tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/agricultural-greenhouse-gas-emissions-56749/articlesAgricultural greenhouse gas emissions – The Conversation2023-09-29T01:25:27Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2108802023-09-29T01:25:27Z2023-09-29T01:25:27ZHere’s how to fix Australia’s approach to soil carbon credits so they really count towards our climate goals<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/550802/original/file-20230928-21-n9ydfs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=199%2C0%2C9290%2C6331&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/female-farmer-hold-soil-hands-monitoring-2346686237">William Edge, Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Australia’s plan to achieve <a href="https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/emissions-reduction/net-zero">net zero</a> greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 relies heavily on carbon credits. </p>
<p>These <a href="https://www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/ERF/About-the-Emissions-Reduction-Fund">credits are awarded to projects</a> that avoid the release of greenhouse gases or remove and “sequester” (store) carbon so it’s no longer warming the atmosphere. </p>
<p>Farmers can be awarded credits for <a href="https://www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/ERF/Choosing-a-project-type/Opportunities-for-the-land-sector/Agricultural-methods/estimating-soil-organic-carbon-sequestration-using-measurement-and-models-method">increasing soil carbon content</a>. The federal government or companies can then purchase these credits to offset their carbon emissions. </p>
<p>These credits must represent genuine carbon sequestration if they are to mitigate climate change. </p>
<p>As Australian agricultural and soil scientists, we have serious concerns about the way credits are awarded for soil carbon sequestration under the <a href="https://www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/OSR/ANREU/types-of-emissions-units/australian-carbon-credit-units">Australian carbon credit unit scheme</a>. There are four main issues with the method that must be addressed as a matter of urgency.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Ymy0IO7nizw?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Soil organic carbon is the treasure beneath our feet (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations)</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/us-scheme-used-by-australian-farmers-reveals-the-dangers-of-trading-soil-carbon-to-tackle-climate-change-161358">US scheme used by Australian farmers reveals the dangers of trading soil carbon to tackle climate change</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Understanding the carbon cycle</h2>
<p>Much like water, carbon cycles through the environment, moving between plants, the earth and the atmosphere. </p>
<p>Plants take in carbon dioxide from the atmosphere as they grow. The carbon is stored in the plant tissue. When plants die, or drop leaves, this carbon-rich organic matter enters the soil. Then it decomposes, releasing carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere. </p>
<p>When carbon inputs from plants exceed losses from the decomposition of organic matter, the amount of soil carbon increases. That means soil organic carbon is more likely to increase during good seasons when there’s plenty of rainfall available to support plant growth – such as during the recent three-year period of consecutive La Niña events.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/550131/original/file-20230925-15-sf72i6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Graphic illustrating how carbon cycles through agricultural systems" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/550131/original/file-20230925-15-sf72i6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/550131/original/file-20230925-15-sf72i6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=309&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550131/original/file-20230925-15-sf72i6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=309&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550131/original/file-20230925-15-sf72i6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=309&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550131/original/file-20230925-15-sf72i6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550131/original/file-20230925-15-sf72i6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550131/original/file-20230925-15-sf72i6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The carbon cycle.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Richard Eckard, University of Melbourne</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Increases need to be due to management</h2>
<p>The recent <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2023-06-24/aus-farmers-to-earn-money-from-soil-carbon-under-new-methods/102213244">tranche</a> of credits awarded to soil carbon projects raises similar concerns to those that have been raised by experts about <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-central-climate-policy-pays-people-to-grow-trees-that-already-existed-taxpayers-and-the-environment-deserve-better-186900">credits awarded to trees</a>. Namely, carbon credits are being awarded for changes associated with seasonal conditions (changes that would have happened anyway) rather than human actions.</p>
<p>The current soil carbon method awards credits when an increase in soil organic carbon is detected between two points in time. This is problematic because it can award credits to projects that report increases during relatively wet periods. </p>
<p>This is the case for <a href="https://carbonlink.com.au/wp-content/uploads/CarbonLink-ACCUs-Flow-Media-Release-June-2023-1.pdf">projects sampled in 2021</a>, directly after a period where conditions were unusually favourable for plant growth. That means credits were awarded for sequestration that had more to do with the weather than good management. </p>
<p>Where crediting occurs due to seasonal conditions, the scheme is not providing any true (<a href="https://law.anu.edu.au/sites/all/files/what_the_beare_and_chambers_report_really_found_and_a_critique_of_its_method_16_march_2022.pdf">additional</a>) climate change mitigation. </p>
<h2>Soil carbon can be lost</h2>
<p>Where soil carbon losses are greater than inputs, soil carbon stocks decline and sequestered carbon is released back to the atmosphere. The <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479720301286">emissions can be rapid</a> and considerable. </p>
<p>Furthermore, modelling indicates it’s likely <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.09.041">soil carbon could be lost</a> under the warmer and drier conditions of future climates. </p>
<p>Where a project loses soil carbon, the legislation does not require excess credits to be returned. Rather, a scheme-wide <a href="https://www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/ERF/Choosing-a-project-type/Opportunities-for-the-land-sector/Risk-of-reversal-buffer">buffer</a> generated from all sequestration projects covers such losses. </p>
<p>This approach is inequitable because all projects share the same burden of maintaining the buffer, irrespective of the risk of reversal of individual projects. </p>
<h2>Overinflated sequestration rates</h2>
<p>Based on a <a href="https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/eap.1473?__cf_chl_tk=1zpwtYjrpjjoZAaRpgcOb5o7R5c_fLaqDx0tadA0kWA-1693540306-0-gaNycGzND1A">comprehensive global analysis</a>, the <a href="https://carbonlink.com.au/wp-content/uploads/CarbonLink-ACCUs-Flow-Media-Release-June-2023-1.pdf">number of carbon credits generated</a> by some Australian projects appears unrealistically high. The most likely reason for these large values is high rainfall, but the way the method works makes it impossible to know for sure because the impacts of management are not identified.</p>
