Food at the heart of climate change
Food systems can turn climate change around
Eyes are momentarily blinking away from Covid-19 and are instead on Glasgow for the COP-26. Nothing like a break from a pandemic to catch up on how poorly we’re addressing another pandemic! COP 26 refers to 26 years of conferences of parties to the UN trying to work out how to tackle climate change. Every year it’s an in-your-face moment, but this year, governments and countries are hooking around Glasgow like they did in 2015 at Paris and before that in 2009, in Copenhagen. Heads of state are there from some of the biggest polluters in the world, like the US and Australia.
We’ve sent Climate Change Minister and Green Party leader James Shaw into the ring to represent us with an emissions profile that has grown to one of the biggest per capita in the OECD. I don’t envy his duty.
It matters greatly. We’re on track for a global catastrophe, called a code red for humanity. It’s a race against time. At the current rate of global warming, we’re expected to reach planetary warming of 1.5°C of our pre-industrial levels by the mid 2030s, so in about ten years. Beyond that, well, it’s really up to us. We have to make rapid and sustained emissions cuts to halt global warming within three decades. The ‘best case’ scenario is that we reach 1.5 degrees, then drop down later. If we surpass 1.5 then we’re facing more heat than homo sapiens have ever lived through.
But we are not on track for 1.5 degrees of warming. Even with our current climate policies, we are set for between 2.7-3.1°C of warming, way above what’s needed to live on a healthy planet. Scientists estimate we’re making about 7.5% of the cuts we need to, at a time where we should be making 55% cuts in emissions to make 1.5 degrees by the 2030s. And other scientists query whether or not we should have targets like this when it’s unlikely anyone will meet them. On that trajectory glaciers disappear, sea ice melts, sea levels rise, species go extinct, and it’s estimated the world economy could shrink by 18% in the next 30 years. It’s not the future anyone wants.
The missing link
I want to talk about why climate change and food systems are inextricably linked and why food systems are at the heart of climate change for Aotearoa. Our approach to addressing climate change needs to therefore reflect that. If we put farmers, growers, food businesses and you—as a food eater— in the middle of the food system and we all make some serious and committed changes, we can turn around our country’s emissions profile in the next two decades, while feeding our population healthy and tasty food. Sound good? Alright, let’s go.
Why food? Well, food contributes to climate change through emissions from growing and producing it. The cause of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions right now can be put down to either energy (over 70%) or food. When the food system includes food waste, agriculture and downstream impacts like fuel in transportation, and energy in manufacturing and refrigeration, its emissions are as high as 29%. Animals contribute around 18% of that.
At the same time, the impacts of climate change affect our food system. Droughts, floods, loss of biodiversity, extreme weather events, and pests and diseases all impact the most on our farmers and growers around the world, leading to crop losses, reductions in harvests and changes in what we can grow. And therefore what we can eat. There are two parts to climate change. Mitigation is reducing emissions. Adaptation is learning to live with the impacts of climate change. We need to do both for our food system—and do it now.
Cutting methane
Nationally, Aotearoa has an emissions portfolio unlike the rest of the world. We have a lot of renewable energy so we do well on that front, but we still let ourselves down with transport emissions and agriculture: cars and cows. Nearly 50% of our emissions come from agriculture, mainly the methane burped from cows, beef, sheep across our country and also some nitrous oxide. We’re working to try and curb that, but with nearly 10million animals, of that just over 6 million dairy cows, we have a lot of work to do.
Methane is a hot topic right now. Yesterday close to 100 countries pledged to cut it by 30% of 2020 levels in the Global Methane Pledge. Including New Zealand, yet it’s not clear why we’ve signed it. Instead of targets to address methane coming from agriculture, in New Zealand we still exclude these emissions from our climate change goals, an unfettered pollution takes place for land owners. (Although we are expecting this to change in 2022). Instead, we’re opting for the controversial option of buying our way out of the problem and trying to offset emissions in other countries. I argue that this approach is wrong and that we can instead chart a better path forward.
Methane has an impact around 24-28 times more than carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, but importantly it doesn’t stick around as long. Carbon dioxide has a lag and can be in the atmosphere for up to a century, which means the car fumes you emit today will be impacting on your grandchildren and great grandchildren when they’re adults. Methane on the other hand is a short-lived gas, so if we can nail how we reduce methane in a couple of decades, in theory by the 2050s, we should be back on track. That is potentially New Zealand’s super power —currently a pretty big problem and the elephant in the room— but ultimately might mean we fare better if we get it right. (Of course, it’s all one atmosphere so we need all countries to rein it in for any hope for the planet to get back to 1.5 degrees of warming but we’d be doing our part).
Most emissions in the food system stem from the primary production stage – the first part – where animals and plants are growing and emitting. That’s also the part that uses pesticides and fertilisers in the conventional farming system, and those are made using fossil fuels - 1tonne of fertiliser put on the land has closer to 6 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent emitted.
However, the stages of manufacturing, processing, transportation, all emit energy in buildings and fossil fuels in transportation, whether that’s road, rail, shipping or plane – or, more often than not, a combination of all of them. It’s important to note this because many conversations about food and climate change focus solely on primary producers, and while yes, it is the majority of the emissions that take place at that stage, all food makers and distributors have a part to play in climate change, particularly those profiting off high emitting products like meat and dairy. Remember, we’re trying to curb global emissions to below 1.5 degrees, and we all have a role and responsibility in that, not only our farmers.
