The study begins by presenting unexpected findings from an analysis of the Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation's (IHME) Global Burden of Disease (GBD) data. This analysis revealed a strong negative correlation between low animal-sourced food consumption and high rates of early deaths (before age 70) due to NCDs in a population-weighted database of 7846 cohorts representing approximately 7.8 billion people. Conversely, in wealthier countries, high animal food consumption showed a positive correlation with NCD mortality. This unexpected finding prompted the author to investigate the implications for climate change mitigation strategies, particularly those related to agricultural practices. The introduction highlights the counterintuitive nature of these findings, particularly in light of prevailing narratives associating animal agriculture with negative environmental impacts. The study's central aim is to demonstrate the potential of a combined strategy of global land regeneration through regenerative/organic agriculture and a doubling of global livestock to significantly mitigate climate change, improve food security, and reduce early NCD deaths.

The paper reviews the IPCC's definitions of key agricultural terms: "sustainable land management," "sustainable intensification," and "climate-smart agriculture." The author points out that these definitions lack specificity regarding the permitted and prohibited farming methods, creating ambiguity. The review then contrasts these definitions with alternative interpretations found in other literature. The author also addresses a seemingly contradictory statement within the IPCC report that advocates for intensive livestock systems as a land-sparing measure to reduce environmental impact. This seemingly contradictory conclusion made by Swain et. al is cited by the IPCC, which fails to take into account regenerative agriculture as a means of soil carbon sequestration. The review concludes by summarizing the current state of knowledge regarding the potential for soil carbon sequestration through regenerative/organic agriculture.

The methodology involves a critique of the IPCC's definitions of terms related to sustainable land management and agricultural practices. The author analyzes the IPCC's SSP1 scenario, its most environmentally favorable model, comparing it to a proposed alternative scenario that involves doubling global livestock and transitioning to global regenerative/organic agriculture. The study uses the IPCC's mean 2010–2019 global anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as a baseline for comparison. The author calculates the net global GHG emissions under the status quo and compares them with the estimated GHG emissions associated with the proposed alternative scenario. The calculation of GHG emissions includes the major gases: CO2, CH4, and N2O. The analysis considers the carbon sequestration potential of regenerative/organic agriculture and factors in natural carbon sinks, with specific attention paid to the methane emissions from livestock and rice cultivation. The author estimates the total GHGs associated with doubling animal-sourced food production and consumption, implementing global regenerative/organic agriculture, managing forests optimally, and eliminating fossil fuel burning worldwide. The calculations rely heavily on IPCC data and other published estimates of global soil carbon sequestration potential.

The study found the IPCC's agricultural land-related definitions to be aspirational and lacking in detail. The IPCC's SSP1 scenario aimed to reduce GHGs to 3 GTCO2-eq yr-1 by 2050. However, the author's modeling suggests that transitioning to global regenerative/organic agriculture (5 billion hectares) and doubling global livestock could result in net global GHGs of -24.1 GTCO2-eq yr-1 for 2-3 decades, with a total CO2 sequestration of -482 to -723 GTCO2-eq. This is a significantly greater reduction than projected by SSP1. The analysis also showed that doubling livestock, alongside regenerative/organic agriculture, allows for the elimination of chemical fertilizers, keeping nitrous oxide emissions stable. The author notes that the potential for carbon sequestration through land regeneration would be maximized within 20-30 years with a complete transition to regenerative agriculture, after which no further net carbon sequestration would occur. Therefore, there is a critical time-sensitive window for enacting this strategy.

The findings challenge the prevailing narrative that reducing livestock numbers is essential for climate change mitigation. The study argues that doubling global livestock, alongside regenerative/organic agriculture, could significantly improve global food security, reduce NCD-related deaths, and contribute far more to climate change mitigation than the IPCC's most optimistic scenario. This counterintuitive conclusion highlights the need for a nuanced approach to environmental policy, balancing climate concerns with the imperative of ensuring global food security and human health. The author acknowledges the counterintuitive nature of advocating for increased livestock numbers, particularly in light of widespread concern about their environmental impact. They present a case where integrating livestock into regenerative agriculture can not only feed the world but help reverse climate change. The discussion emphasizes the need for global collaboration to facilitate this transition, highlighting the labor-intensive nature of regenerative agriculture and suggesting the potential for worker-owned cooperatives.

The study concludes that the IPCC's SSP1 scenario is insufficient to address climate change. The proposed strategy of doubling global livestock and transitioning to global regenerative/organic agriculture presents a more effective pathway to mitigate climate change while simultaneously improving food security and reducing early deaths from NCDs. The successful implementation of this strategy would necessitate significant financial investment, resource allocation, and global collaboration to support farmers in both developed and developing nations. The long-term success is dependent on the transition to worker-owned cooperatives to provide adequate labor. Further research is needed to analyze the detailed potential of this combined strategy.

The study acknowledges several limitations, including the exclusion of relatively minor anthropogenic GHGs (fluorinated gases) from the analysis. A granular analysis of the carbon sequestration potential of each hectare of agricultural land was not performed. Additionally, the potential for carbon sequestration in forests and oceans was not fully modeled. These limitations suggest that the reported CO2 sequestration estimates could be conservative.