This summary was prepared by Hamed Kioumarsi, EBM at Springer Nature, in collaboration with Zary Shariman Yahaya (School of Biological Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Malaysia) and Rodrigo Pacheco (Goodwill Ambassador, FAO).

Citation: Kioumarsi, H., Shariman Yahaya, Z., & Pacheco, R. (2026). Can Livestock Farming Restore Biodiversity? Rethinking Animal Husbandry as a Climate and Ecosystem Solution. Springer Nature Communities. https://go.nature.com/4wrNWd0

Introduction

Agriculture and animal husbandry are vital for creating jobs, boosting economic growth, and feeding the world. However, conventional animal-production systems are widely believed to have negative environmental consequences. Therefore, we need to approach this issue from a different perspective by aligning livestock production with global climate rules and regulations, while gradually reducing reliance on meat and other animal-based products. It is the herbivorous livestock that cause the emission of greenhouse gases, soil degradation, and loss of biodiversity. However, such problems are often the consequence of poor management practices and improper stocking rates of livestock. The grazing animals, if applied properly, can serve for biodiversity recovery and resilience of ecosystems. Hence, the key issue here is not whether livestock agricultural production is harmful or beneficial but rather the proper way of their application.

Ecological Intervention

Grazing animals are important components of biocultural landscapes because they are a result of interactions between ecology and humans over a considerable period of time. Grazing animals play an important role in shaping plant communities, soil biogeography, and other ecological processes. The introduction of livestock to an ecosystem may influence several biomes at once.

The role of herbivores is not always harmful. For instance, livestock may create the right conditions for numerous animals and plants. On the local scale, farm animals have an impact on vegetation, edaphology, and biogeography. Grazing may exert various influences on biodiversity in different biomes in terms of different taxonomic groups.

The interaction between large herbivores and biomes was studied on the various organizational levels. Scientists have proved that livestock affects plant communities in different ways. However, the relationship between herbivores and plant communities is complex and it may be either positive, negative, or neutral.

An excellent example of animal-induced ecological interference is the practice of mixed grazing. In certain circumstances, the interactions between cattle and sheep can lead to advantageous effects on plant species richness, soil carbon content, and other biogeographical phenomena. Nonetheless, the advantages of mixed grazing are situational and vary depending on the climate and animal population density. Generally, the practice of animal husbandry can affect biodiversity positively or negatively.

 Soil, Carbon, and Biodiversity

The links between animal husbandry and biogeography of the soil are rather complicated and are based on the abiotic aspects. The grazing activities can positively, negatively, and neutrally affect biochemical processes in the soil. It depends on many local aspects, such as the level of grazing, and so on. Thus, moderate grazing can lead to increased belowground biomass in some biomes and decreased in others. The animal husbandry affects the plant community, thereby changing the biome.

Well-managed grazing systems can contribute to soil carbon sequestration through improved vegetation cover and increased soil organic matter. But one should remember that the carbon footprint of the farm depends on a number of aspects. For example, different soil characteristics, climate, grazing intensity, and other factors can influence the speed of carbon sequestration by grazing animals. Moreover, it is not proved that rotational grazing increases the rate of carbon sequestration in all biomes.

Thus, while studying the influence of livestock farming on the carbon cycle in the world, one has to consider both positive and negative aspects. While grazing may result in an increased carbon content of soils, this effect will not necessarily apply to all cases. The emission of greenhouse gases by livestock has to be considered as well. The effect of livestock farming on the carbon cycle depends on the biome and production type.

 From Agricultural Commodities to Biodiversity Conservation

The alternative paradigm of ecological animal husbandry perceives farms as multiservice institutions that go beyond producing agricultural commodities. In addition to producing animal goods, farms are supposed to create positive externalities in relation to the local biome. Thus, farmers are able to use rotational grazing in order to enrich the soil with carbon and make regional biodiversity higher and the whole ecosystem more resilient to any climatic changes.

The adoption of ecological animal husbandry requires the farmers' transition from one paradigm to another. It is necessary for farmers to forget about maximization of profits and focus on sustainability of their business. Such an approach will help them receive positive outcomes both in the context of the local biome and their agricultural enterprise.

The implementation of rotational grazing can become one of the tools of transformation as it enables farmers to regulate the intensity and timing of grazing. Nevertheless, rotational grazing is rather too situational to be applied universally. Research conducted lately indicates that rotational grazing leads to different outcomes in terms of plant productivity, emission of greenhouse gases, soil biogeography and other aspects. In general, the effect of livestock farming on the biome depends on initial and final state of the system.

This is why the idea of “regenerative grazing” should not be promoted excessively since its positive consequences are rather situational. Ecological animal husbandry is a complicated sphere which takes into account a variety of factors. The main idea of this paradigm consists in understanding that the density of the livestock is not dependent on the wishes of profit-oriented producers but the carrying capacity of the biome.

 Assessing Biodiversity Potential

It is now apparent that livestock production is not divorced from ecology. Animal husbandry thus needs to be viewed as an intervention in nature as opposed to an extension thereof. In this respect, it should be clear that contemporary farmers cannot focus solely on the increased output from their farms. Livestock could and should be used to manipulate the environment and improve its resilience and diversity.

Basically, livestock production can be viewed as biodiversity management intervention tool. This view proves beneficial in conservation biology since it shows the possibilities that exist in every agricultural system. A livestock enterprise may prove multifunctional and can be utilized to restore native vegetation, build carbon rich soils and conserve native fauna.

The paradigm shift to the ecological animal husbandry calls for a more holistic outlook of the issue at hand. A livestock operation has to be planned in such a way so as to maximize biodiversity and carbon sequestration in the soils. The ultimate purpose of such operations has to be creation of multifunctional landscapes.

