First, we present results from our secondary data analysis across the production, climate, and nutrition side. Next, we discuss the tensions and synergies emerging between these three dimensions.
Stark variations in the dairy production system across geographies, animals, and producers
The Indian dairy sector is characterised by smallholder farmers with an average herd size of three animals (NSSO 2021). While 80 million such producers augment their income through bovine-rearing, less than two per cent of them rely on it as a primary income source (ibid.).
However, the aggregates and averages hide the diversity of Indian dairy producers. For instance, average yields in the states like Punjab and Haryana are 2–5 times the average yields in the states like Odisha, West Bengal, etc. (Fig. 1, based on GoI 2023a). Similarly, variation in dairy animal type and species is significant across the regions. While buffaloes account for 64 per cent of in-milk animals in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh, they merely account for 7 per cent in Tamil Nadu (Fig. 2, based on GoI 2019). The respective milk contribution of different animal categories is also different. Indigenous cattle, buffaloes, and cross-bred or exotic breeds account for 35, 44, and 22 per cent of the in-milk animal population but 20, 45, and 32 per cent of the milk production, respectively (based on GoI 2019; 2023). However, these relative contributions are dynamic and have significantly evolved over time. India’s milk production has more than doubled between 2003 to 2019 (GoI 2006; 2023). Milk production increase has only two pathways: increasing the in-milk animal population or per-animal productivity. Our first-of-its-kind decomposition analysis shows that the top two contributors to India’s milk increase in the last two decades are buffalo yield improvement (contributing 35 per cent of the additional milk) and increasing population of crossbred animals (contributing 26 per cent of the additional milk)1. Understanding such evolutions provides fresh insights into how the future pathways of milk production increase can be shaped for India.
Beyond productivity, we also observe stark differences in per-animal income across Indian states, pointing to different dairy archetypes. The profitability per bovine animal is about ten times higher for states like Haryana, Kerala, Punjab, and Uttarakhand compared to eastern states like West Bengal, Jharkhand, Orissa, Tripura, and Chattisgarh (Fig. 3a). The net income per bovine is higher for households keeping larger animal herds, implying some economies of scale (Fig. 3b). (Based on NSSO 2021)
We also find that the constraints limiting dairy productivity and incomes vary in their magnitude across geographies. While the western states faced significant losses from animal feed and nutrition insecurity (57 per cent of total losses), eastern states suffered significantly due to breeding and animal health issues (47 per cent of total losses) (Birthal and Jha 2005). While there is a surplus of dry and green fodder in Punjab, Tamil Nadu has a 36 per cent deficit (Roy et al. 2019). Similarly, the percentage occupancy of sanctioned posts of veterinarian doctors was 97 per cent in Kerala, and the same was only 58 per cent in Bihar in 2023 (GoI 2023b).
Given the stark variations — in herd sizes, average income per animal, average yields, animal categories, as well as the relative incidence of constraints — the management and way forward for dairy communities across India can not follow a one-size-fits-all approach.
Dairy consumption is highly inequitable and unaffordable in India
Based on our analysis of the National Consumer Expenditure Survey (NSSO 2012)2, we find that dairy consumption in India is highly inequitable. Daily consumption of milk (including milk products) was well above the recommended level of intake of 300 g/day/capita (ICMR-NIN 2024) in the top income groups. Whereas the lowest income group’s consumption was only at 20 per cent of the recommended levels (Fig. 5a). Per capita consumption in the top income decile was 5 and 8.5 times the consumption in the bottom income decile in urban and rural households respectively. The top 30 per cent of the population by income consumed about 50 per cent of India's milk (products), while the bottom 30 per cent consumed only 15 per cent of it in 2011-12 (Fig. 5b).
The level of milk consumption was also strongly influenced by local milk availability, urbanisation, religion and social group of the population (see regression analysis in Table A of the supplementary material). On average, Sikh and Jain households consumed 16% (CI: 10% − 23%) and 42% (CI: 33% − 52%) more milk per month, whereas Muslim households consumed 17% (CI: 14% − 19%) less milk per month compared to average Hindu households. Across social groups, scheduled tribes, scheduled caste, and OBC households consumed significantly less milk than the general category. For example, scheduled castes households consumed 21% (CI: 19% − 23%) less milk compared to the general category households.
