bodies apart. They’re just food so it does’t matter.