English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The famous FAO report “Livestock’s Long Shadow” (Steinfeld et al. 2006) and hundreds of subsequent publications blamed domestic livestock, in general, and grasslandbased production systems in the (sub) tropics, in particular, of causing serious environmental hazards such as climate change, claiming that 18% of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are from livestock, more than from the transport sector. Few reviews challenged this claim, and those that did received little attention from the media. Pitseky et al. (2009) revealed the double standard applied by the FAO in this matter: Whereas for livestock products a full life cycle assessment for GHG emissions was applied, for the transport sector only fuel consumption was taken into account. This striking weakness of the FAO report alone considerably disadvantages livestock husbandry due to a scientifically questionable comparison.

Planet at risk from grazing animals?