Hot, Hungry Planet: The Fight to Stop a Global Food Crisis in the Face of Climate Change
By Lisa Palmer
()
About this ebook
Earth will have more than 9.6 billion people by 2050 according to U.N. predictions. With resources already scarce, how will we feed them all? Journalist Lisa Palmer has traveled the world for years documenting the cutting-edge innovations of people and organizations on the front lines of fighting the food gap. Here, she shares the story of the epic journey to solve the imperfect relationship between two of our planet’s greatest challenges: climate change and global hunger.
Hot, Hungry Planet focuses on three key concepts that support food security and resilience in a changing world: social, educational, and agricultural advances; land use and technical actions by farmers; and policy nudges that have the greatest potential for reducing adverse environmental impacts of agriculture while providing more food. Palmer breaks down this difficult subject though seven concise and easily-digestible case studies over the globe and presents the stories of individuals in six key regions—India, sub-Saharan Africa, the United States, Latin America, the Middle East, and Indonesia—painting a hopeful picture of both the world we want to live in and the great leaps it will take to get there.
Lisa Palmer
LISA PALMER is an independent journalist and public policy scholar who has documented the science, environment, and social challenges of a changing global environment for over 15 years. Palmer is presently a resident public policy scholar at The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, and is one of the few journalists globally to achieve this prestigious distinction. She lives in Maryland.
Related to Hot, Hungry Planet
Related ebooks
The Fight Over Food: Producers, Consumers, and Activists Challenge the Global Food System Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsFood, Freedom, Community Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsEating Tomorrow: Agribusiness, Family Farmers, and the Battle for the Future of Food Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Comfortably Unaware Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Building Community Food Webs Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsNourished Planet: Sustainability in the Global Food System Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Economics of Sustainable Food: Smart Policies for Health and the Planet Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsSelling Local: Why Local Food Movements Matter Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsConscious Food: Sustainable Growing, Spiritual Eating Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsSustainable Food Systems: The Role of the City Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsNature for Sale: The Commons versus Commodities Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsWasted World: How Our Consumption Challenges the Planet Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Urban Planning and Everyday Urbanisation: A Case Study on Bahir Dar, Ethiopia Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsCoping with Climate Change: the Roles of Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsOrganic Revolutionary: A Memoir of the Movement for Real Food, Planetary Healing, and Human Liberation Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsKnowing Nature: Conversations at the Intersection of Political Ecology and Science Studies Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsGreeniology 2020: Greener Living Today, And In The Future Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsEvery Woman's Guide To Saving The Planet Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5The State of Food and Agriculture 2019: Moving Forward on Food Loss and Waste Reduction Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsClimate Change and Food Production Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsA Case for Environmental Justice Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsFood Security and Scarcity: Why Ending Hunger Is So Hard Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThriving Beyond Sustainability: Pathways to a Resilient Society Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Social Commons: Rethinking Social Justice in Post-Neoliberal Societies Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsCarbon Markets Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsClimate Change and Food Systems: Global Assessments and Implications for Food Security and Trade Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsRepowering Cities: Governing Climate Change Mitigation in New York City, Los Angeles, and Toronto Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Last Drop: The Politics of Water Rating: 2 out of 5 stars2/5Farming in Nature's Image: An Ecological Approach To Agriculture Rating: 3 out of 5 stars3/5Sustainable Values, Sustainable Change: A Guide to Environmental Decision Making Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratings
Public Policy For You
