Wild meat consumption in tropical forests spares a significant carbon footprint from the livestock production sector

Whether sustainable or not, wild meat consumption is a reality for millions of tropical forest dwellers. Yet estimates of spared greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from consuming wild meat, rather than protein from the livestock sector, have not been quantified. We show that a mean per capita wild meat consumption of 41.7 kg yr−1 for a population of ~ 150,000 residents at 49 Amazonian and Afrotropical forest sites can spare ~ 71 MtCO2-eq annually under a bovine beef substitution scenario, but only ~ 3 MtCO2-eq yr−1 if this demand is replaced by poultry. Wild meat offtake by these communities could generate US$3M or US$185K in carbon credit revenues under an optimistic scenario (full compliance with the Paris Agreement by 2030; based on a carbon price of US$50/tCO2-eq) and US$1M or US$77K under a conservative scenario (conservative carbon price of US$20.81/tCO2-eq), representing considerable incentives for forest conservation and potential revenues for local communities. However, the wild animal protein consumption of ~ 43% of all consumers in our sample was below the annual minimum per capita rate required to prevent human malnutrition. We argue that managing wild meat consumption can serve the interests of climate change mitigation efforts in REDD + accords through avoided GHG emissions from the livestock sector, but this requires wildlife management that can be defined as verifiably sustainable.

Hydropower plant in Eastern Amazon and its impacts on the local population’s eating habits

This study assessed the direct impacts of Cachoeira Caldeirão Hydropower Plant (before and during its construction) on the eating habits (fish and wild meat consumption) of the residents in Porto Grande City, Amapá State, Brazil. The study was conducted in 2015, based on a questionnaire for data collection (Sample size = 53) and on comparative analysis for significance (Wilcoxon test, p < 0.05) and correlation (Pearson’s test) assessment. Results suggested significant changes in families’ eating habits. The Wilcoxon test detected three significant variables (p < 0.05): family income, number of species (fish and wild meat consumption) and rate of wild meat consumption per family. Both the Wilcoxon and the Pearson’s correlation tests confirmed two variables (p < 0.05 and r > 0.7): family income versus wild meat consumption before (p value = 0.045; r = - 0.75) and family income versus fish consumption during (p value = 0.0029; r = - 0.83) hydropower plant construction. It can be inferred that the decrease in family fish consumption may be related to changes in the families' eating habits. Changes in diet may have led families to a growing consumption of industrialized and/or ultra-processed foods, very common in geographically isolated Amazon riverside regions with limited access to electricity. Furthermore, families were forced to adapt to a new reality due to environmental changes in their territories.

Wild Meat Is Still on the Menu: Progress in Wild Meat Research, Policy, and Practice from 2002 to 2020

Several hundred species are hunted for wild meat in the tropics, supporting the diets, customs, and livelihoods of millions of people. However, unsustainable hunting is one of the most urgent threats to wildlife and ecosystems worldwide and has serious ramifications for people whose subsistence and income are tied to wild meat. Over the past 18 years, although research efforts have increased, scientific knowledge has largely not translated into action. One major barrier to progress has been insufficient monitoring and evaluation, meaning that the effectiveness of interventions cannot be ascertained. Emerging issues include the difficulty of designing regulatory frameworks that disentangle the different purposes of hunting, the large scale of urban consumption, and the implications of wild meat consumption for human health. To address these intractable challenges, we propose eight new recommendations for research and action for sustainable wild meat use, which would support the achievement of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Environment and Resources, Volume 46 is October 2021. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Beliefs in the Dietary Benefits of Water Monitor, Varanus salvator Meat in Western Java, Indonesia

Local knowledge on the benefits of wild meat is probably the motivation behind consumption of such unusual source of protein. Various tribes in Indonesia are known to include wild meat of monitor lizards, Varanus spp. in their diet for several reasons including health benefits. Water monitor, Varanus salvator, is widely distributed across the Indonesian Archipelago and commonly found even in degraded habitats. Meat and internal organs of this species are commonly known to be consumed in Indonesia by at least three ethnics, i.e. Batak on Sumatra, Dayak on Kalimantan, and Minahasa on Sulawesi islands. We aim to investigate consumption of water monitor meat in a few communities in the western part of Java, where there is likely a custom albeit benign. Previous observations in the province of West Java showed consumption of a smaller scope in Sundanese communities, where religious background is of a restriction. Consumption of water monitor meat all over on Java seemed to be infrequent, yet also prevailing at a level of small business. In the western part of Java, consumption and sales seemed to be dominant in the northern areas, but mostly in Jakarta than in the regencies of West Java province. Direct observations and casual interviews with a few associates in West Java revealed a long-term practice in Cibinong. Besides its gastronomic benefit, meat of water monitor is believed as health tonic for men and a therapeutic method to treat skin diseases.