Scientists have warned the world must diversify its food production and consumption, or face damaging supply disruptions that could lead to suffering and social unrest.
The call came as farmers from across Australia warned agriculture was set to take a heavy hit from the effects of climate change.
A delegation of farmers from across the country converged on Australia’s Parliament House, in the national capital Canberra, to push for better action on climate change.
At the same time a new global study found the health and environmental benefits of transforming the way the world farms would outweigh heavily the cost of doing so, with the authors urging governments to do more to support sustainable agriculture.
“A small disruption in supply really can do a lot of damage and leads to huge price increases,” said Per Pharo of the Food and Land Use Coalition, the global alliance of economists and scientists behind the study.
“That creates suffering and social unrest. And it will highly likely also lead to hunger and instability,” he told Reuters Newsagency.
Global over-dependence on a relatively small number of staple foods leaves populations vulnerable to crop failures, with climate change adding to the strain, the report said.
“Four different crops provide 60 per cent of our calories, wheat, rice, maize and potatoes. That increases our vulnerability,” Mr Pharo said.
The panel said the report was the first of its kind to assess the benefits of transforming global food systems as well as the cost of inaction.
The damage the modern food industry does to human health, development and the environment costs the world US$12 trillion a year, equivalent to China’s GDP, the study found.
It proposes a series of solutions, from encouraging more diverse diets to improve health and reduce dependency on specific crops, to giving more support to the types of farming that can restore forests, a key tool in fighting climate change.
In Costa Rica, for example, the government has reversed deforestation by eliminating cattle subsidies and introducing payments to farmers who manage their land sustainably.
As a result, the amount of forest cover has risen from a quarter of the country’s land in 1983 to more than half today, the report said.
The cost of the reforms it lays out were estimated to be up to US$350 billion a year.
However, that would create business opportunities worth up to US$4.5 trillion, a 15-fold return.
The study said the reforms could also free up 1.2 billion hectares of agricultural land for restoration, an integral part of efforts to curb climate change and halt biodiversity loss.
That is more than twice the size of the Amazon rainforest, which spans seven nations.
“What we’re saying is realistic if the reform agenda is implemented,” said Mr Pharo, adding that under the proposed changes, consumers would actually get “slightly more affordable food”.
“The excuse that we cannot prioritise environment at the same time because we’ve got to focus on development, on human welfare, is simply false. We can deliver both.”
Meanwhile, Farmers for Climate Action launched a report in Canberra which outlined the case for urgently adopting a national strategy around climate change and agriculture.
The executive director of the Australian Farm Institute Richard Heath told attendees, “Australian agriculture needs a national, cohesive climate change strategy”.
“We need this strategy because Australian agriculture is both partially responsible for, and increasingly impacted by the effects of climate change,” he said.
“Australian farmers are very good at dealing with risk.
“However, the pace and extent of change that the climate is now experiencing is beyond the capacity of even the best farmer using the best practises and technologies to adapt.”
The Farmers for Climate Action group wants the strategy “to sit on a foundation of risk minimisation, supported by the pillars of strong research, development and extension, adoption of clean energy and a focus on the capture and storage of carbon, within an environment of continuous improvement”.
Mr Heath said such a strategy not only makes sense environmentally, but also economically.
“Because without climate action, agricultural production will continue to fall, farm profits will decline, food insecurity will rise, rural health will be adversely impacted, trust in agriculture will decline,” he said.
“It is beyond time for action.”
According to Farmers for Climate Action, Australia’s gross domestic product looks set to take a hit from climate change.
“It is estimated that climate change impacts would cause Australian gross domestic product to decline by 5 to 11 per cent in 2050, compared to a business-as-usual GDP scenario without climate change,” material from the group said.
EcoNews is an independent publication that relies on contributions from its readers.
WE’RE BUILDING A PLATFORM WITH A CLEAR FOCUS ON THE ENVIRONMENT, CULTURAL AND SOCIAL GOOD. CONTRIBUTE AND TOGETHER WE CAN MAKE AN IMPACT.
