What now for climate change & food?

By David Burrows

- Last updated on GMT

 ©  iStock/f9photos
© iStock/f9photos

Related tags: Climate change

The climate change agreement struck in Paris a year ago entered into force on Friday. Some 55 countries representing 55% of global greenhouse gas emissions have ratified the accord and all of them, including the EU, China, India and the US, now have an obligation to keep global warming in check.

Specifically, the plan is to prevent temperatures rising more than 2o​C over pre-industrial levels – that’s the point when, to paraphrase, ‘all hell breaks loose’. In that scenario, the food system by most accounts will start to fall apart; though there are signs that the seams are already being stretched.

Indeed, the deal struck in Paris refers to “safeguarding food security and ending hunger, and the particular vulnerabilities of food production systems to the adverse impacts of climate change”.​ Ideally, this will mean holding temperature rises at no more than 1.5o​C – which is the deal’s aspirational - as opposed to binding - target.

Thank goodness, at least, that we have a plan in place. It took a couple of decades but we’ve got there. Phew. And critically we’ve got there in advance of the US elections (Donald Trump had threatened to “cancel” the agreement should he win the keys to the White House this week). Double phew.

But don’t get too comfortable just yet. As it stands, the commitments in the deal will see us shoot through that 2o​C ceiling. To keep temperatures in check, global emissions should be no more than 42 gigatonnes by 2030. However, forecasts published last week by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) suggest they’ll reach 54 to 56 gigatonnes – that translates to temperature rises of between 2.9o​C and 3.4o​C by 2100.

That, according to the UN, doesn’t bear thinking about. The loss of biodiversity natural resources as well as the economic fallout will be hard enough to cope with, but there will also be growing numbers of climate refugees hit by hunger, poverty, illness and conflict. “None of this will be the result of bad weather,”​ noted the head of UN Environment Erik Solheim in his foreword to UNEP’s report. “It will be the result of bad choices by governments, private sector and individual citizens.”

UNEP offers up some solutions for plugging this gaping emissions gap, including the role of energy efficiency. Changes to consumption patterns are mentioned in passing, but they are far from prominent. The paper is, of course, covering the actions between now and 2030, but putting consumption to one side for now could be short-sighted.

More and more consumers are switching some of their meat and dairy products with plant-based alternatives. Meat and dairy firms have spotted this as a trend rather than a fad – this year dairy giant Danone gobbled up soy milk manufacturer WhiteWave​, whilst US meatpacker Tyson Foods bought a stake in plant-based meat startup Beyond Meat​. This kind of activity will increase, but will it be fast enough to shift consumption at the scale required to curb emissions?

Legislation would speed things up. Indeed, regulators will want to note the research published last year by Chatham House, which showed that shifting global demand for meat and dairy products is central to achieving climate goals​”​.

“If the energy sector is successfully decarbonised by 2050, our diets can make the difference between the two-degree scenario in which dangerous climate change is averted and the four-degree scenario described by the World Bank as one of ‘cataclysmic’ climate change,”​ noted the UK think tank’s expert LauraWellesley.

Carbon labels have been tried, whilst carbon taxes on foods have been mooted. So far, however, most governments have been reluctant to wade into the livestock consumption debate. But not all: Denmark​ and China​ are among those currently dipping their toes in the water.

Research due to be published later today by the Oxford Martin Programme on the Future of Food will offer governments yet more food for thought – the researchers have calculated the impact that taxes on high carbon foods could have on emissions and health. The idea of fiscal measures in a bid to shift diets can be hard to swallow, but successful sugar taxes could certainly be a sweetener.

Related news

Show more

Related products

show more

Big surprises in Ipsos survey of 6000 flexitarians

Big surprises in Ipsos survey of 6000 flexitarians

DuPont Nutrition & Biosciences | 30-Nov-2020 | Technical / White Paper

Flexitarians in 9 countries give a meal-by-meal account of their preferences. Discover what it takes to make plant-based part of every meal in our groundbreaking...

Clean-label Umami and Kokumi solutions

Clean-label Umami and Kokumi solutions

Kerry | 12-Nov-2020 | Case Study

The memorable sensory qualities of umami and kokumi used in perfect synergy can bring depth and taste to savoury foods. Integrating umami and kokumi effectively...

The next generation of food and drink is here

The next generation of food and drink is here

Barry Callebaut Food Manufacturers | 10-Nov-2020 | Technical / White Paper

More than ever, consumers look to brands who share their values to justify their choices. Food and drink should not only be tasty, but nutritious and good...

Deep-dive into improving packaging line efficiency

Deep-dive into improving packaging line efficiency

Sidel Group | 03-Nov-2020 | Technical / White Paper

Ever wondered what is the best way to improve your packaging line performance? Learn about the ins and outs of line regulation and accumulations in 3 steps:...

Related suppliers

1 comment

Climate Change is a Farce

Posted by c bowers,

Climate Change is cycles of the Earth,North Pole once
South and Vice Versa .Ask the Dinosaurs.

Polar ice caps melt and regrow ..Earth is getting colder
according to the "real" experts.

Report abuse

Follow us


View more