<p>This is not the first time a soil carbon project has made <a href="https://theconversation.com/us-scheme-used-by-australian-farmers-reveals-the-dangers-of-trading-soil-carbon-to-tackle-climate-change-161358">unrealistic claims</a>. </p>
<p>In addition, <a href="https://carbonlink.com.au/wp-content/uploads/CarbonLink-ACCUs-Flow-Media-Release-June-2023-1.pdf">one project saw 44%</a> of the increase in soil carbon at depths below 30cm. This is an issue because published studies show soil carbon changes in deeper soil are <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167880923002785">relatively small</a> and happen slowly. We are concerned the reported changes may have more to do with the way they were calculated. </p>
<p>Currently, data used to calculate credits are not released by the scheme regulator so cannot be scientifically verified. The release of data under strict non-disclosure arrangements would allow scientists to assess the implementation of the method. This would provide confidence credits generated represent real climate change mitigation. </p>
<p>Increased transparency was a <a href="https://www.dcceew.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/independent-review-accu-exec-summary.pdf">key recommendation</a> of the <a href="https://oia.pmc.gov.au/published-impact-analyses-and-reports/chubb-review-australian-carbon-credit-units">Chubb Review</a> of Australian Carbon Credit Units in 2022. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/chubb-review-of-australias-carbon-credit-scheme-falls-short-and-problems-will-continue-to-fester-197401">Chubb review of Australia's carbon credit scheme falls short – and problems will continue to fester</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1707172133288149265"}"></div></p>
<h2>Contributing to our emissions targets?</h2>
<p>Australia’s emissions are reported annually to the United Nations in the national <a href="https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/publications/national-inventory-reports">greenhouse gas inventory</a>. These annual inventories show progress towards our declared emissions reduction targets. </p>
<p>The current inventory method used to account for changes in soil carbon uses coarse regional-level statistics. Changes to practices at farm level, such as grazing management, are not detected and will not be reflected in our national greenhouse gas accounts. Further, Australia reports changes in soil carbon for the top 30cm of the soil only whereas carbon credits are also awarded for changes that occur deeper in the soil. </p>
<p>This means some soil carbon credits the Australian government purchases do not count toward our emissions targets. It calls into question the effectiveness of using taxpayer funds to purchase soil carbon credits as a policy tool.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-relies-on-controversial-offsets-to-meet-climate-change-targets-we-might-not-get-away-with-it-in-egypt-193460">Australia relies on controversial offsets to meet climate change targets. We might not get away with it in Egypt</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Getting it right</h2>
<p>To address the issues we have identified, the measurement-based soil carbon <a href="https://www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/ERF/Choosing-a-project-type/Opportunities-for-the-land-sector/Agricultural-methods/estimating-soil-organic-carbon-sequestration-using-measurement-and-models-method">method</a> needs to be revised to only credit increases due to management. For instance, <a href="https://verra.org/methodologies/vm0042-methodology-for-improved-agricultural-land-management-v2-0/">the Verra scheme</a> in the international voluntary carbon market uses a method that minimises crediting for increases associated with rainfall. </p>
<p>To support revision of Australia’s scheme, scientists should be granted access to project data. Data could to be used to improve models in order to distinguish between climate and management effects. This would ensure the method is fit for purpose. </p>
<p>There also needs to be greater focus on monitoring changes in soil carbon. For a start, Australia’s <a href="https://www.tern.org.au/">Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Network</a> should be extended to include agricultural land. This would provide data to increase transparency, independence and rigour of soil carbon estimates. </p>
<p>The revisions we propose would help ensure investment in carbon credits contributes to our national emissions reduction targets and addresses the urgent challenge of climate change.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/a-tonne-of-fossil-carbon-isnt-the-same-as-a-tonne-of-new-trees-why-offsets-cant-save-us-200901">A tonne of fossil carbon isn't the same as a tonne of new trees: why offsets can't save us</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/210880/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Aaron Simmons is a Senior Research Scientist with the NSW Department of Primary Industries. Aaron has received funding from the Commonwealth and NSW governments for soil carbon research and policy development. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Annette Cowie is a Senior Principal Research Scientist in the Climate Branch at the NSW Department of Primary Industries, and Adjunct Professor in the School of Environmental and Rural Science at the University of New England. She has received funding for soil carbon research from NSW and Commonwealth government programs. Annette is a member of Soil Science Australia, a not-for-profit, professional association for soil scientists, and on the Advisory Board of Australia New Zealand Biochar Industry Group. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dr Beverley Henry is an Adjunct Associate Professor at Queensland University of Technology. She has previously worked for, and received funding from, the Commonwealth and Queensland Governments, and has, or has previously held, science consulting and advisory roles with Australian and international government and agricultural organisations. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Brian Wilson is a Professor in Terrestrial Carbon Management at the University of New England. He has received funding from the Commonwealth and State Government and from the Cotton Research and Development Corporation for research relevant to soil carbon.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Pannell is a professor in environmental economics and agricultural economics at the University of Western Australia. He has received funding from the Commonwealth Government and from Grains Research and Development Corporation for research relevant to soil carbon. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Rowlings is a Professor in Sustainable Agriculture at Queensland University of Technology. He receives funding from Meat and Livestock Australia and Department Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries for soil carbon research. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Elaine Mitchell is a Research Fellow at the Queensland University of Technology. She has received funding from the Commonwealth Government for soil carbon research. She is also the founder of Ecometric, which provides advisory services in the natural capital space, including advice to carbon project developers on approaches to stratification, soil sampling and soil carbon modelling.