How to Blow Up a Pipeline: Learning to Fight in a World on Fire Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment Rating: 3 out of 5 stars3/5The Art of War Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Price We Pay: What Broke American Health Care--and How to Fix It Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Nolo's Guide to Social Security Disability: Getting & Keeping Your Benefits Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsMen without Work: Post-Pandemic Edition (2022) Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5A Short History of Reconstruction [Updated Edition] Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Just Mercy: a story of justice and redemption Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Dumbing Us Down - 25th Anniversary Edition: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5No Visible Bruises: What We Don’t Know About Domestic Violence Can Kill Us Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Social Security 101: From Medicare to Spousal Benefits, an Essential Primer on Government Retirement Aid Rating: 3 out of 5 stars3/5Capital in the Twenty-First Century Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Talking to My Daughter About the Economy: or, How Capitalism Works--and How It Fails Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Least of Us: True Tales of America and Hope in the Time of Fentanyl and Meth Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Tell Your Children: The Truth About Marijuana, Mental Illness, and Violence Rating: 3 out of 5 stars3/5How We Do Harm: A Doctor Breaks Ranks About Being Sick in America Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Power and Independence of the Federal Reserve Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Walkable City: How Downtown Can Save America, One Step at a Time Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Nobody: Casualties of America's War on the Vulnerable, from Ferguson to Flint and Beyond Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Love Your Enemies: How Decent People Can Save America from the Culture of Contempt Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5The Truth About COVID-19: Exposing The Great Reset, Lockdowns, Vaccine Passports, and the New Normal Rating: 3 out of 5 stars3/5Deception: The Great Covid Cover-Up Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsIt's Even Worse Than You Think: What the Trump Administration Is Doing to America Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Chasing the Scream: The Inspiration for the Feature Film "The United States vs. Billie Holiday" Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion Rating: 3 out of 5 stars3/5The Diversity Delusion: How Race and Gender Pandering Corrupt the University and Undermine Our Culture Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Saving Us: A Climate Scientist's Case for Hope and Healing in a Divided World Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Abolition of Sex: How the “Transgender” Agenda Harms Women and Girls Rating: 3 out of 5 stars3/5
Reviews for Hot, Hungry Planet
0 ratings0 reviews
Book preview
Hot, Hungry Planet - Lisa Palmer
1
Introduction
The Fight to Close the Food Gap
In June 2013, I suddenly found myself having a meal in the middle of a field with a scholar from Spain, an environmental lawyer who specialized in water resources, an expert on energy, and an ecologist. I had been awarded a fellowship to attend a Vermont Law School summer session course on the global challenge of feeding the world while protecting forests and other natural landscapes, and that evening I had gone with other fellows, visiting faculty, and staff to the home of John Echeverria, a professor of law who was then the acting director of the Environmental Law Center. The group had come to the summer law program for a range of reasons—to teach, to learn, to interact with others outside our professions—and the Echeverrias’ gathering, an informal buffet dinner on their porch, was meant to encourage camaraderie among the faculty and students. Halfway through the meal I stood up when I heard what sounded like a lawn tractor approaching, its driver hollering. I looked to the front yard and saw a picnic table on wheels. Are you coming?
the enthusiastic driver asked. At John’s urging a few dinner guests joined me in nodding yes. The driver of the all-terrain table introduced himself as John’s neighbor and friend. He was on his evening joyride and had hoped to find a few companions. Both John and the driver suggested those of us new to Vermont take our plates with us for the ride down to an alfalfa field to behold the green landscape.
Which one?
I asked with curiosity.
The one next to the river,
he said and pointed to the river valley that stretched beyond the front yard. For a moment I hesitated. I was enjoying the historic Victorian farmhouse. The driver prodded: When have you ever been on a motorized picnic table?
Never. So I joined in.
It was an amazing ride. We bounced along a tractor path through the field until we rested on a bridge over the Ompompanoosuc River.
The meal was entirely local, prepared with seasonings that gave the food a Latin twist by John’s wife: locally produced pork, squash and beans from a nearby garden, and lettuce and herbs from the Echeverrias’ backyard. Exhortations to eat local
and vote with your fork
have become ubiquitous since the mid-2000s, and the bounty before us was enough to make anyone a proponent. In this part of Vermont local food is plentiful, and state policies support and encourage small-scale farming. But could states everywhere—and countries everywhere—support policies that encourage their local farms to grow abundant amounts of food for local populations? During this particular idyll in the alfalfa, it was tempting to hope that Vermont—its policies and local food culture writ large—might have the answer.
We are on the cusp of a global food crisis. But you may not know it if you are looking at Vermont. Parts of Vermont could best be described as the eat local
–utopia. In much of the United States—and the world—city sprawl, among other issues, means that meeting citizens’ calorie needs with local production is virtually impossible. And, in just two decades, an additional 2.6 to 4 billion people will be sitting down at the global table wondering what’s for dinner, what is dinner, or even if we have dinner.¹ That’s the equivalent of adding the population of New York City to the world’s grocery lines every month for the next thirty-five years.
