Climate change may
affect food systems in several ways ranging from direct effects on crop
production, to changes in markets, food prices and supply chain infrastructure.
There has been a dramatic increase in recent years in the
public’s awareness of global climate change, reflecting increasing stridency
from the scientific community as new and stronger evidence of climate change is
revealed.
The Earth’s climate is constantly changing as a result of
natural processes. The atmosphere has an effect like a greenhouse on the
Earth’s temperature. The energy from the sun reaching the earth is balanced by
the energy the Earth emits to space. Greenhouse gases (GHGs) trap some of the
energy the Earth releases to space. The GHGs in the atmosphere act as a
thermostat controlling the Earth’s climate. Without this natural greenhouse
effect, the average temperature on Earth would be -18˚C instead of the current
+15˚C. Therefore, life as we know it would be impossible.
The majority of the world’s scientists studying this topic
agree that the current rate of climate change is faster than at any time in the
last 10,000 years because of human activity. Human activities affect GHG levels
by introducing new sources of emissions or by removing natural sinks, such as
forests. Sources are processes or activities that release GHGs; sinks are
processes, activities or mechanisms that remove GHGs.
Since the industrial revolution, concentrations of GHGs have
been increasing steadily as a result of industrialization (increasing sources
of emissions) and deforestation (declining sinks). Between 1970 and 2004
several key GHG emissions, including carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4),
nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and
sulphurhexafluoride (SF6), increased by 70 percent. The scientific evidence for
this is very solid. In its fourth assessment report since 1990, the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded that climate change is already
happening and can be primarily attributed to human activity.
Global climate change will have substantial impacts on the
environment including water resources, fisheries, forests, wildlife and
ecosystems. Regional climate changes, particularly temperature increases, are
already affecting different natural systems on all continents and in some
oceans. Scientists also predict that climate change will increase climate variability.
Key Predictions
The impacts of global climate change on food systems are
expected to be widespread, complex, geographically and temporally variable, and
profoundly influenced by preexisting and emerging social and economic
conditions.
Some of the key findings of a recent report by Universal
Ecological Fund (Fundación Ecológica Universal FEU-US) make for interesting
reading. FEU-US is a non-profit, non-governmental organization that seeks to
increase awareness that encourages actions on sustainable development issues
through researching, analyzing, producing and disseminating information.
Its report, “The Impacts of Climate Change on Food
Production: A 2020 Perspective” notes the following:
1. The temperature of the planet would increase by, at
least, 2.4ºC above pre-industrial times.
Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the most important man-made
greenhouse gas. In 2008, CO2 levels reached 385.2 parts per million (ppm). With
current increase rates of about 0.5 percent per year, CO2 levels could reach
410 ppm in the next decade. These levels correspond to greenhouse gases (GHGs)
concentrations above 490 ppm CO2-equivalent (all greenhouse gases combined).
This equals a 2.4ºC increase in global temperature above pre-industrial times.
2. Two of the three main elements of food production –water
and climate— would be most affected by climate change.
Obtaining more land suitable for agricultural production is
unlikely. It is therefore water availability (mainly in the form of rain, on
which 80 percent of food production depends) and climate conditions, which
would most significantly impact food production worldwide, with both positive
and negative impacts.
3. The most significant impacts of climate change on food
production would be on:
• The tropical region –the region between 30º N and S of the
Equator—due to reduced water availability and increased temperatures.
• The temperate region –between 30º and 60º N and S—due to
changes in precipitation.
4. Positive and negative impacts of climate change by region
include:
• Africa: The region with the most severe expected impacts.
About two-thirds of arable land in Africa is expected to be lost by 2025.
Decreased rainfall would also impact yields from rain-fed agriculture, with
estimations of up to 50 percent in some countries. A combination of increased
temperature and rainfall changes would lengthen the growing season benefiting,
for example, the production of Ethiopian coffee.