</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Matthew Tom Harrison is an Associate Professor at the University of Tasmania. He has been awarded funding from State and Commonwealth Governments, as well as Research Development Corporations to research practices, skills and technologies for improving soil organic carbon sequestration.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Grace is Professor Global Change at Queensland University of Technology. He currently receives funding from the Grains Research and Development Corporation, Meat and Livestock Australia, the Dept of Climate Change Energy Environment and Water, National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Scheme - Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Network, AgriFutures, and AgriMix. He has previously received funding from the Clean Energy Regulator, the Dept of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry, and Cotton Research and Development Corporation.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Raphael Viscarra Rossel is a Professor of Soil and Landscape Science at Curtin University. Previously, he was a Senior Principal Research Scientist at CSIRO, where he received funding from the Commonwealth Government for developing innovative soil carbon measurement methods that aided the formulation of the soil carbon methodology.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Richard Eckard receives funding from Meat and Livestock Australia and the Commonwealth of Australia on greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture and carbon farming. His science contributed to six Australian carbon credit methods. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Warwick Badgery is a Research Leader with the NSW Department of Primary Industries and is an Honorary Senior Fellow at Melbourne University. He receives funding from Meat and Livestock Australia, the NSW and Federal Governments for research on climate mitigation and soil carbon. </span></em></p>A group of agricultural and soil scientists has serious concerns about the way credits are awarded for soil carbon sequestration in Australia.Aaron Simmons, Adjunct Senior Research Fellow, University of New EnglandAnnette Cowie, Adjunct Professor, University of New EnglandBeverley Henry, Adjunct Associate Professor, Queensland University of TechnologyBrian Wilson, Professor, University of New EnglandDavid Pannell, Director, Centre for Environmental Economics and Policy, The University of Western AustraliaDavid Rowlings, Professor, Queensland University of TechnologyElaine Mitchell, Research Fellow, Queensland University of TechnologyMatthew Tom Harrison, Associate Professor of Sustainable Agriculture, University of TasmaniaPeter Grace, Professor of Global Change, Queensland University of TechnologyRaphael Viscarra Rossel, Professor of Soil & Landscape Science, Curtin UniversityRichard Eckard, Professor & Director, Primary Industries Climate Challenges Centre, The University of MelbourneWarwick Badgery, Research Leader Pastures an Rangelands, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2076052023-06-14T20:11:16Z2023-06-14T20:11:16Z‘We are gambling with the future of our planet for the sake of hamburgers’: Peter Singer on climate change<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/531654/original/file-20230613-21-p10mcb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=122%2C40%2C5333%2C3590&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/beef-cattle-being-loaded-onto-road-2028765296">John Carnemolla, Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>I wasn’t aware of climate change until the 1980s — hardly anyone was — and even when we recognised the dire threat that burning fossil fuels posed, it took time for the role of animal production in warming the planet to be understood. </p>
<p>Today, though, the fact that eating plants will reduce your greenhouse gas emissions is one of the most important and influential reasons for cutting down on animal products and, for those willing to go all the way, becoming vegan.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/peter-singers-fresh-take-on-animal-liberation-a-book-that-changed-the-world-but-not-enough-205830">Peter Singer's fresh take on Animal Liberation – a book that changed the world, but not enough</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>A few years ago, eating locally — eating only food produced within a defined radius of your home — became the thing for environmentally conscious people to do, to such an extent that “locavore” became the Oxford English Dictionary’s <a href="https://blog.oup.com/2007/11/locavore/">“word of the year” for 2007</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/530209/original/file-20230605-31-zxg7ln.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/530209/original/file-20230605-31-zxg7ln.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/530209/original/file-20230605-31-zxg7ln.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=921&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530209/original/file-20230605-31-zxg7ln.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=921&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530209/original/file-20230605-31-zxg7ln.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=921&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530209/original/file-20230605-31-zxg7ln.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1157&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530209/original/file-20230605-31-zxg7ln.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1157&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530209/original/file-20230605-31-zxg7ln.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1157&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>If you enjoy getting to know and support your local farmers, of course, eating locally makes sense. But if your aim is, as many local eaters said, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, you would do much better by thinking about what you are eating, rather than where it comes from. That’s because <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local">transport makes up only a tiny share</a> of the greenhouse gas emissions from the production and distribution of food. </p>
<p>With beef, for example, transport is only 0.5% of total emissions. So if you eat local beef you will still be responsible for 99.5% of the greenhouse gas emissions your food would have caused if you had eaten beef transported a long distance. On the other hand, if you choose peas you will be responsible for only about 2% of the greenhouse gas emissions from producing a similar quantity of local beef. </p>
<p>And although beef is the worst food for emitting greenhouse gases, a broader study of the carbon footprints of food across the European Union showed that meat, dairy and eggs accounted for 83% of emissions, and transport for only 6%. </p>
<p>More generally, plant foods typically have far lower greenhouse gas emissions than any animal foods, whether we are comparing equivalent quantities of calories or of protein. Beef, for example, emits 192 times as much carbon dioxide equivalent per gram of protein as nuts, and while these are at the extremes of the protein foods, eggs, the animal food with the lowest emissions per gram of protein, still has, per gram of protein, more than twice the emissions of tofu. </p>
<p>Animal foods do even more poorly when compared with plant foods <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/environmental-impacts-of-food#carbon-footprint-of-food-products">in terms of calories produced</a>. Beef emits 520 times as much per calorie as nuts, and eggs, again the best-performing animal product, emit five times as much per calorie as potatoes. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1658842081614241794"}"></div></p>
<p>Favourable as these figures are to plant foods, they leave out something that tilts the balance even more strongly against animal foods in the effort to avoid catastrophic climate change: the “carbon opportunity cost” of the vast area of land used for grazing animals and the smaller, but still very large, area used to grow crops that are then fed — wastefully, as we have seen — to confined animals. </p>
<p>Because we use this land for animals we eat, it cannot be used to restore native ecosystems, including forests, which would safely remove huge amounts of carbon from the atmosphere. One study has found that a shift to plant-based eating would free up so much land for this purpose that seizing the opportunity would give us a 66% probability of achieving something that most observers believe we have missed our chance of achieving: limiting warming to 1.5°C. </p>
