Food is our common ground: diets, land use and emissions

Future food-related emissions will rise, through a combination of land conversio

Cliquez pour la version française

by Sonja Vermeulen

One inconvenient truth about food and climate change is that total emissions from agriculture must increase to feed growing populations with changing dietary demands.  Indeed, the widely cited estimate from the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) that we will need 70% more food by 2050 has recently been revised upwards to 100% +/- 11%.  A more detailed picture of the future size and shape of this food demand emerges in Global changes in diets and the consequences for land requirements for food, by Thomas Kastner, Maria Jose Ibarrola Rivas, Wolfgang Koch and Sanderine Nonhebel, a recent article that presents historical FAO datasets in a new format.

Kastner and co-authors’ innovation is to calculate and show how our total calorie consumption is divided among different types of food, and then how much land is required for each of these food types, both for the world as a whole and for each of 17 major geographic regions.  The consumption data alone provide a fascinating portrait of global nutritional diversity.  Did you know, for instance, that Central Africans are the world-record root-eaters, and Southern Europeans the world-record fruit-eaters

The analysis busts the myth that diets are rapidly becoming richer across all developing countries, moving towards a static, Western endpoint.  The reality is that developing regions vary widely in their trajectories – most sobering is the marked decline in average calorific intake across “Middle Africa” over the past half century.  Plus Western diets are in flux.  For example, North American calorie consumption has increased markedly since 1961, mainly due to rising use of sugars and vegetable fats rather than of animal products, which have remained constant at about 1000 calories per capita.

Extrapolating from consumption to land use provides further insights.  Particularly interesting is that between 1963 and 1984, expansions in land requirements for crops were largely associated with population growth, and for many regions were compensated by land savings due to improving technology.  After 1984 a greater proportion of agricultural expansion was associated with changes in diets, and technology was less successful as a buffer. 

What of the future?  The authors caution that feeding nine billion people at the levels of consumption found in North America, Oceania and Europe will require a doubling of current cropland, and further that technology-based land savings are usually based on much higher inputs of fossil fuels, fertilizers, pesticides and irrigation infrastructure.  Also, the study under-represents the true extent of land and resource use for human food production, as the FAO data do not include pastureland for grass-fed livestock, nor fisheries. 

In short, unless there are severe curbs on high-end food consumption (along the lines of permanent wartime rations), food-related emissions will rise, through a combination of land conversion and more input-intensive farming.  But the good news is our impressive capacity for adaptation: as the authors’ analyses show, human diets are not on a one-way demand-driven path, but instead are surprisingly flexible over time, influenced by what’s most available and affordable locally and through trade.

Links

 


This is the June 2012 installation of AgClim Letters, a monthly e-bulletin on science and policy written by Sonja Vermeulen, Head of Research for CCAFS. Sign up to receive AgClim Letters bulletin and read past bulletins. Your comments are welcome below.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Re: Food is our common ground: diets, land use and emissions

If there was significant reduction in food waste globally, there might not be so much food deficit to feed the ever growing population. However, wastage knows no Western calorie savings nor Southern declining calorie intake. Developing countries witness food damage like unknown before due to poor storage and processing- case in point the currently rotting rice mountains in India or the rivers of milk in rural Highlands Kenya. Same goes for the millions of livestock that drop dead during droughts instead of converting them into tinned beef. That happens also when tons of fish are discarded in Western Europe waters just because they don't meet the EU standard. Also, individual family food wastes into bins due to expiry dates has been quantified into millions of pounds annually. And that is just what goes to land fills considering that supermarkets have their own way of processing the wasted foodstuff. If such waste were curbed, the hold-back into factory processing would trickle back all the way to the farms and thus there might be less pressure on land and conversion into food production.

Re: Thinking globally, acting locally

If we agree to “think globally”, it becomes evident that riveting attention on GROWTH could be a grave mistake because we are denying how economic and population growth in the communities in which we live cannot continue as it has until now. Each village's resources are being dissipated, each town's environment degraded and every city's fitness as place for our children to inhabit is being threatened. To proclaim something like, 'the meat of any community plan for the future is, of course, growth' fails to acknowledge that many villages, towns and cities are already ‘built out’, and also ‘filled in’ with people. If the quality of life we enjoy now is to be maintained for the children, then limits on economic and population growth will have to be set. By so doing, we choose to “act locally" and sustainably. More economic and population growth are no longer sustainable in many too many places on the surface of Earth because biological constraints and physical limitations are immutably imposed upon ever increasing human consumption, production and population activities of people in many communities where most of us reside. Inasmuch as the Earth is finite with frangible environs, there comes a point at which GROWTH is unsustainable. There is much work to done locally. But that effort cannot reasonably begin without sensibly limiting economic and population growth. To quote another source, “We face a wide-open opportunity to break with the old ways of doing the town’s business…..” That is a true statement. But the necessary “break with the old ways” of continous economic and population growth is not what is occurring. There is a call for a break with the old ways, but the required changes in behavior are not what is being proposed as we plan for the future. What is being proposed and continues to occur is more of the same, old business-as-usual overconsumption, overproduction and overpopulation activities, the very activities that appear to be growing unsustainbly. More business-as-usual could soon become patently unsustainable, both locally and globally. A finite planet with the size, composition and environs of the Earth and a community with the boundaries, limited resources and wondrous climate of villages, towns and cities where we live may not be able to sustain much longer the economic and population growth that is occurring on our watch. Perhaps necessary changes away from UNSUSTAINABLE GROWTH and toward sustainable lifestyles and right-sized corporate enterprises are in the offing. Think globally while there is still time and act locally before it is too late for human action to make any difference in the clear and presently dangerous course of unfolding human-induced ecological events, both in our planetary home and in our villages, towns and cities.

Neither diets nor agriculture are the same in all places

Thank you to both commentators for reminding us that agriculture is very strongly place-specific - just like diets in fact. Therefore any strategies for adaptation and mitigation must be tailored to the local agro-ecological, economic and cultural realities.

Re: Food is our common ground: diets, land use and emissions

We all agree that there is a need to increase food production to meet the demand. But, it is important that we need to develop appropriate strategies to meet this demand. These strategies have to be specific to the countries because the type of crop, climate, topography, nature of the soil, food habits etc. vary considerably among countries. Even in the same country these factors vary. The respective governments need to develop appropriate strategies to increase food production.

Re: Food is our common ground: diets, land use and emissions

Even though climate change is a global phenomenon, its impact on agriculture takes geographical dimension. As such specific targeted policies should be designed to assist in the adoption of mitigation measures.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.