As we sat in the field, our moving dinner party discussed how a growing population is putting pressure on the world’s water, land, and natural resources like never before. Planning ahead to address this fight to feed humankind is both a numbers game and an urgent social crisis. Calories, climate change, and acreage for farming are some factors on one side of the equation. The 7 billion–plus people on the planet now, projected to swell to 9.6 to 11 billion by 2050, are on the other.
How is the global food system meeting the demands of people right now? Of the more than 7 billion people in the world, about 1 in 6 go to bed hungry every night. This is not because we don’t have food. This is not because we do not grow enough food. It is, for the most part, because about a billion people, or somewhat fewer, don’t have the financial, institutional, or political means to get it. They’re too poor. They’re too disenfranchised. They’re too disconnected from world affairs to exercise power to get this food. They are food insecure. Essentially it’s a problem of poverty and institutions and not one of agronomy or land-use change or forests.
But in the near and far future, a growing global population with changing tastes will add to food insecurity, putting additional pressure on the food system. More important than population increases is dietary change in the rising middle class. Yes: adding more than 2 billion people to the planet during the next two to three decades is a big issue—it means a whopping 30 percent increase in food demand. But consider the increasing wealth of the world, especially the 4 billion people who are now becoming part of the global middle class. That group will increase from 1.8 billion in 2009 to 3.2 billion by 2020 and 4.9 billion by 2030. Most of this growth will come from Asia. By 2030 people in China, Indonesia, Vietnam, and other Asian countries will constitute 66 percent of the global middle-class population and account for 59 percent of middle-class consumption, compared to 28 percent and 23 percent, respectively, in 2009.² They are changing their diets and adopting a more Western style of diet. So that means eating more meats, more dairy products, more sugars, fats, oils, and other resource-intensive foods. Population growth is part of the issue, but more important is consumption: how diets will change with increasing affluence. There may now be sufficient food, if it is not wasted, but it is not always affordable. This illustrates a basic paradox of the food supply—once people have sufficient funds to afford food, they almost immediately want better food, which puts greater strain on the food system.
Vermont has had a long history of community-supported agriculture, an alternative to supermarket shopping where customers pledge to support a farm or group of farms and share the risks of farming with the growers. While the concept of community-supported agriculture originated in Japan in the 1960s and was further developed in the 1970s in Europe, farmers in New England—and especially Vermont’s dairy cooperatives—have been moving toward closer connections to consumers ever since organizing themselves through cooperatives for the better part of a century.³ Community-supported agriculture differs from a co-op, which introduces a middleman. In community-supported agriculture, consumers buy directly from their local grower without going through a middleman. The number of people buying their food directly from farms has grown steadily in response to the increasing demand for natural and organic food, particularly from the burgeoning urban population.⁴
Today, there are between 2,600 and 6,000 farms that sell to consumers through these direct agreements across the United States. (People disagree on official ag census statistics.)⁵ Yet some research provocatively suggests that local farming, as well as organic farming, is not always better for the environment than large-scale production for larger markets because small and organic producers often have lower yields and need more land to produce the same amount of food, resulting in more deforestation and biodiversity loss, which ultimately can undercut the environmental benefits.⁶ Depending on the crop, consuming local food does not always translate to more efficient use of water, energy, and land resources than consuming food produced on large, modern farms for mass distribution. This is to say, complexities exist, and buy local
isn’t a silver bullet. When both small- and large-scale systems take on more elements of agroecology—a field that takes a whole system approach to agriculture production and combines biodiversity and ecology with farmers’ knowledge and consideration of social and economic conditions—they can reduce agriculture’s impact on climate change and make it possible for ecosystems to produce abundant sustainable food while also improving social and economic resiliency in food systems. Because feeding the world sustainably is a critical human problem rooted in the multifaceted and deeply interconnected relationships between humans and the environment, the response requires us to examine the entire food system holistically, from production through processing, distribution, and consumption. Ultimately the solution to feeding the hot, hungry teeming planet of the future is not in the rolling hills of the Vermont countryside, where ecological abundance and economic wealth create the possibility for delicious local dinners next to clean, flowing rivers. Rather, there will be many solutions in many different places that must reflect the relationships between global warming and global hunger, between the natural environment and the social environment, in our attempts to address both problems.