<p>Another study has suggested that a rapid phaseout of animal agriculture would enable us to stabilise greenhouse gases for the next 30 years and offset more than two-thirds of all carbon dioxide emissions this century. According to the authors of this study:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The magnitude and rapidity of these potential effects should place the reduction or elimination of animal agriculture at the forefront of strategies for averting disastrous climate change.</p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/it-can-be-done-it-must-be-done-ipcc-delivers-definitive-report-on-climate-change-and-where-to-now-201763">'It can be done. It must be done': IPCC delivers definitive report on climate change, and where to now</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Climate change is undoubtedly the biggest environmental issue facing us today, but it is not the only one. If we look at environmental issues more broadly, we find further reasons for preferring a plant-based diet.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/531656/original/file-20230613-27-ptt5ua.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Smoky landscape photo, fire consumed land recently deforested by cattle farmers near Novo Progresso, Para state, Brazil." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/531656/original/file-20230613-27-ptt5ua.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/531656/original/file-20230613-27-ptt5ua.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/531656/original/file-20230613-27-ptt5ua.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/531656/original/file-20230613-27-ptt5ua.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/531656/original/file-20230613-27-ptt5ua.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/531656/original/file-20230613-27-ptt5ua.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/531656/original/file-20230613-27-ptt5ua.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Fires in the Amazon and linked to cattle ranching.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://photos.aap.com.au/search/amazon%20cattle">Andre Penner/AP Photo</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The clearing and burning of the Amazon rainforest means not only the release of carbon from the trees and other vegetation into the atmosphere, but also the likely extinction of many plant and animal species that are still unrecorded. </p>
<p>This destruction is driven largely by the prodigious appetite of the affluent nations for meat, which makes it more profitable to clear the forest than to preserve it for the indigenous people living there, establish an ecotourism industry, protect the area’s biodiversity, or keep the carbon locked up in the forest. We are, quite literally, gambling with the future of our planet for the sake of hamburgers. </p>
<p>Joseph Poore, of the University of Oxford, led a study that consolidated a huge amount of environmental data on <a href="https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aaq0216">38,700 farms and 1,600 food processors</a> in 119 countries and covered 40 different food products. Poore summarised the upshot of all this research thus: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>A vegan diet is probably the single biggest way to reduce your impact on planet Earth, not just greenhouse gases, but global acidification, eutrophication, land use and water use. It is far bigger than cutting down on your flights or buying an electric car, as these only cut greenhouse gas emissions. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Poore doesn’t see “sustainable” animal agriculture as the solution:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Really it is animal products that are responsible for so much of this. Avoiding consumption of animal products delivers far better environmental benefits than trying to purchase sustainable meat and dairy. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Those who claim to care about the wellbeing of human beings and the preservation of our climate and our environment should become vegans for those reasons alone. </p>
<p>Doing so would reduce greenhouse gas emissions and other forms of pollution, save water and energy, free vast tracts of land for reforestation, and eliminate the most significant incentive for clearing the Amazon and other forests. </p>
<hr>
<p><em>This is an edited extract from <a href="https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/456655/animal-liberation-now-by-singer-peter/9781847927767">Animal Liberation Now</a> by Peter Singer (Penguin Random House).</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/207605/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Singer does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>When Peter Singer first published Animal Liberation in 1975, he wasn’t aware of climate change. But the new book, Animal Liberation Now, argues eating plants will reduce greenhouse gas emissions.Peter Singer, Professor of Bioethics in the Center for Human Values, Princeton UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1884702022-08-29T13:12:38Z2022-08-29T13:12:38ZFarming and fertilisers: how ecological practices can make a difference<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/481570/original/file-20220829-18-ou1fad.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A young farmer spreads fertiliser on young crops in Ethiopia.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Edwin Remsberg/VWPics/Universal Images Group via Getty Images</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Agriculture involves a difficult balance between food production and environmental impact. For example, fertilisers can help to achieve good crop yields, but over-using them produces <a href="https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol22/iss4/art8/">greenhouse gas emissions and pollution</a>. </p>
<p>Some of these impacts also threaten future agricultural production. Greenhouse gas emissions, for instance, contribute to climate change and increase the <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29610383/">likelihood of extreme weather events</a>.</p>
<p>To sustain agriculture, then, it is necessary to minimise the use of inputs like fertilisers, and support crop growth in other ways. One approach is through increasing ecological functioning within farms. This means enhancing relationships between different on-farm organisms, including crops, livestock, microbes, and wild plants and animals. Using these relationships to support crop yields is called “<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S016953471200273X">ecological intensification</a>”. </p>
<p><a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30509848/">Previous research</a> has shown that ecological intensification can be effective. But studies have only been done over short timescales of just a few years, whereas the effects of agricultural practices often take longer to become clear. Variation in weather between years can obscure effects in the short term, and some ecological processes take several years to stabilise.</p>
<p>In a <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-022-00911-x">recent study</a>, my colleagues and I explored whether long-term studies also support ecological intensification. To answer this, we sought out 30 <a href="https://glten.org/">long-term experiments</a> from around Europe and Africa. We used these experiments to look at whether ecological intensification could reduce the need for two inputs: nitrogen fertiliser and tillage.</p>
<p>We found that ecological intensification can partly replace fertilisers to support crop yields, because both ecological intensification and fertilisers increase soil nutrients. So farmers could use ecological intensification to reduce fertiliser use while maintaining the same yields. Farmers who already used low or no fertiliser could increase their yields.</p>
<p>Ecological intensification could also increase yields whether farmers were ploughing or using <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-till_farming">no-till farming</a>. This was because tillage and the ecological practices we tested had different functions, and contributed to crop yields in different ways.</p>
<p>Overall, ecological intensification can help balance food production and environmental impacts by reducing high fertiliser use without reducing yields. And it can supplement low inputs to boost yields in poor, remote communities where inputs are expensive or hard to access.</p>
<h2>What we measured</h2>
<p>We selected experiments that had been running for 10 years or more. We made an exception to include two nine-year-old experiments to increase representation of smallholder farming practices in our dataset.</p>
<p>The 30 experiments in our study tested different practices in a diverse range of climates, soil types and farming systems. We looked for common trends across experiments. In particular, we wanted to know how ecological practices and input use interacted. Was it better to combine multiple ecological practices and inputs, or were they most effective when used independently?</p>
<p>Within our dataset, there were three classes of ecological practices and two types of inputs tested frequently enough to include in our analysis. </p>
<p>The ecological practices were:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>crop diversification – rotating crops or planting different crops close to each other </p></li>
<li><p>including fertility crops such as forage or ground covers rather than staple food crops </p></li>
<li><p>organic matter management – like using compost or manure to fertilise crops, and retaining crop residues on the field to cycle nutrients.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>Ecological intensification entails replacing or augmenting inputs. So we compared the effects on crop yields of increasing the three ecological practices against the effects of decreasing two inputs: synthetic nitrogen fertiliser and tillage intensity. Fertiliser provides the nitrogen that crops need to grow, but can also cause pollution. Intensive tillage (or ploughing) removes weeds but can increase soil erosion.</p>