Impact on food systems
Let’s look at the impact climate change is set to have on food. The strain on food resources of our climate change future is immense: more people are expected on the planet, over 9 billion mouths to feed by 2050. Yet there will be more uncertainty about where and when crops will grow, with droughts and extreme weather events set to disrupt entire countries. It also changes how pathogens (pests) and diseases move around, which affect animals and plants, not just those we eat but all of the species in our rich painting of biodiversity.
The connection between climate change and food extends to impacts on our health. Climate change, obesity and under-nutrition are all pandemics. They are long, slow-burning ones that don’t make you stay at home or need to get vaccinated. Together, scientists now dub the three pandemics the ‘Global Syndemic,’ because the big three—climate change, obesity and under-nutrition—also interact and affect each other to an extent.
The biggest threat to health from climate change is expected to be under-nutrition. That is a lack of proper nutrition, caused by not having enough food or not eating enough food containing substances necessary for growth and health. Food availability and quality is linked to impacts of climate change on agro-ecological systems, like crops, pests, diseases, weeds, pollination, forests, livestock and aquatic food sources. Where changes in temperatures and events like floods or droughts occur it affects what can be grown and the diversity of crops impacts in turn on diet diversity. That affects how well people—especially children—grow.
Climate change also affects food security (availability of food) and there are links to the nutrient density of plants being affected by climate change, leading to less nutritious food. All of these things play into under-nutrition and people’s health and quality of life. With climate change, we are seeing the interconnectivity between human health and the health of the planet play out: they are both sick and we need to work to improve it for everyone.
Food at the heart of policy
So what can we do about this? Aotearoa needs to make food systems the heart of its climate change policy (in the absence of a cohesive national food policy).
Put farmers and growers in the middle of it as agents of change to help solve the problems of climate change without slaying livelihoods.
There needs to be a pathway out of this for farmers and growers who are for the most part every day people who want the best for their communities and also the planet. Blaming farmers for our emissions is not the way forward. Nearly 20% of our emissions come from road transport (trucks and cars); close to the 22% that come from dairy cows. The difference is farmers have the opportunity to increase biodiversity through farm planting (something most already do), and they have a direct connection to the land: they are on the front line of climate change themselves. Our farmers and growers therefore have the most to lose (or gain) from this. On the other hand, commuters and freight companies polluting are less connected to the need for change. Farmers are well connected, they just need support and a way forward that helps our rural communities and economies.
Solutions exist: farmers are starting to look at ways to de-stock (reduce cattle numbers), increase planting on farms, convert land use to regenerative ways of growing, which has a more diverse plant base (a polyculture not monoculture), offsetting their practices, diversifying incomes (e.g. growing a secondary crop to allow them to cut back on cow numbers but still make money), and converting to other land uses, like avocado growing in Northland.
Meanwhile, scientists are trying everything to curb cow emissions: vaccinations, getting them to eat seaweed, wearing halters with masks that convert their burps from methane to water and CO2, trialing different crops in the diet, improving stock performance through eating less (the more that’s eaten, the more is belched), milking once a day, reducing stocking rates on the farm, breeding low emitting stock, changing the gut biome to reduce methane, to name a few.
But in reality, it's a very difficult thing to change at the speed and scale that the change needs to occur. To be on track for less than 1.5 degrees of warming and reign it in by the 2030s, we need to seriously move faster on this topic. All of this is complicated. Farmers now live with large debts and are tied into a financial system that is not flexible with adapting land use practices for environmental reasons. Granted, dairy farmers get good payouts, the highest ever this season. But 95% of our dairy is exported, so even if you want to cut back on your own meat and dairy intake to do your bit as a food eater, you’re not making a dent in that national dairy number. To change our emissions will take sustained effort from our farmers and the companies they supply to, like Fonterra. Farmers are the agents of change here and there is a growing number of them that are shifting to better practices. You can too, as a food business or eater.
Food businesses and you, the food eater
For food businesses, there’s work to be done. Start with a climate change inventory and work out your emissions, and how you can reduce them first, then offset the rest. Understanding your supply chain better to know where the shocks and impacts of climate change are going to hit you is also important.
As someone buying food, be aware of the impact of the food you are eating. It’s a complex equation, but if you eat simply and understand and know where your food is coming from you are on your way to cracking the issue. Reducing your meat, coffee, chocolate, rice, palm oil, and prawn consumption will help your greenhouse gas emissions, but also knowing the land use practices of your farmers and growers is fundamental in this equation. Look for organic, biodynamic, fair trade and regenerative products. It might be more expensive but if you eat less of it you will save those costs in the long run. Our soils, waterways and biodiversity will thank you.
And whatever you do, as a food business or a food eater, please don’t waste food. It also creates methane and is one of the easiest things - low hanging fruit - that you can do to reduce your impact. Globally 6% of emissions are attributed to food loss and waste, not accounting for all the water, energy, labour and love that goes into making food before it’s thrown out. The least you can do is plan your meals better, organise your fridge and get a compost, Bokashi, or join your organic waste collection into a community garden until it’s able to be hot composted locally by your council collection.
If we want to turn this around, we need a new approach. I believe that the food systems approach can solve how we tackle climate change as a country. This would of course be helped by our government taking this approach, but in the meantime, every single person can turn this around by making changes that are needed. Let’s go!
Emily King
emily@spira.nz