Global use of antibiotics in livestock is projected to rise by 30% by 2040 unless governments intervene, according to a new report from the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). The agency warns that without action, more than 143,000 tonnes of antimicrobials will be administered to farm animals each year by the middle of the next decade, surpassing the previous peak of between 118,000 and 130,000 tonnes recorded in 2013.
A surge with far‑reaching consequences
The FAO report, published on Wednesday, estimates that the continuation of current trends would represent a 30% increase from 2019 levels. Yet the authors stress this trajectory is not inevitable. Strategic improvements in animal health, management practices and production efficiency could cut projected antibiotic use by as much as 57%, bringing it down to around 62,000 tonnes by 2040.
Regional disparities are stark. The Asia‑Pacific region is expected to remain the largest consumer of livestock antibiotics, accounting for 64.6% of global use, followed by South America at 19%. Africa is forecast to experience the highest rate of growth in consumption, a 40.8% rise between 2019 and 2040.
Why livestock antibiotics matter for human health
Animal husbandry accounts for close to three‑quarters of all antimicrobial use worldwide, and in many countries that use is poorly monitored. Some herds are routinely dosed, and in numerous nations antimicrobials are still employed to promote growth in animals bred for meat. This practice is one of the leading drivers of antimicrobial resistance (AMR)—the rise of superbugs that threaten to render vital human medicines useless.
The World Health Organisation identifies AMR as one of the top ten global public health threats. Without intervention, it could cause up to 10 million deaths per year worldwide by 2050. In 2019 alone, 4.95 million deaths were associated with bacterial AMR, with 1.27 million directly attributable to it. The impact of antibiotic resistance in Europe is comparable to the combined burden of influenza, tuberculosis and HIV. Routine surgeries such as hip replacements could become life‑threatening if antibiotics lose their effectiveness.
The economic toll is already immense. Within Europe, AMR costs an estimated €11 billion (£9.5 billion) annually. Globally, the price tag is predicted to reach $1 trillion by 2050. Current direct healthcare costs tied to resistant infections are estimated at $66 billion per year worldwide, a figure projected to rise to $159 billion annually by mid‑century. The World Bank warns that AMR could cause annual global GDP losses of up to $1.7 trillion by 2050. In 2019, antibiotic‑resistant infections led to an estimated $693 billion in hospital costs and $194 billion in productivity losses across the globe.
The link between livestock use and human resistance is direct and worrying. Higher use of antibiotics in animals results in greater resistance to those drugs, and the resulting losses to livestock alone could reach a cumulative $318 billion by 2040. By contrast, the maximum cost of phasing out the use of growth promoters is estimated at $53 billion in total.
What is driving the increase?
Recent successes in reducing the tonnage of antibiotics used in farming—down by about a third from its 2013 peak—are now in jeopardy. The FAO report points to growing global demand for meat and lax regulation as key factors. Many producers are returning to the use of antibiotics for growth promotion, a practice that has been banned in the European Union and the United Kingdom since 2006 but remains legal in many other countries.
Animal antibiotics are often used to compensate for poor hygiene, inadequate husbandry or stressful intensive farming conditions. The FAO argues that antibiotic effectiveness should be regarded as a global public good, and that governments must act to prevent the overuse of these critical medicines.
Solutions: regulation, better farming and trade measures
The FAO report contends that the projected rise can be avoided. Teaching farmers and meat producers more efficient methods would reduce the need for growth enhancement and make disease prevention easier. Among the alternatives to antibiotics are vaccines, probiotics, prebiotics, phytogenic compounds, enzymes, organic acids, bacteriophages and even CRISPR/Cas9 technology. Improved husbandry and biosecurity also play a central role.
Regulatory action is already underway in several regions. The EU has banned the use of antibiotics for growth promotion since 2006, and from September 2026 it will also ban the import of all meat, dairy and eggs produced with antibiotics as growth promoters. The EU has additionally restricted group preventative (metaphylactic) use and requires data collection on antibiotic consumption.
The UK also banned growth promoters in 2006. New Veterinary Medicines Regulations introduced in Great Britain in May 2024 restrict routine antibiotic use and prohibit their use to compensate for poor hygiene or inadequate farm management. Prophylactic use is now limited to exceptional circumstances. However, the UK has not implemented a full ban on prophylactic group treatments or mandatory antibiotic‑use data collection, unlike the EU. British standards on farm antibiotic use have not kept pace with EU rules since Brexit, and the EU is set to strengthen its regulations further.
Cóilín Nunan, of the Alliance to Save Our Antibiotics (ASOA), urged governments to act. “Phasing out the use of antibiotics for growth promotion, one of the worst misuses of antibiotics, will not be costless,” he said. “But [the FAO report] says that the economic impact associated with rising antibiotic resistance in livestock, including lower production and higher food prices, will be far higher and longer‑lasting.”
Nunan added: “The solution is better regulation of farm antibiotic use combined with policies aimed at minimising illness in farm animals. In our view, this means a move away from intensive, unhygienic and stress‑inducing forms of livestock farming, towards more health‑orientated farming systems where antibiotics are rarely needed.”
ASOA has called for the UK to ban imports of meat produced with growth promoters. Nunan pointed to pressure on countries that have used antibiotics irresponsibly, noting that Brazil—which has banned several antibiotic growth promoters, including virginiamycin and bacitracin, effective April 2026—has been removed from the EU’s list of authorised countries for exporting meat and animal products due to non‑compliance with EU requirements. “Extending the EU’s ban on antibiotic growth promotion will help protect public health and shield farmers from unfair competition,” Nunan said. “The UK government needs to implement a similar ban, to protect its consumers and farmers. The new sanitary and phytosanitary agreement that is being negotiated between the UK and the EU provides an ideal opportunity for the UK to align with the EU on this and other important farm antibiotics standards.”