<h2>What we found</h2>
<p>Our results showed that ecological practices usually increased yields when added to a farming system. However, the benefits of crop diversification, fertility crops and adding organic matter were typically high when synthetic nitrogen fertiliser use was low. Often there was no benefit when nitrogen fertiliser use was high. </p>
<p>This showed us that you can use either an ecological practice or a nitrogen fertiliser to increase yields. But if you use both together, the effect is the same as using either one.</p>
<p>We deduced that this is because the practices and the fertiliser have the same main function: all provide nitrogen to the crop. Crop diversification and fertility crops often involve adding legumes to the system. Plants such as beans, peas and clovers fix atmospheric nitrogen and add it to the soil. Manures and composts release nitrogen from decomposing plant material or livestock wastes. </p>
<p>Sometimes we observed small extra benefits of using an ecological practice alongside high nitrogen. For example, adding manures and composts still increased yields when nitrogen was high. <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11104-016-3031-x">Other research</a> has shown that these organic matter additions help to improve soil structure and microbial activity. They can also contribute to soil water retention and the cycling of other nutrients.</p>
<p>Using two ecological practices together was generally beneficial, because each provides different functions.</p>
<p>Similarly, using ecological practices together with inputs can increase yields when their functions do not overlap. This can be achieved, for example, by using fertiliser in small amounts to top up the nutrients provided by ecological practices.</p>
<p>We also found that diversifying with non-legume crops under high nitrogen had a yield benefit. It is likely due to the interruption of weed, pest and disease cycles.</p>
<p>In our study, tillage did not strongly interact with ecological practices, suggesting that each had different functions. This means that farmers can adapt their tillage practices to their environment independently from their decisions on using diversification, fertility crops and organic matter.</p>
<h2>The net effect</h2>
<p>Ecological intensification could be a way to distribute fertiliser more equitably to improve global food security while minimising environmental impacts. Currently, <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13593-018-0492-8">average fertiliser rates in Africa are a small fraction of those in Europe</a>. Smallholders in particular use much less than their fair share. Too much fertiliser causes environmental impacts, but too little fertiliser makes it difficult to produce enough food.</p>
<p>Other <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/nature10452">studies</a> have <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0594-0">suggested</a> that if fertiliser use is reduced where it is currently high (such as large commercial farms in developed countries), then fertiliser use could be increased where it is currently very low (smallholder farmers in developing countries), without overloading global ecosystems with nitrogen pollution. </p>
<p>Our study shows how ecological intensification could help to achieve this.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/188470/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Chloe MacLaren has received funding from the UK BBSRC project 'GLTEN-Africa' (BB/R020663/1).</span></em></p>Farmers who use little or no fertiliser can use ecological practices to increase their yields.Chloe MacLaren, Cropping Systems Ecologist, Rothamsted ResearchLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1776042022-02-28T11:01:03Z2022-02-28T11:01:03ZTransformational change is coming to how people live on Earth, UN climate adaptation report warns: Which path will humanity choose?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/448755/original/file-20220227-32682-1u5rqrf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=56%2C211%2C4720%2C3108&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Weather and climate extremes are already here, and communities will have to adapt.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/flooding-in-dhaka-royalty-free-image/544688619">Michael Hall via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Governments have delayed action on climate change for too long, and incremental changes in energy and food production will no longer be enough to create a climate-resilient future, a <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-ii/">new analysis</a> from scientists around the world warns. </p>
<p>The world is already seeing harmful impacts from climate change, including extreme storms, heat waves and other changes that have pushed some natural and human systems to the limits of their ability to adapt. As temperatures continue to rise, transformational change is coming to how people live on Earth. Countries can either plan their transformations, or they can face the destructive, often chaotic transformations that will be imposed by the changing climate.</p>
<p>I’m one of the authors of the climate impacts and adaptation report, released Feb. 28, 2022, as part of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/assessment-report/ar6/">Sixth Assessment Report</a>. The increasing alarm in these reports, which review the latest research every six or seven years, echoes what I’ve seen over years of work <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=sk6R5OYAAAAJ&hl=en">in international development and climate change</a>.</p>
<h2>Climate change is having damaging effects today</h2>
<p>Global temperatures have risen 1.1 degrees Celsius (2 F) since 1890. This warming has already produced substantial environmental changes. </p>
<p>Heat waves and extreme downpours have become more severe in many areas. These impacts have already contributed to water scarcity and complex food price spikes, and they can exacerbate health risks for vulnerable populations, such as low-income communities that <a href="https://theconversation.com/heat-waves-hit-the-poor-hardest-a-new-study-calculates-the-rising-impact-on-those-least-able-to-adapt-to-the-warming-climate-175224">can’t afford cooling</a> when temperatures rise.</p>
<p>Climate models show <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-i/">these effects will worsen</a> in a warming future as people continue releasing greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel use, agriculture and other activities, compromising humanity’s ability to adapt.</p>
<p>Where people cannot adapt, lives will be transformed in reactive, expensive ways. For example, research shows that if warming increases beyond 1.5 C (2.7 F) compared to preindustrial times, some small island states will lose much of their area to rising seas. Climate change will transform where their residents live, what they do for a living and indeed the very way they live.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A woman stands at the edge of a flooded road looking at a home's roof across the water." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/448744/original/file-20220227-86466-p4itdl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/448744/original/file-20220227-86466-p4itdl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448744/original/file-20220227-86466-p4itdl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448744/original/file-20220227-86466-p4itdl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448744/original/file-20220227-86466-p4itdl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448744/original/file-20220227-86466-p4itdl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448744/original/file-20220227-86466-p4itdl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Climate change is already contributing to humanitarian disasters, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s new report explains. On the island nation of Kiribati, which is at high risk from sea level rise, the village of Tebunginako had to be relocated.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/kiribati-islands-climate-change-the-village-of-tebunginako-news-photo/118361112?adppopup=true">Justin McManus/The AGE/Fairfax Media via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Rising temperatures and increasingly <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-if-several-of-the-worlds-biggest-food-crops-failed-at-the-same-time-74017">frequent droughts in the breadbaskets</a> of the global food system, such as the American Midwest or Australia’s Murray-Darling Basin, will compromise harvests. In our tightly interconnected global food system, such events create radiating shortages and price spikes across different crops and places.</p>
<p>In the United States, these spikes are generally limited, but can resemble price increases under current inflation. For the most vulnerable Americans, such increases can strain their food security and increase pressure on social safety nets. In less wealthy parts of the world, these spikes can induce profound <a href="https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/FullAssessment.pdf">food crises</a>, <a href="https://www.newsecuritybeat.org/2012/01/do-high-food-prices-cause-social-unrest/">social unrest</a> and political instability.</p>
