Seminar on “How to feed 9 billion people within the planet’s boundaries – Agro-ecology for Food Security and Nutrition” Stockholm, 10 March 2015Presentation by: Ulrich HOFFMANN (Dr. habil.) Former Principal Editor, UNCTAD Trade and Environment ReviewChief Economist, Research Institute on Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Switzerland

22

Contextualization and Introduction

• Food security, access to land and water may well become the key issues dominating the global political, economic and security agenda of the 21st century, not the access to fuel and metals.

• "How we define 'efficiency', 'productivity', and 'technology' decisively determines our objectivity of the discussion on what we understand by "modern agriculture". Paradoxically, many consider those production systems as 'modern, efficient and productive' that are among the most polluting, squandering of natural resources and that use much external energy."

Cited from: Gunnar Rundgreen, Garden Earth: From hunter and gatherer to capitalism and beyond.

• The current agricultural production system breeds hunger and cannot resolve it, because it is not related to insufficient supply, but to poverty. • Unlike most other sectors, agriculture already disposes of the production

methods and means to be truly sustainable and well adapted to climate change.

33

Contextualizing Agroecology

• The question of whether “Agroecology (AE) can Feed the World” is actually ill-placed, because:

– it tacitly assumes that the key structural and systemic problems of the current production system, chiefly caused by input-intensive and very polluting industrial agriculture, largely remain unresolved;

– it assumes that AE does not further develop its truly sustainable productivity potential and its potential for boosting local rural development and livelihoods.

• In other words, AE is conceptually placed in a “business as usual scenario”, in which it only increases its production and market shares, without profound transformational change. • Preliminary conclusion: AE can feed the world, but not under current structural and systemic problems.

4444CC 1: There is enough food for all, but the structures are wrong

• With 1.3%, the growth of per-capita food production today is higher than in the last 50 years (4,600 kcal per capita is twice as high as required).

• Thus debatable: is there really a need to increase global food production by 50-70%?

• Principal structural reasons for the supply-demand gap:

(i) Concentrate feed production for industrial livestock production;

(ii) Bio-fuel production and other industrial bio-material use;

(iii) Pre- and post-harvest losses; (iv) Increasing consumption of animal

protein, notably in rapidly industrializing countries.

Source: Wege aus der Hungerkrise, 2014 issue, p. 4.

Per-capita cereal production 261kg

Per-capita cereal production 336kg

World population 3.1bn

World population 6.9bn

Global cereal production 0.8bn t

Global cereal production 2.3bn t

5555Structural Calamities

• Less than half of global cereal production goes into food, about 1/3 is destined for animal feed, some 20% for industrial use, including bio-fuels.

Global Cereal Production in 2011: 2.3 bn t

Food 46%Feed 34%

Industrial Use 20%

Source: FAO Food Outlook, November 2013.

• Harvest and post-harvest losses are about 40% of production.

• How to feed animals in the future?

66CC 2: Hunger is a Poverty Issue, Primarily in Rural Areas

• Despite increased food production, higher productivity and liberalized markets, the share of hungry people has not significantly declined.

• Massive hunger particularly concerns small-scale farmers and agr labourers.• Hunger is therefore a problem of lack of rural purchasing power & access to

land and means of production.

Anteil der Unterernährten an der Gesamtbevölkerung

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1969-71 1979-81 1989-91 1995-97 2000-02 2005-07 2008-09 2010

%

Mal-nourished according to households, 2005

Source: Oxfam, Growing a better future, London, 2011

Share of mal-nourished in total population

7777CC 3: Smallholders Produce the Bulk of Food Globally

• If small-scale farmers provide the bulk of global food they should also receive commensurate attention and support – the reality is far from that.• Many small-scale farmers are producing organic by default – little problem for conversion.

8888CC 4: Market Asymmetry

Market concentration for agricultural inputs, processing and trade:

Estimated market concentration of the 10 largest companies:

Traded seeds: 75%Agro-chemicals: 91%Fertilizers: 41%Bio-technology: 66%Veterinary products: 81%Food processing: 24%Retail: 49%Source: ETC group, 2013

Farmers

Processors

Retailers

Consumers

Local/Int Traders

9999CC 5: Aggravating Environmental Crisis of Agriculture

• Significant resource limits and contamination

• Erosion of the ecological function of the soil, the soil production function and the soil‘s regulatory function.

• Water availability, water quality and contamination.

• Nitrogen contamination of soil and water.

• Biodiversity loss beyond the point of no return.

Source: Rochström et.al., Stockholm Resilience Centre

• Grave problems with animal health and welfare in industrial livestock production.

• Considerable contribution of agriculture to global warming (anything between 40-45% of global GHG emissions).

1010Implications of Excessive Nitrogen Use

In the same period, global cereal production has not even doubled.

All fertilizers (1961=31.2Mt)

Nitrogenous fertilizers (1961=11.6Mt)

Yields of Cereal Production in France, 1961-2010, t/ha

11111111

Methane and Nitrous-oxide Emissions

Main sources of GHG emissions in LDCs

Agriculture accounts for only 4% of global GDP (including processing and retail some 15%), but generates 40-45% of GHG emissions.