• Asia: The most serious potential threat arising from
climate change in Asia is water scarcity. Central and South Asia would
experience negative impacts, while the impacts on East and South-East Asia
would be beneficial. The two most populated countries in the world would
experience different impacts –India with negative impacts, and China with
positive impacts.
• Europe: Climate-related increases in crop yields, of about
5 percent in wheat, are expected mainly in northern Europe; while the largest
reductions of all crops, of up to 10 percent, are expected in the Mediterranean
region.
• Latin America and the Caribbean: Overall yield production
of wheat, rice, maize, and soybean is estimated to decrease by 2.5 to 5
percent. The impact of climate change in Latin America’s productive sectors is
estimated to be a 1.3 percent reduction in the region’s GDP for an increase of
2°C in global temperature
• Northern America: Overall, decreased precipitation will
create important problems for the United States, restricting the availability
of water for irrigation and at the same time increasing water demand for
irrigated agriculture. This would affect in particular the western region of
the United States; some yield increases are expected in the Great Plains.
• Oceania: As a result of reduced precipitation, water
security problems are very likely to intensify, and change land use away from
drier areas. This would negatively affect Australia in particular, the major
food producing country in the region.
5. The amount of food estimated to be produced in the next
decade would not be enough to meet the food requirements of an additional 890
million people estimated to inhabit the world in the next decade.
• Global wheat production vs. demand: 14 percent deficit
Countries with expected increase in production: China,
United States, Canada and
Argentina. Countries with expected decrease in production:
India, Egypt, Russian Federation, Ukraine, Italy, Pakistan, France, Germany,
Iran, Romania, Australia, Turkey, United Kingdom, Kazakhstan, Poland and Spain.
• Global rice production vs. demand: 11 percent deficit
Countries with expected increase in production: China,
United States, Indonesia, Vietnam, Philippines, Japan, Thailand, Myanmar,
Cambodia, Republic of Korea, Lao Peoples Democratic Republic.
Countries with expected decrease in production: India,
Brazil, Egypt, Nigeria, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Madagascar.
• Global maize production vs. demand: 9 percent deficit
Countries with expected increase in production: China,
United States, Indonesia, Canada and Philippines.
Countries with expected decrease in production: India,
Brazil, Egypt, Nigeria, Russian Federation, Ukraine, Italy, Argentina, France,
Germany, Romania, South Africa, Mexico, Hungary and Serbia.
• Global soybean production vs. demand: 5 percent surplus
Countries with expected increase in production: China,
United States, Indonesia, Brazil, Canada, Argentina, Vietnam, Japan, Serbia,
Paraguay, Bolivia, Uruguay and Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
Countries with expected decrease in production: India,
Nigeria, Russian Federation, Ukraine, Italy, Iran and South Africa.
6. As a result of decreased availability of food, prices
could increase up to 20 percent. The inevitable consequence would be the
increase in the share of hunger, which could reach one in every five people.
The current level of undernourishment in the world is 1
billion people –one in every seven is hungry today. Currently, about 6.5
million children under five die every year of malnutrition and hunger-related
diseases –about 18,000 deaths a day.
Within the next decade, these figures could almost double,
reaching one in every five people being hungry. At least every other newborn in
Africa; one in every four newborns in Asia; and one in every seven newborns in
Latin America and the Caribbean would be sentenced to undernourishment and
malnutrition.
Impacts on the
Agricultural Sector
Agriculture and fisheries are highly dependent on specific
climate conditions. Trying to understand the overall effect of climate change
on our food supply can be difficult. Increases in temperature and carbon dioxide
(CO2) can be beneficial for some crops in some places. But to realize these
benefits, nutrient levels, soil moisture, water availability, and other
conditions must also be met. Changes in the frequency and severity of droughts
and floods could pose challenges for farmers and ranchers. Meanwhile, warmer
water temperatures are likely to cause the habitat ranges of many fish and
shellfish species to shift, which could disrupt ecosystems. Overall, climate
change could make it more difficult to grow crops, raise animals, and catch
fish in the same ways and same places as we have done in the past. The effects
of climate change also need to be considered along with other evolving factors
that affect agricultural production, such as changes in farming practices and
technology.