<p>The impacts of a warming future will compromise the achievement of societal goals like ending poverty and malnutrition, in the United States and abroad.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/a-quick-guide-to-climate-change-jargon-what-experts-mean-by-mitigation-carbon-neutral-and-6-other-key-terms-167172">A quick guide to climate change jargon – what experts mean by mitigation, carbon neutral and 6 other key terms</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>People, companies and governments can cut risks</h2>
<p>The world is not helpless in the face of these risks.</p>
<p>If countries, communities and individuals recognize the need for transformation, they can identify what they want to transform and what they want to preserve. They can ask who will be most affected by such transformations, and then plan for and manage these impacts, bringing as many people as possible into a climate resilient future. This does more than secure material safety. It changes people’s relationship with each other and the environment.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Dry soil trickles through the fingers of farmer Roland Hild as he demonstrates the dryness of his field in Germany." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/448745/original/file-20220227-42643-1fjdu5w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/448745/original/file-20220227-42643-1fjdu5w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448745/original/file-20220227-42643-1fjdu5w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448745/original/file-20220227-42643-1fjdu5w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448745/original/file-20220227-42643-1fjdu5w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=496&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448745/original/file-20220227-42643-1fjdu5w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=496&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448745/original/file-20220227-42643-1fjdu5w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=496&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">As global temperatures rise, many crops face risks from weather and climate extremes.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/dry-soil-trickles-through-the-fingers-of-farmer-roland-hild-news-photo/1210867252?adppopup=true">Thomas Kienzle/AFP via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>There are emerging examples of transformational adaptation to climate change that show what is possible.</p>
<p>In <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.101965">Australia, farmers who adopted regenerative agriculture</a> practices, which help to store more carbon in the soil, found that the health of their soil increased. This allowed the farmers to buffer their fields against drought and floods. They also became more collaborative and ecologically aware, and they articulated more holistic goals for their farming that went beyond income to well-being and conservation. </p>
<h2>Preservation vs. transformation: A false choice</h2>
<p>The slow global response so far makes it clear that addressing climate change is fundamentally a problem of people and their motivations.</p>
<p>Some politicians and others promote false choices between expensive adaptation and the status quo. But <a href="https://time.com/5348333/republicans-climate-change-carbon-tax/">arguments that mitigating climate change is too expensive</a> obscure the fact that <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-the-social-cost-of-carbon-2-energy-experts-explain-after-court-ruling-blocks-bidens-changes-176255">people pay for this losing battle</a> against the transformative impacts of climate change all the time. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A chart of CO2 concentrations based on ice core reconstructions and modern observations" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/448746/original/file-20220227-32622-1ozugut.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/448746/original/file-20220227-32622-1ozugut.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448746/original/file-20220227-32622-1ozugut.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448746/original/file-20220227-32622-1ozugut.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448746/original/file-20220227-32622-1ozugut.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448746/original/file-20220227-32622-1ozugut.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448746/original/file-20220227-32622-1ozugut.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Levels of carbon dioxide, a powerful greenhouse gas that is released by burning fossil fuels and drives global warming, have risen quickly in the atmosphere over the past 70 years.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/">NOAA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The IPCC report notes that <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-ii/">in East Africa</a>, the economic impact of climate change on a single crop, maize, has been estimated at US$1 billion each year. This is far more than these countries or the international community spends on agricultural aid and other support for these farmers. Their production is part of the same global food system that shapes food prices everywhere. It’s one example of how <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-the-social-cost-of-carbon-2-energy-experts-explain-after-court-ruling-blocks-bidens-changes-176255">humanity is already paying for adaptation</a>, often in indirect ways.</p>
<p>Focusing on the status quo also sidesteps the thorny politics of deciding what aspects of our current lives, societies and economies should be preserved and what can and should be transformed. Shifting from cars to public transportation can improve access jobs and amenities for lower-income populations. At the same time, housing near transportation can be priced out of reach. Building a seawall might protect properties along one part of the coast while shifting erosion to communities with fewer resources. </p>
<p>What countries and communities decide to transform, and how, will depend greatly on who gets to participate in these decisions. Their outcomes, in turn, will have significant implications for justice and equity.</p>
<h2>Reactive approach hides the accumulating costs</h2>
<p>But the status quo isn’t cheap in the long run, and studies show that the harm from more drastic warming would be extensive.</p>
<p>The Urban Climate Change Research Network, an international consortium of scientists, estimates that the <a href="https://uccrn.ei.columbia.edu/arc3.2">current cost of adaptation for urban areas</a> alone is between $64 billion and $80 billion each year. The same assessment found the annual costs of inaction are likely to be 10 times as large by midcentury. The longer countries wait to mitigate climate change, the fewer transformational options they will have.</p>
<p>[<em>Over 140,000 readers rely on The Conversation’s newsletters to understand the world.</em> <a href="https://memberservices.theconversation.com/newsletters/?source=inline-140ksignup">Sign up today</a>.]</p>
<p>The choice is not between expensive transformation and no-cost status quo. The difference lies in how people will pay, how much they pay, and how often they pay. If we do not choose the transformations we want, environmentally imposed transformations lurk very near for some, and eventually for all.</p>
<p>The IPCC assessment offers a stark choice: Does humanity accept this disastrous status quo and the uncertain, unpleasant future it is leading toward, or does it grab the reins and choose a better future?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/177604/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Edward R. Carr has received funding from the United States Agency for International Development and the National Science Foundation. He is affiliated with the Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel of the Global Environment Facility, where his the Panel Member for Climate Change Adaptation. </span></em></p>An author of the report explains the damaging effects climate change is already having and why adaptation is essential.Edward R. Carr, Professor and Director, International Development, Community, and Environment, Clark UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1526292021-01-04T15:26:58Z2021-01-04T15:26:58ZCoffee: here’s the carbon cost of your daily cup – and how to make it climate-friendly<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/376993/original/file-20210104-19-1tbq0wx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C5463%2C3646&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/paper-cup-coffee-latte-beans-on-270548702">Amenic181/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>For many of us, coffee is essential. It allows us to function in the morning and gives a much needed boost during the day. But <a href="https://rgs-ibg.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/geo2.96">in new research</a>, we revealed the effect that our favourite caffeine hit has on the planet. </p>