Local food has benefits and tradeoffs. It’s almost always fresher than food that has been trucked 1,000 miles, but distance doesn’t necessarily correlate with the environmental costs of that food. Writing in World Watch Magazine, Sarah DeWeerdt argues:
If the goal is to improve the environmental sustainability of the food system as a whole, then there are a variety of public policy levers that we can pull. To be sure, promoting more localized food production and distribution networks would reduce transport emissions. But what if a greater investment in rail infrastructure helped to reverse the trend toward transporting more food by inefficient semi-truck? What if fuel economy standards were increased for the truck fleet that moves our food? Or, to name one encompassing possibility, what if a carbon-pricing system incorporated some of the environmental costs of agriculture that are currently externalized? Local food is delicious, but the problem—and perhaps the solution—is global.⁷
Researchers have found that 83 percent of emissions occur before food even leaves the farm.⁸
I worked hard to keep all this in mind while enjoying the delicious dinner in the alfalfa field in Vermont. The other guests and I swapped impressions about the impact of farming on ecosystems, the effects of extreme weather and drought on crops, and the destruction of forests and degradation of pastures to support a growing population that is eating more meat. We talked about fracking and nuclear power, water and soil, science and technology, and what kind of knowledge people might need in the future. As I looked around the table, my strongest impression was that the answer depended on all these things at once: social sciences like economics and politics, the environmental sciences, and the unequal capacities for adaptation; human geography and development; the rural and urban poor; health care and population; education and women’s empowerment; and land use and technology.
When it comes to food, transportation contributes a tiny fraction of the overall environmental impact. Local food has plenty of benefits, and I’m all for it, but if you want to think global,
you need to consider other factors: changing our consumption of animal products; reducing human fertility rates, which is the average number of children that would be born per woman; expanding agriculture on treeless, degraded lands rather than within forests; and addressing the gross overuse—and underuse—of fertilizer.
In other words, Vermont’s kumbaya agrarian model is not the global answer to how to feed the world. It might be the answer to feeding Vermont. Or part of Vermont. What we need is a sustainable and resilient global agricultural system. How we decide to feed the next 2.5 billion people will define civilization for millennia to come. Technically, farmers today grow enough food to feed everyone. Yet nearly 1 billion people periodically go hungry, usually because the food is too expensive or not available in the right places. Families in poorer parts of the world have historically consumed one meal a day. In some areas families plan their meals for the week and decide which two days they will go without eating entirely. The number of people who use this strategy will likely increase as the world population grows amid a changing climate.
So, maddeningly, our current food problem isn’t linear. A major trend is more meat and dairy consumption, and it is affecting food production, land use, water use, and food prices globally. The rapid rise of the global middle class is driving half the increase in the world’s predicted food consumption. To prevent more hunger farmers would have to more than double their production by 2050, even though the population will not have doubled. As more people gain wealth, they adopt diets that include meat and dairy. And producing a pound of chicken or beef takes four to twelve pounds of grain, respectively. So we run into a shortage—or destabilization of prices—as the world tries to produce more grain for animal feed.
As I sat in the Vermont field observing the richness of the land around us, the discussion turned to the expansion of farming. Someone wondered why we can’t grow more food by planting more acres. Straightforward as this seems, increasing the amount of land devoted to agriculture is not the answer. Half the world’s vegetated land is already devoted to agriculture. Clearing more forests, especially tropical forests, and grasslands would cause an environmental disaster. Nor are crop yields improving fast enough. To keep up with projected food demands, farmers will need to produce 2.4 percent more each year—and every year. Even with the spread of modern farming methods, farmers achieve half that, or a production increase of 0.9 to 1.6 percent per year. Finally, climate change is predicted to reduce crop growth by at least 1.5 to 2.5 percent per decade.⁹ Climate change is forecast to significantly hurt some crops in some areas. In India, for example, research shows that wheat yields will suffer losses of 6 to 23 percent by