As noted by Dr. Kim Chang-gil of the Korea Rural Economic
Institute in a recent research paper, agricultural production is carried out
through the selection of crops suitable for the climate of a specific region
and application of proper farming methods. Therefore, agriculture is a climate
dependent bio-industry with notable regional characteristics.
The publication “The Impact of Climate Change on the
Agricultural Sector: Implications of the Agro‐Industry for Low Carbon,
Green Growth Strategy and Roadmap for the East Asian Region,” was prepared as a
background policy paper for the East Asia Low Carbon Green Growth Roadmap
project with funding from the Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA),
under the East Asia Climate Partnership.
“Climate change disturbs the agricultural ecosystem,
resulting in the change in agricultural climatic elements such as temperature,
precipitation, and sunlight, while further influencing the arable, livestock,
and hydrology sectors.”
First of all, the impacts of climate change on the arable
and livestock sector are made known by biological changes including the change
of flowering and harvesting seasons, quality change, and shift of areas suitable
for cultivation. Climate change affects the agricultural ecosystem, giving rise
to blights and pests and causing population movement and change in
biodiversity. In the livestock sector, climate change brings about biological
changes in areas such as fertilization and breeding and also affects the
growing pattern of pastures.
Climate change affects the hydrology including underground
water level, water temperature, river flow, and water quality of lakes and
marshes, by impacting precipitation, evaporation, and soil moisture content. In
particular, the increase of precipitation by climate change leads to an
increase of outflow while the temperature rise increases evaporation, resulting
in the reduction of outflow, Dr. Kim notes.
Negative impacts of global warming include reduced crop
quantity and quality due to the reduced growth period following high levels of
temperature rise; reduced sugar content, bad coloration, and reduced storage
stability in fruits; increase of weeds, blights, and harmful insects in
agricultural crops; reduced land fertility due to the accelerated decomposition
of organic substances; and increased soil erosion due the increased rainfall.
In addition, each crop requires different climate and
environmental conditions to grow. So, if climate change like temperature rise
occurs, the boundary and suitable areas for cultivation move north and thus the
main areas of production also change. The change in the main areas of
production might be as a crisis for certain areas but might be an opportunity
for other areas, so it cannot be classified either as a positive or as a
negative impact.
“In sum, the impacts of climate change on the agricultural
sector have ambivalent characteristics of positive impacts creating
opportunities and of negative impacts with costs. Therefore, it is very
important to formulate adaptation strategies that can maximize the
opportunities and minimize the costs that will lead to sustainable agriculture
development.”
Food Industry
Beyond the physical impacts of climate change lie a range of
market risks and opportunities that are being driven by changing consumer
preferences, supply chain demands and government policies – all in response to
the challenge of climate change.
Consumers are becoming increasingly interested in the
environmental credentials, amongst other things, of the food and beverage
products they buy. This is consistent with a broad and global trend in which
consumers are demanding higher standards of quality, transparency and
accountability in food and beverage products. This trend can only continue.
As a consequence food-processing companies have to take the
effects of emissions from their operations on climate into account.
This may be achieved by energy conservation and substitution
of fossil fuels with renewable energy sources in the day-to-day running of
their operations. In this context the ideas and concepts proffered here apply
mainly to small and medium sized enterprises.
It is worth noting as well that investment in applications
to achieve significant energy reduction requires speedy pay back as most
companies now have to contend with cutthroat competition due to the financial
crisis worldwide and indeed the continuing recession.
Climate change as a result of human activity further
exacerbates the problem and now directly affects the development of existing
and new food processing facilities. The renewal of existing facilities in
energy conservation terms by ‘retro-fitting’ largely depends on what has gone
before whereas the planning of new facilities in terms of location,
construction design, utility requirements such as energy, water utilization /
waste management and packaging recycling can be more strategically planned.