<p>Weight for weight, coffee produced by the least sustainable means generates as much carbon dioxide as <a href="https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/what-is-the-climate-impact-of-eating-meat-and-dairy/">cheese</a> and has a carbon footprint only half that of one of the <a href="https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/what-is-the-climate-impact-of-eating-meat-and-dairy/">worst offenders – beef</a>. And that’s all before <a href="https://science.sciencemag.org/content/360/6392/987">adding milk</a>, which carries its own <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959652614001474">hefty environmental baggage</a>.</p>
<p>Over <a href="http://www.ico.org/new_historical.asp?section=Statistics">9.5 billion kg</a> of coffee is produced around the world each year, with a total trade value of <a href="https://oec.world/en/profile/hs92/coffee">US$30.9 billion</a>. Global coffee demand is expected to <a href="https://www.sustaincoffee.org/assets/resources/ci-report-coffee-in-the-21st-century.pdf">triple production by 2050</a>, raising pressure on forests and other habitats in the tropical regions where it’s grown as farmers look for new land to till.</p>
<p>Fortunately, there are greener ways of <a href="https://research.bangor.ac.uk/portal/files/20570051/null">growing coffee</a>. In our study, we calculated and compared the carbon footprints of conventional and sustainable Arabica coffee – the beans baristas use to make a high-quality brew – from two of the world’s largest producers, Brazil and Vietnam. We found that changing how coffee is grown, transported and consumed can slash the crop’s carbon emissions by up to 77%.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/coffee-60-of-wild-species-are-at-risk-of-extinction-due-to-climate-change-109982">Coffee: 60% of wild species are at risk of extinction due to climate change</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Decarbonising a cup of coffee</h2>
<p>Growing a single kilogram of Arabica coffee in either country and exporting it to the UK produces greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to 15.33 kg of carbon dioxide on average. That’s raw, pre-roasted beans (otherwise known as “green coffee”) produced using conventional methods. But by using less fertiliser, managing water and energy use more efficiently during milling and exporting the beans by cargo ship rather than aeroplane, that figure falls to 3.51 kg of CO₂ equivalent per kg of coffee.</p>
<p>The average cup of coffee contains about <a href="https://www.starbucks.com/responsibility/environment/climate-change">18g of green coffee</a>, so 1 kg of it can make 56 espressos. Just one espresso has an average carbon footprint of about 0.28 kg, but it could be as little as 0.06 kg if grown sustainably. </p>
<p>But what if you like your coffee with milk? Lattes have a carbon footprint of about 0.55 kg, followed by cappucinos on 0.41 kg and flat whites on 0.34 kg. But when the coffee is produced sustainably, these values fall to 0.33 kg, 0.2 kg and 0.13 kg respectively. Using <a href="https://science.sciencemag.org/content/360/6392/987">non-dairy milk alternatives</a> is one way to make white coffee more green.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/376986/original/file-20210104-23-gutj0d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A graph comparing the carbon footprint of different types of coffee beverages." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/376986/original/file-20210104-23-gutj0d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/376986/original/file-20210104-23-gutj0d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=414&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376986/original/file-20210104-23-gutj0d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=414&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376986/original/file-20210104-23-gutj0d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=414&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376986/original/file-20210104-23-gutj0d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=521&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376986/original/file-20210104-23-gutj0d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=521&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376986/original/file-20210104-23-gutj0d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=521&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Opting for oat milk or other non-dairy alternatives can help coffee drinkers lower their carbon footprint.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://rgs-ibg.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/geo2.96">Nab & Maslin (2020)</a>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>There are plenty of other ways to shrink the carbon footprint of sustainable coffee even further, like replacing chemical fertilisers with organic waste and using renewable energy to power farm equipment. Roasting coffee beans in their country of origin makes them lighter during transport too, so vessels can burn less fuel transporting the same amount of coffee.</p>
<p>Of course, it’s not just carbon emissions that leave a bitter taste. The coffee industry is plagued by <a href="https://www.loening-berlin.de/project/a-holistic-approach-for-sustainability-in-the-coffee-sector/">human right abuses</a> and other environmental issues, such as water pollution and habitat destruction. <a href="https://www.rainforest-alliance.org/business/responsible-sourcing/collective-action-a-call-for-the-coffee-industry-to-address-labor-issues-in-producing-countries/">Certification schemes</a> exist to ensure coffee meets a minimum ethical standard during its journey from crop field to shop shelf. These schemes need constant improvement as the industry grows. One way to do that would be including our recommendations for growing more climate-friendly coffee, so that people can buy certified coffee with confidence that their daily luxury isn’t costing the Earth.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/152629/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Maslin is a Founding Director of Rezatec Ltd, Co-Director of The London NERC Doctoral Training Partnership and a member of Cheltenham Science Festival Advisory Committee. He is an unpaid member of the Sopra-Steria CSR Board. He has received grant funding in the past from the NERC, EPSRC, ESRC, Royal Society, DIFD, DECC, FCO, Innovate UK, Carbon Trust, UK Space Agency, European Space Agency, Research England, Children's Investment Fund Foundation, Wellcome Trust, Leverhulme Trust and British Council. He has received research funding in the past from The Lancet, Laithwaites, Seventh Generation, Channel 4, JLT Re, WWF, Hermes, CAFOD and Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Carmen Nab receives funding from Natural Environment Research Council. Grant Number: NE/S007229/1 </span></em></p>The process that brought you your morning latte could have produced half a kilogram of CO₂.Mark Maslin, Professor of Earth System Science, UCLCarmen Nab, PhD Candidate in Environmental Science, UCLLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1493122020-11-05T19:02:48Z2020-11-05T19:02:48ZGlobal food system emissions alone threaten warming beyond 1.5°C – but we can act now to stop it<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/367723/original/file-20201105-17-d25i09.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C4226%2C1910&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/tractor-spraying-wheat-field-sprayer-1064831297">Pajtica/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>How people grow food and the way we use the land is an important, though often overlooked, contributor to climate change. While most people recognise the role of burning fossil fuels in heating the atmosphere, there has been less discussion about the necessary changes for bringing agriculture in line with a “net-zero” world.</p>
<p>But greenhouse gas emissions from the global food system are growing. Unless there are significant changes in the way we produce and deliver food from fields to tables, the world will miss the climate targets of <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/paris-agreement-23382">the Paris Agreement</a>, even if we immediately phase out fossil fuel use.</p>
<p>In a <a href="https://science.sciencemag.org/cgi/doi/10.1126/science.aba7357">new paper</a>, my colleagues and I explored how food system emissions fit into remaining carbon budgets which are intended to limit global warming to 1.5 or 2°C above pre-industrial levels. We estimated that if global food systems continue to develop at their current rate – known as a “business as usual” trajectory – the resulting increase in emissions from this alone would likely add enough extra warming to take Earth’s average temperature beyond a 1.5°C rise in the 2060s.</p>
<p>The good news is that this outcome is not inevitable. There are improvements to what we eat and how we farm it that are achievable, and can be pursued right now.</p>
<h2>Carbon budgets</h2>
<p>Thanks to the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-paris-climate-agreement-at-a-glance-50465">Paris Agreement</a>, the world has an internationally agreed target of keeping global warming below 2°C, and striving for 1.5°C.</p>
<p>To meet any given temperature target, there’s a fixed carbon budget – a finite amount of CO₂ that can be emitted before global temperatures surpass the limit. This surprisingly straightforward link between CO₂ emissions and global temperature helps scientists set <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/">useful targets for reducing emissions</a>. Achieving this temperature target means keeping total CO₂ emissions within the carbon budget, by phasing out fossil fuel burning so that we reach net-zero emissions before exceeding the budget.</p>