CC 6: Agriculture is a Major Cause & Victim of Climate Change

Source: World Resources Institute and Source: World Resources Institute and UNCTAD, LDC Report 2010UNCTAD, LDC Report 2010

Source: IPCC (2007)Source: IPCC (2007)

12121212

• Increase of non-CO2 agricultural GHGs in 1990-2005: 14%

• Projected increase of non-CO2 agricultural GHGs in 2010-2030: 30-60%

GHG Emission Dynamics in Agriculture

13Likely Climate-change-induced Losses in Agricultural Production by 2080

Much-required Paradigm Shift in Agriculture • The world needs a paradigm shift in agricultural development: from a "green revolution" to

an "agro-ecological / eco-functional intensification" approach.

• This implies a rapid and significant shift from conventional, monoculture-based and high-external-input-dependent industrial production towards mosaics of sustainable, regenerative production systems that also considerably improve the productivity of small-scale farmers.

• The required transformation is much more profound than simply tweaking the existing industrial agricultural system. Rather, what is called for is a better understanding of the multi-functionality of agriculture (its importance for rural livelihoods, resource scarcities, climate).

Sustainable Productivity

(new definition required)

Strengthening Resilience (to

resource & energy use, climate change)

Reflecting and Capitalizing on

Multi-functionality

Equity Challenge (access to food,

farmer livelihoods)

• We need to see a move from a linear to a holistic approach in agricultural management, which recognizes that a farmer is not only a producer of agricultural goods, but also a manager of an agro-ecological system that provides quite a number of public goods and services (e.g. water, soil, bio-diversity, landscape etc.)• Need for a trade regime that supports

the transformation and allows to make local/ regional products the first choice.

14

15151515What are the key tasks?

• Dual strategy required: • (a) drastic reduction of negative effects of conventional agriculture; • (b) mainstreaming of agro-ecological production methods, including OA.

• Addressing ‘resource hotspots’: industrial livestock and biofuels• Dealing with market asymmetries in input and output markets• In developing countries: Re-discovering agriculture as engine for economic and

social development (50-80% in gross product, but below 5% of gov expenses)

• Much more attention to be given to smallholders• Land reform and gender issues• Democratization of R&D• Reform of the international trade regime• More importance to be accorded to (staples) food sovereignty• Discontinuing perverse subsidies and incentives• Developing consistent and holistic strategy to support really sustainable

production methods.

16161616What are the most important challenges?

• We need fundamental changes; small steps will only yield small result. • Linear shifting of problems and use of techno- and quick-fixes prevail; lack of

systemic thinking to harness multi-functionality of agriculture (need for proper definition of sustainable intensification and modern agriculture).

• Production expansion focus prevails: “more with less environmental impact”. • As regards resource, nutrient and climate limits, the seriousness of the real

threat and challenges are not yet appreciated. • Emphasis is placed on production-related changes, without appreciating the

importance of the thus required political and social transformation. • Lacklustre progress on land reform and gender rights.• Reform of the international trade rules outstanding (regarding food

sovereignty, local food and nutrient cycles, as well as food reserves). • Stronger regulation of foreign investment in agriculture (land grabbing) and

speculative investment in soil and food items.

17171717Some Key Future Challenges for Agro-ecology, in particular Organic

Agriculture

• Preserving balance between further increasing (sustainable) productivity (and thus reducing costs) and maintaining eco-balance.

• Avoiding the commercial trap: push by large processing and marketing companies to specialize and expand production volume.

• Properly communicate to consumers the social goods and services generated by OA (true costs, but not many benefits are internalized in prices of organic products).

• In the long term, OA can only significantly expand its market share if a considerable part of the ‘true’ costs of conventional agriculture is internalized; starting with drastic reduction of perverse subsidies (2012 – 415 Mrd. $).

18181818

Cost Internalization in Conventional Agriculture: The Illustrative Example of Excessive Nitrogen Use

The EU commissioned “European Nitrogen Assessment”, published in 2011, came to the following conclusion: (Sutton et al., 2011):

The total cost of agriculture-caused nitrogen contamination of water, atmosphere, the impact on the eco-system and on climate change can be estimated in the order of 70-320 bn. Euro per annum (i.e. 150-736 Euro per person). This sum is twice as high as the monetary benefit derived from nitrogen use in agriculture. • Total food purchases per person in Western Europe currently are at a level

of some1,650 Euro.

• If one were to consider 365 Euro as compensation for nitrogen-caused contamination and incorporated that in prices of conventional food, the latter would increase by about 22%.

CC-adapta-tion

Preservation ofbiodiversity

Main-tainingground-water quality

Landscapeprotec-tion

Reduction of GHG emissions

19191919

The “true” Costs of Conventional and Organic Food

Closednutrientcycles

Occu-pationalsafety

Functional biodiversity

Soilquality

Promotingrural liveli-hoods

Animal welfare

Conventional Agriculture

Organic Agriculture

Not remuneratedpublic servicesof OA

Unjustifiablesubsidies

Some publicsupport tosocial sevices

Plant &Equipment,Input costs,Damage caused

Damages ultimately born by the public

20202020

The UNCTAD Trade and Environment Review 2013

is available on-line at:

http://unctad.org/en/Pages/Publications/TradeandEnvironmentReviewSeries.aspx

Thank you very much for your attentionThank you very much for your attention