We also find that milk consumption at the recommended intake level is highly unaffordable for most Indian households. If 70 per cent of Indian households were to consume the recommended level of milk, they would need to spend up to 20 per cent of their monthly expenditure only on milk (Fig. 6).
Stagnant climate emissions from the sector for two decades, but may increase going forward
Next, we assess the climate impact of and on the sector. Since enteric fermentation emissions constitute a majority (72 per cent) of the production emissions in the dairy sector (Garg et al. 2016; 2018), we primarily focus on these.
We estimate the total enteric fermentation emissions from bovine animals in India to be ~ 218 million tonnes CO2-eq. in 20193. We find that while milk production has increased by 2.25 times between 2003 and 2019, the enteric fermentation emissions have remained virtually the same. The emissions have stagnated along with the total bovine population in the country (Figs. 6a and 6b, based on GoI 2003; 2007; 2012; 2019). However, the structure of the bovine population has evolved significantly. The male bovine population has decreased by ~ 44 per cent, while the female population has increased by ~ 34 per cent from 2003 to 2019. In 2019, male bovines constituted only 19 per cent of the total bovine population compared to 35 per cent in 2003 (Fig. 6b). Thus, the decrease in the male bovine population has majorly compensated for the increase in the female bovine population, leading to stagnant emissions from the sector.
Another structural shift in the bovine population is the displacement of the indigenous cattle population with high-yielding cross-bred or exotic breed bovines.
As milk production has risen significantly in this period, the emission intensities of milk production (kg CO2-eq./ kg milk) (not allocating the emissions from male animals used for draught purposes to milk production) have decreased by 45 per cent, 60 per cent and 47 per cent from crossbred cattle, indigenous cattle, and buffaloes, respectively (Fig. 6c).
We decompose these emission intensity reductions into two factors — milk yield improvements and herd composition change. We find that a majority of the emission intensity reduction can be attributed to milk yield improvement for all bovine categories (Fig. 6d). Changes in herd composition (decreasing shares of unproductive female cattle) have contributed to 22 per cent and 27 per cent of the emission intensity reduction in indigenous and crossbred cattle, respectively, but negligibly in the case of buffaloes.
Sector’s climate mitigation interventions can enhance farmers' incomes and milk production
Since the emission intensity of the milk is inversely proportional to the milk yield per animal, any efforts to improve the animal’s milk productivity also help in reducing the sector’s emission intensity. The milk yields of dairy animals in India remain significantly lower than those reported globally (FAOSTAT 2024). Thus, milk yield improvement from in-milk animals would remain an important pathway to improving farmers' incomes and reducing the emission intensity of milk production. A range of interventions that can help in improving the milk yield per animal and reducing the emission intensity of milk production are discussed below:
Ration Balancing
Nutritionally imbalanced livestock diets in India lead to productive and reproductive inefficiencies (Garg et al. 2016). Feeding dairy animals a least-cost balanced ration, using locally available feed resources and a mineral mixture, increased milk output by 55.2 per cent and 75.4 per cent, absolute emissions per animal by 12.8 per cent and 12.6 per cent but decreased emission intensity (kg CO2-eq./kg FPCM) by 31.2 per cent and 34.7 per cent in cattle and buffaloes respectively (ibid.).
Selective breeding for genetic improvement of dairy animals towards better milk productivity is another key solution for climate mitigation. For example, Singh et al. (2018) report an improvement in milk yields by 8.8 per cent for Kankrej cattle in four years under the AICRP project for genetic improvement.
Shift from low-yielding indigenous animals to crossbred or exotic breeds has been a strategy under play as shared in the results above. Given the gains in productivity and incomes, the farmers may continue to displace indigenous animals with exotic varieties. However, the shift may have significant adverse consequences for smallholders in particular, as the exotic breeds are more vulnerable to climate change impact. We discuss this further in the next section.
Sex-sorted semen use
The use of sex-sorted semen in artificial insemination is also being promoted for faster breed improvement to avoid the birth of unproductive male cattle, thereby also avoiding emissions from them (GoI n.d.). However, the higher input cost is a key barrier to adoption by smallholder farmers. As discussed in the previous section, historically, the male bovine population decline compensated for the female bovine population increase, limiting the total emissions from the sector. Going forward, as the scope for further reduction in the male bovine population shrinks, the total (mostly female) bovine population may increase. The use of sex-sorted semen use might accelerate this increase as the same number of calvings would be required for milk production, but 90 per cent of the calves (now female) instead of 50 per cent (with normal semen) may be retained in the system. Thus, while emission intensities of milk production may decrease due to accelerated genetic selection using sex-sorted semen, the total emissions may increase due to an increased total bovine population.