In order to guarantee that livestock activities provide biodiversity and sustainability, it is necessary to have a measure of such activities. Thus, besides being measured using traditional economic parameters, animal husbandry activities should also be measured from the perspective of conservation biology. Such a paradigm requires that there be continuous and comprehensive assessment of the effect of grazing activities on the biome.

The proposed approach is important for conservation biology since it will legitimize the inclusion of livestock production into the larger concept of biodiversity conservation. Ecological animal husbandry provides the chance to incorporate agriculture into conservation practices on a larger scale. Grazing activities, when used effectively, can enhance sustainable development and ensure food security. The activities of animal husbandry should be aimed at rejuvenating native vegetation and providing biodiversity and productive ecosystems.

Conclusion

Can farming with livestock restore biodiversity? In some situations, grazing animals can be used as instruments of ecological management. Large herbivores are not good or bad for the biome; rather, their influence on ecosystems is contingent upon the local context, including the type of animals involved, grazing pattern, abiotic environment, etc.

This implies that when planning livestock breeding activities, one should avoid dichotomy of the relationship between livestock and nature. The ecological livestock breeding should be viewed within a greater framework of the livestock-soil-carbon-biodiversity complex. This means that the job of farmers is to achieve the optimal ratio between the economic and environmental benefits in their particular area.

One of the solutions to ecological animal husbandry is the biodiversity enhancement of farms. There are several possible ways in which the grazing activities can enhance biodiversity, such as restoration of the native vegetation, protection of species, improvement of soil carbon, creation of wildlife habitats, water retention, and nutrients cycling, among others. Every biome has its chances for benefiting from livestock activities, but they are different in various regions.

Moreover, it is important to realize that the advantages of the practice are dependent on the context. This means that farmers should know what and how to invest ecologically in their regions. The development of biodiversity-based practices for raising animals should be supported by science and reality.

Livestock raising in the future will be associated with ecology and biodiversity. The best operations are those which balance a variety of objectives. Livestock can change the landscape to make it beneficial for humans, the biome, and economy.

 References

Briske, D. D., et al. (2008). Rotational grazing on rangelands: Reconciliation of perception and experimental evidence. Rangeland Ecology & Management, 61(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.2111/06-159R.1

Conant, R. T., Cerri, C. E., Osborne, B. B., & Paustian, K. (2017). Grassland management impacts on soil carbon stocks: a new synthesis. Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America, 27(2), 662–668. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.1473

Derner, J. D., & Schuman, G. E. (2007). Carbon sequestration and rangelands: A synthesis of land management and precipitation effects. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 62(2), 77–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224561.2007.12435927

Foley, J. A., et al. (2005). Global consequences of land use. Science, 309(5734), 570–574. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1111772

Gong, X., Wang, Y., Zhan, T., Wang, C., Li, C., & Liu, Y. (2023). Advances in Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Grazing on Grassland Ecosystems in China. Agriculture, 13(5), 1084. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13051084

Herrero, M., Havlík, P., Valin, H., Notenbaert, A., Rufino, M. C., Thornton, P. K., Blümmel, M., Weiss, F., Grace, D., & Obersteiner, M. (2013). Biomass use, production, feed efficiencies, and greenhouse gas emissions from global livestock systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(52), 20888–20893. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1308149110

Kioumarsi, H., Yahaya, Z. S., & Rahman, A. W. (2011). The effect of molasses/mineral feed blocks along with the use of medicated blocks on haematological and biochemical blood parameters in Boer goats. Asian Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 6(2), 1264–1270. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajava.2011.1264.1270

Kioumarsi, H., Naseri Harsini, R., Özbey, B. G., Rafiei, B., Alidoust Pahmedani, M., Shariman Yahaya, Z., & Rosen, M. A. (2026). Wildlife, biodiversity, and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals: Synergizing conservation and development for a sustainable future. European Journal of Sustainable Development Research, 10(2), Article em0367. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejosdr/17816

Kioumarsi, H., Rosen, M. A., Rafiei, B., Shariman Yahaya, Z., Naseri Harsini, R., Amrulloh, H., & Gholipour Fereidouni, H. (2026). Global climate action toward net-zero emissions: Pathways, technologies, challenges, and future directions. European Journal of Sustainable Development Research, 10(3), Article em0407. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejosdr/18611

McSherry, M. E., & Ritchie, M. E. (2013). Effects of grazing on grassland soil carbon: a global review. Global change biology, 19(5), 1347–1357. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12144

Olff, H., & Ritchie, M. E. (1998). Effects of herbivores on grassland plant diversity. Trends in ecology & evolution, 13(7), 261–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-5347(98)01364-0

Poore, J., & Nemecek, T. (2018). Reducing food's environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science (New York, N.Y.), 360(6392), 987–992. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaq0216

Rosen, A. R., Kioumarsi, H., & Gholipour Fereidouni, H. (2025). Climate action and net-zero emissions. European Journal of Sustainable Development Research, 9(4), em0334. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejosdr/16864

Stanley, P. L., et al. (2018). Impacts of soil carbon sequestration on life cycle greenhouse gas emissions in cattle production systems. Agricultural Systems, 162, 249–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2018.02.003

Tscharntke, T., et al. (2012). Global food security, biodiversity conservation and the future of agricultural intensification. Biological Conservation, 151(1), 53–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.01.068

Sandoval-Calderon, A. P., Rubio Echazarra, N., van Kuijk, M., Verweij, P. A., Soons, M., & Hautier, Y. (2024). The effect of livestock grazing on plant diversity and productivity of mountainous grasslands in South America - A meta-analysis. Ecology and evolution, 14(4), e11076. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.11076