Opinion: Dr Jacqueline Rowarth disagrees with UK author George Monbiot's argument that the average New Zealanders diet meat-loving diet could be devastating for the planet.
Overseas experts are not necessarily experts in the New Zealand context.
It seems to be taking us a very long time to realise this, even though we acknowledge that New Zealand is unique.
The country's geological youth and maritime climate, combined with relatively recent settlement and educated population, mean that the development of the country has followed a different pathway to that of most countries.
In the past, experts in farming from the old country brought in what they thought were "good things" – gorse, broom and rabbits, for instance.
And then ferrets, stoats and weasels to control the rabbit problem.
The current misguided behaviour is still about farming.
In the middle of the regenerative agriculture debate (with the focus on trying to decide what it means in New Zealand when we already have soil organic matter, high animal welfare and pastoral-based systems) we have UK-based journalist George Monbiot splashed in the headlines, saying that "the New Zealand diet is particularly bad for the planet due to the vast amount of land required to produce food for it".
Diets are difficult to assess because self-reporting tends to be optimistic and major databases, such as those created by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) use "carcass availability" as a guide, rather than actual consumption (based on self-reporting).
Based on FAO assessments, the average New Zealand diet contains approximately 75kg of meat per capita per year, in comparison with the USA at 100kg, and Israel, Australia and Argentina at between 90 and 88 kg per person a year.
Unlike the other countries, New Zealand's consumption (on average) is approximately a quarter beef, 5 per cent sheep meat, 25 per cent pork and over half is chicken.
Israel's beef consumption has increased by 50 per cent since 2015 and was almost 20kg per person in 2021. This is twice that of average New Zealand consumption.
The CSIRO (the Australian equivalent of the New Zealand Crown Research Institutes) has calculated the best diet to meet nutritional needs and minimise environmental impact.
It suggests 0.8 servings of red meat (in which beef, lamb, pork and kangaroo are included) a day, which is 80g of raw red meat and approximately 19kg a year.
The CSIRO recommendation is to increase average meat consumption in total from 2.7 to 2.8 servings a day; the increase is in red meat.
On this basis, New Zealanders are eating more meat than required (but not as much as some other countries).
Plant-based drinks have lower quantities of 20 nutrients measured, particularly calcium and protein.
To gain the required amount of calcium and protein would require increased food consumption with consequent increased requirements for land area and water.
Greenhouse gas emissions would also be increased.
Monbiot's statement that soy crops require only two square metres of land for every 100 grams of protein is simply wrong.
Dr Graeme Coles, a Canterbury-based nutrition scientist, has done the calculations.
"Yield of soy in warm-temperate climates in the best soils with optimal management might reach 5 tonnes/ha, or 50 g of grain/square meter," Coles said.
"Since the gross protein content of soy is 36 per cent, at best, the yield of usable protein is 18g/square meter.
"This means that 5.6 square meters, or 2.8 times the land that Monbiot claims, is required to provide 100g of crude soy protein."
Also overlooked was that soy protein is a relatively poor source of essential amino acids compared to animal protein, particularly milk protein, and requires processing.
"Processing usually involves loss of some protein, or at least, reduction of digestibility. In contrast, you can drink milk straight from the udder, and beef can be eaten raw," Coles says.
Yet another overlooked factor in the Monbiot calculations is that pastoral agriculture in New Zealand occurs mostly where crops cannot grow, and the crops that can be grown are mostly not the protein crops, such as soy, that are being promoted as an alternative to meat and dairy.
CSIRO has shown that animal protein is an important part of meeting nutritional needs with the least environmental impact.
AgResearch has shown that New Zealand meat and dairy have lower environmental impact than other countries achieve.
The answer is then clear – meet nutritional requirements by eating the appropriate servings of New Zealand meat and milk. QED.
- Dr Jacqueline Rowarth, Adjunct Professor Lincoln University, has a PhD in Soil Science (nutrient cycling) and is a Director of Ravensdown, DairyNZ and Deer Industry NZ. The analysis and conclusions above are her own. jsrowarth@gmail.com