In dealing with the emerging issue of climate change and its
potential negative consequences manufacturers have now to be much more
proactive. Previously manufacturers that were proactive in the area of utility
savings over the past 30 years did so primarily for economic or bottom line
reasons.
What can be done?
As noted by Dr. Kim in his paper, in order to accomplish
green growth in the agricultural sector, we should create an innovative way to
turn inconvenience into a growth engine by leaving existing convenience and
inertia behind, and by achieving a shift in thinking among relevant parties, to
ensure that inconvenience and hazard can be properly managed.
“For this to happen, an amicable atmosphere should be
created with a bold paradigm shift, where the suggestion of various ideas and
active discussion can take place.”
First of all, he
notes, it is urgent that we come up with an implementation strategy that allows
us to maintain the unique characteristics of agriculture as a green industry,
and thereby eventually achieve green growth by actively developing public
functions, such as atmospheric purification and environmental protection
through agricultural production innovation and clean technology.
“It is particularly necessary to establish green governance
where all farmers, relevant organizations and policy makers concerned can work
together, where a strong will to implement green growth and an effective
execution system are required to accomplish green growth. However, the policy
to promote environmentally friendly agriculture itself is not enough to ensure
an assured transition toward a low-carbon agricultural system, but
reorganization of the overall agricultural system is needed.”
Above all,
agricultural policy and low-carbon environmental policy should be properly
integrated so that the concept of green growth in the overall agricultural
sector takes root. In order to maximize the policy effectiveness through a
proper combination of policy instruments in various relevant sectors, a green
innovation system should be established where policymakers, researchers,
relevant organizations, farmers and other relevant bodies can have proper
understanding of green growth and share their roles.
In addition to that, Dr. Kim observes that a systematic
stage-by-stage strategy to develop technology should be devised and implemented
on a steady basis so that green technology reduction or absorbing of greenhouse
gases in the agricultural sector can be utilized as a growth engine.
“When green growth in the agricultural sector is
successfully implemented, agriculture will solidify its position not only as a
green industry that manages national land in an environmentally sustainable
manner but also as a life industry that supplies safe agricultural products and
manages national greenhouse gas emissions.”
As for the food industry, the key is to be prepared. The
findings of a report: “Impact of Climate Change on Tasmania’s Food and Beverage
Industry” prepared by Pitt & Sherry could equally hold for the food
industry across the world.
It notes that the industry needs to be first aware of the likely
consequences, physical and financial, of climate change.
“At a minimum, or as part of a risk assessment process,
businesses should document their ‘carbon footprint’ and understand the extent
to which that footprint creates risks and/or opportunities for their products.
Assessing these risks and opportunities requires a market-by-market approach,
particularly for exported produce.”
For those businesses with a low carbon footprint, or the
ability to achieve this cost effectively, there may be market advantage in
disclosing this information to consumers or supply chain partners. The
attractiveness of this will depend in part on product positioning and the
prospects for gaining market premiums.
“For all businesses, there is almost certainly advantage to be
gained by reducing their greenhouse emissions to the greatest extent possible:
the business case should consider not only direct exposures, such as energy and
transport costs, but also supply chain linkages, future policy settings, market
risks and corporate/brand positioning.
Where a high standard of proof is required – whether to meet
market, legal or corporate expectations – full life cycle assessment of a
product’s environmental characteristics may be justified. Despite the
availability of software tools to assist with this process, it can involve
significant costs. A risk-managed approach might therefore see such assessment
reserved for products believed to possess above-average exposure or,
conversely, potential to attract premiums. Assessments could be undertaken on
behalf of a whole industry or product class by the relevant industry association.
As the information that such assessments will bring to light
will also be valuable to governments, to help identify needs and opportunities
for targeted assistance and/or investment promotion, there is a prima facie
case for government support for this work. At the same time, businesses must
remain accountable for determining their own response to climate change and
accept the consequences should they choose not to engage actively in managing
the issue, the report notes.