Improved veterinary services
Furthermore, in many parts of the country, poor availability of support ecosystems for bovine-rearers, such as veterinary and artificial insemination services and farmer capacity building, are major challenges (Birthal and Jha 2005; Gowane et al. 2019). Improving the extension support to farmers can help reduce unproductive days due to disease incidences, large intercalving periods, etc., thereby reducing emission intensities.
While many solutions discussed above would reduce the average emission intensity of milk production, the total emissions from the sector will depend on the evolution of the total bovine population. Higher milk yields may reduce the number of bovine animals needed to meet milk demand. However, with better productivity and profit per animal, farmers may expand their bovine herds if milk prices are high enough (rebound effect of efficiency improvements). This would, in turn, depend on the evolution of the total demand for milk and milk products. Also, considering the bovine culling policies in India, improving milk productivity may not have as strong an impact on total emissions, as the female animals may remain in the system beyond their productive age.
Anti-methanogenic feed additives like Harit Dhara and Tamarin Plus (Patent No. 201941004992) developed by ICAR-NIANP are reported to reduce emissions by 17–20 per cent while improving milk yields (NIANP 2023). Such feed additives may reduce absolute BAU emissions from the sector if implemented at scale.
Finally, moderating excess milk consumption and demand from high-income groups who are not at risk of undernutrition could also reduce absolute emissions and improve equity in milk availability and affordability (discussed further in the next section).
We summarise the climate implications of these various interventions and their unintended consequences in Table 2 below.
Table 2
Sectoral interventions and their climate implications
Interventions having climate mitigation impact | Reduces emission intensity (kg CO2e per kg milk)? | Reduces absolute emissions from the bovine-rearing sector compared to the business-as-usual scenario? | Potential unintended effects |
Ration balancing | Yes | Yes, if the increase in milk yields leads to a reduction in the total bovine population (needed to meet milk demand) at a rate greater than the increase in per-head emissions of balanced-diet-fed animals | Improved productivity and profits per animal may lead to the expansion of herds by farmers, i.e. rebound effects may increase the total bovine population unless the milk demand stagnates. |
Selective breeding for higher milk productivity | Yes | Yes, if the increase in milk yields leads to a reduction in the total bovine population (needed to meet milk demand) at a rate greater than the percentage increase in the emissions between a high-yielding animal and a displaced animal | The same risk of a rebound effect as above |
Shifting the population mix to crossbred/exotic breeds | Yes | Same as above | The same risk of a rebound effect as above It can lower the resilience of the system to climate change impacts and increase the pressure on feed and fodder resources in the country |
Sex-sorted semen (SSS) use | Yes | Yes, if improvement in breed quality and milk yields via SSS reducess the total bovine population (needed to meet milk demand) at a rate greater than the percentage increase in the emissions between a high-yielding animal and displaced animal | May actually increase the total absolute emissions as the number of animals (primarily female) will increase in the system |
Better veterinary care to reduce unproductive disease days | Yes | Yes | - |
Anti-methanogenic feed additives | Yes | Yes | - |
Moderating excess milk demand from high-income groups | - | Yes | - |
A just transition to a low-carbon dairy sector in India
As one analyses various mitigation strategies, it is important to assess whether and how these strategies may play out differently for different population groups (of bovine-rearers and consumers) to ensure that the sector’s low carbon transition is just and equitable. Based on the literature, data analysis and basic system dynamics archetype assessment, we find the following four big messages:
1. The shift towards exotic breeds as a mitigation strategy may undermine the resilience of small producers unless their adaptation capacity against climate change is also enhanced
Higher milk yields of exotic or crossbred cattle improve milk production and lower emission intensities (see Fig. 6c). Between 2003 and 2019, 26 per cent of the increase in India's milk production came from an increase in exotic and crossbred cattle population (decomposition analysis detailed in the supplementary material). The share of exotic and crossbred cattle in total bovines almost doubled from 9 to 17 per cent, while that of indigenous cattle decreased from 57 to 47 per cent from 2003 to 2019 (GoI 2003; 2019). However, exotic and crossbred cattle have lower resilience to heat stress and resource scarcity (feed and water) than indigenous cattle (Kishore et al. 2013; Seijian et al. 2018; Singh et al. 2022). Typically, small-herd dairy farmers do not have the financial capacity to address such stresses via investments in better sheds and air circulation for animals, greater veterinary expenditures, and more procured feed and fodder. Thus, while the shift to exotic and crossbred animals improves production and lowers emissions in the short to medium term, it could lower the resilience of small dairy farmers to climate change in the medium to long term.
