The Evolution of Animal Husbandry for Sustainable Farming. Interview with Sam De Campeneere
In our conversation with Dr Sam De Campeneere, Scientific Director for Animal Husbandry at ILVO (Belgium’s Institute for Agriculture, Fisheries, and Food), we explored how livestock research has evolved over the past three decades. With a background in agricultural engineering and a PhD in applied biological sciences, De Campeneere began his career studying the feeding needs of Belgian Blue bulls. Today, he coordinates research on sustainability, climate change, and animal welfare, and serves as Vice President at EAAP.
He recalls that, until the 1990s, research primarily focused on maximising production and profitability. Now, the priority is to optimise systems within environmental and social limits, reflecting public concern for emissions, animal welfare, and climate change. In Belgium, since the early 2000s, the focus has shifted to managing nitrogen and phosphorus pollution, and nearly every new project starts from a specific societal challenge.
De Campeneere stresses the link between nutrition and emissions. In the past, farmers overfed animals to avoid deficiencies; however, with improved data, precision feeding now reduces waste and environmental impact. However, the shift toward feeding animals more human-edible crops, especially for monogastrics, has sparked debate—improving efficiency but raising concerns about a possible food-feed competition.
He also highlights the complexity of evaluating feed choices: is it better to grow soy locally with lower yields or import high-yield soy from abroad? These trade-offs, he says, demonstrate how farmersmust continually balance environmental, nutritional, and economic objectives.
To assess the impact of livestock, researchers use life cycle analysis (LCA), which tracks emissions and resource use across the entire supply chain. However, weighing different concerns—such as climate change, biodiversity, and water pollution—is far from simple. Nowadays, biodiversity loss is the most pressing environmental issue; yet, in Europe, climate change tends to dominate the conversation.
Dr De Campeneere also debunks common myths about livestock and climate change. Ending animal agriculture wouldn’t solve the climate crisis, he says. While agriculture accounts for 10–20% of global emissions, fossil fuels remain the primary driver of global emissions. Methane—often cited in critiques of livestock—is indeed a potent greenhouse gas, but it has a short atmospheric lifespan. Reducing methane can yield immediate climate benefits, but it shouldn’t distract from the urgent need to cut CO₂ emissions.
Importantly, ruminants aren’t the main source of methane. Landfills, fossil fuel extraction, and rice fields are among the sources that produce more. Satellite data even pinpoints methane hotspots in cities and gas fields, not farms. De Campeneere urges a more balanced discussion: agriculture has a role to play, but the waste and energy sectors offer faster and more controllable paths to cut methane in the short term.
Ultimately, he calls for continued investment in research, innovation, and international cooperation to make livestock farming more sustainable. The future lies not in simplistic solutions but in nuanced, science-based strategies that account for both global and local realities.