The latest IPCC report estimates that to limit warming to 2C (67% likelihood), we have a remaining carbon budget of 1150 GtCO2. Very roughly [1], that is about 142 tCO2 per person. Say you have 40 years of your life left. That is 3.55 tCO2 per year.
How do you divvy it up? Eating a kg of beef [2] per week means you emit 3.12 tCO2/year. Add whatever else food you consume, and that is your entire budget.
[1] ignoring people's ages and as yet unborn people. I use 1150 GtCO2/8.1 billion current people alive.
My takeaway as always is that clearly the single most impactful thing most people can do is not have children, or have fewer children. Unless you're a billionaire, nothing in your life with have close to the same impact as not reproducing.
I would however also point out that simply divided total emissions reductions needed vs all humans is misleading. The average Nigerian emits FAR less CO2 than the average Indian. The average Indian emits less than the average Chinese person, who emits less than the average American.
If we look at per country per capita emissions [1], we can see that Africa, South America and Asia (excluding China and India) have current emissions below the 2C warming. So yes, they don't need to reduce anything at the country level - simply not increase.
How do you divvy it up? Eating a kg of beef [2] per week means you emit 3.12 tCO2/year. Add whatever else food you consume, and that is your entire budget.
[1] ignoring people's ages and as yet unborn people. I use 1150 GtCO2/8.1 billion current people alive.
[2] The OP's OurWorldInData graph screenshot says beef emissions are 60, but the actual page says 99. Same chart. I don't understand. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/food-emissions-supply-cha... I used 60 in the calculation above.