As reported by Balaraju et al. (2016), many resource-poor farmers rearing indigenous cattle prefer cattle traits such as high adaptability to harsh tropical climates and disease resistance compared to high milk production. A sustainable and resilient pathway for such rearers should focus on improving the milk yields of indigenous breeds with climate adaptation traits. If exotic breeds are being promoted among such farmers, planning and investing in increasing their climate adaptation capacities will be critical.
2. The shift towards larger herd sizes as a mitigation strategy may undermine the livelihood security of small producers
As seen from Fig. 3b, larger bovine herds are more profitable per animal head. Larger herdsizes bring efficiency and productivity gains due to better management of cattle, increasing the income of profit-maximising farmers and reducing the emission intensity of milk production. As climate mitigation becomes a priority for the dairy procuring companies, they may shift their procurement to larger herd-keepers — further enhancing the profits of large herd-keepers (reinforcing loop in Fig. 7).
On the other hand, small and resource-poor dairy farmers (who rely on bovine rearing only as an augmented source of income) tend to minimise their input costs and risks and may not aim to maximise profits from milk sales (Balaraju et al. 2016). Thus, they may not want to or be able to increase their herd sizes and rear high-yielding breeds (that also require better quality and quantity of feed and fodder, healthcare, etc.) — maintaining a herd size that reduces vulnerability and provides a steady level of income (balancing loop in Fig. 7).
Apart from displacing milk procurement away from such small bovine rearers, the expanding large commercial dairy farms may also steepen the competition for scarce fodder resources in the country — further limiting the commercial viability of bovine rearing for smallholders. Thus, if a shift to larger herds underways due to economic and climate mitigation goals, the smallholders may need to be transitioned to other sustainable livelihood options.
3. Many of the current mitigation options may not find traction with risk-minimising and resource-poor small bovine rearers
Many of the mitigation strategies that tend to improve the productivity or efficiency of bovine-keeping may not necessarily find traction with some of the risk-minimising small bovine-rearers in the country. As discussed earlier, dairying remains an augmented source of income for most agricultural households with small herd sizes. Many small herd owners tend to minimise risks and input costs and do not necessarily seek to maximise profit (Balaraju et al. 2016; Bhandari et al. 2021; Gowane et al. 2019; Birthal & Jha 2005). Small bovine rearers in many parts of India do not keep the animal for commercial selling of milk but derive multiple other values, such as consumptive use of milk, draught power, use of animal dung as bio-input or energy source, non-consumptive use value associated with cultural and religious significance of the animal, option value for risk mitigation, and existence value (Bhandari et al. 2021; Balaraju et al. 2016).
Thus, productivity-oriented mitigation strategies may not find high levels of adoption among small Indian bovine-rearers. Accordingly, there is a need to look beyond productivity improvement interventions as well to sustainably manage the sector’s emissions.
4. Majority of the sector’s emissions are associated with the consumption of high-income groups
As seen in Fig. 4b, 50 per cent of India's milk (products) consumption and, thereby, the sector's emissions can be attributed to the top 30 per cent of the population by income. The demand for value-added products (VAPs) like ice cream, packaged milk-based sweets, cheese, etc., is projected to increase at 14 to 24 per cent CAGR till 2028 by various market research firms (IMARC Group 2023a; 2023b; 2023c; MarkNtel Advisors 2023). These VAPs require large amounts of liquid milk per unit production, and their consumption would be driven by high-income groups —further increasing their per capita milk consumption and carbon footprint. Moderating excess milk (product) consumption among the high-income groups would be important to making milk affordable for low-income households and equitably transitioning to a low-carbon dairy sector in India.