<p>The same applies to CO₂ emissions from agriculture. We have to switch the energy sources powering farms and food production from fossil fuels to renewables, while halting the deforestation that creates new farmland.</p>
<p>But here things get complicated, as CO₂ is only a relatively small part of the total emissions from food systems. Agricultural emissions are dominated by nitrous oxide (N₂O), mostly from fertilisers spread on fields (both synthetic and animal manures), and methane (CH₄), largely produced by ruminant livestock such as cows and sheep, and rice farming. So how do these two gases fit into our carbon budgets?</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="An aerial view of a feedlot full of cows." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/367725/original/file-20201105-14-1n8tmt2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/367725/original/file-20201105-14-1n8tmt2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=328&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367725/original/file-20201105-14-1n8tmt2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=328&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367725/original/file-20201105-14-1n8tmt2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=328&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367725/original/file-20201105-14-1n8tmt2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367725/original/file-20201105-14-1n8tmt2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367725/original/file-20201105-14-1n8tmt2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The methane burps of cows and other livestock are a signficant contributor to global warming.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/aerial-view-farm-stable-full-cows-1506043913">Fernando filmmaker/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Nitrous oxide lasts in the atmosphere for around a century, making it relatively long-lived (though still a lot shorter than CO₂ on average). Each N₂O emission subtracts from the carbon budget in a similar way to CO₂ itself.</p>
<p>Methane only survives in the atmosphere for around a decade once emitted. Each emission causes a significant but fairly short burst of warming, but doesn’t contribute to long-term warming and reduce the available carbon budget in the same way as <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-methane-should-be-treated-differently-compared-to-long-lived-greenhouse-gases-97845">CO₂ or N₂O</a>. To account for this, we used <a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab6d7e">a new approach</a>, which treats methane differently to longer-lived gases, in order to incorporate it in carbon budgets.</p>
<h2>Keeping warming below 2°C</h2>
<p>Using this new framework, we considered how food system emissions might affect the world’s remaining carbon budget in lots of different scenarios. These included what might happen if we made the typical diet more or less sustainable, if people wasted less food, or if farms produced more food from the same amount of land.</p>
<p>Given that there’s an increasing human population that is, on average, eating more food – and more emissions-intensive types of food such as meat and dairy – the world is on track to exceed the carbon budget for limiting warming to 1.5°C due to these food system emissions alone, and take up a large share of the 2°C budget.</p>
<p>But there are many changes we can make to avoid this. Switching to healthier diets that are more plant-based and lower in calories or reducing food waste could allow the same number of people to be fed with less overall food production and a smaller environmental footprint. Improved farming methods, including more efficient use of fertilisers, could help produce more food with fewer resources. These are achievable changes which would significantly reduce food system emissions.</p>
<p>Even better, implementing all of these measures could actually expand the total carbon budget the world has left. If the amount of food the world needs and how it was produced were carefully planned, more land could be freed for other purposes. That includes rewilding, which would expand wild habitats on former farmland, encouraging biodiversity and fixing carbon from the atmosphere into plants.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A pair of large, white storks stand in a nest atop a large oak tree." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/367726/original/file-20201105-17-enw3pq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/367726/original/file-20201105-17-enw3pq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367726/original/file-20201105-17-enw3pq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367726/original/file-20201105-17-enw3pq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367726/original/file-20201105-17-enw3pq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367726/original/file-20201105-17-enw3pq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367726/original/file-20201105-17-enw3pq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">On the Knepp estate in Sussex, UK, land once used for farming has been allowed to rewild.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/two-white-storks-sleeping-on-their-1823378192">SciPhi.tv/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>People will always have different dietary preferences, and climate change could limit how much we’re able to improve agricultural efficiency, even if warming remains below 1.5°C. But even if some strategies are only partially fulfilled, pursuing multiple approaches simultaneously could still significantly reduce food system emissions overall.</p>
<p>Keeping global warming to 1.5°C gives the world very little wiggle room. It’s essential that emissions from burning fossil fuels are eliminated as rapidly as possible. The world must build on the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-a-17-emissions-drop-does-not-mean-we-are-addressing-climate-change-138984">plunge in emissions</a> that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, and force similar declines <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-020-0797-x">every year onwards</a>.</p>
<p>We have shown that if – and it is a big if – the world does actually manage to decarbonise this quickly, we have a good chance of keeping food system emissions low enough to limit warming to between 1.5 and 2°C. We can waste no more time in achieving this.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/149312/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Lynch receives funding from the Wellcome Trust.</span></em></p>Modern agriculture releases lots of different greenhouse gas emissions, each with complex effects on the global climate.John Lynch, Postdoctoral Researcher in Physics, University of OxfordLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1463922020-09-17T07:46:50Z2020-09-17T07:46:50ZNew Zealand will make big banks, insurers and firms disclose their climate risk. It’s time other countries did too<p>This week’s announcement of <a href="https://www.mfe.govt.nz/climate-change/climate-change-and-government/mandatory-climate-related-financial-disclosures">mandatory disclosures</a> of climate-related risks for companies and financial institutions is arguably the New Zealand government’s most significant climate policy — even more so than the <a href="http://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2019/0136/latest/LMS183736.html">Zero Carbon Act</a> itself.</p>
<p>The new policy will come into effect in 2023. It requires all banks, asset managers and insurance companies with more than NZ$1 billion in assets to disclose their climate risks, in line with the emerging global standard from the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (<a href="https://www.fsb-tcfd.org/publications/final-recommendations-report/">TCFD</a>). This is a smart move, as it ties risk disclosure to international best practice, which is likely to evolve in the coming years.</p>
<p>There will be a collective gulp in bank boards and company risk management departments of the roughly 200 affected entities, but initiatives such as the <a href="https://www.theaotearoacircle.nz/sustainablefinance">Aotearoa Circle Sustainable Finance Forum</a> show a growing proportion of the financial sector understands climate risk disclosures are necessary. </p>
<p>I have criticised this government’s climate policy in the past for being big on promise but short on concrete policies. But this financial disclosure policy has some real teeth. </p>
<h2>Banking on a brighter future</h2>
<p>New Zealand has a bank-based financial system. This means banks — rather than the stock or bond markets — are the primary source of finance for companies. </p>
<p>New Zealand’s Exchange (<a href="https://www.nzx.com/">NZX</a>) has a <a href="https://www.nzx.com/markets/NZSX">market capitalisation of around NZ$170 billion</a>, while the four big New Zealand banks (all subsidiaries of Australian banks) have assets, consisting largely of loans, of <a href="https://bankdashboard.rbnz.govt.nz/balance-sheet">around NZ$500 billion</a>. </p>
<p>Including banks and insurance companies in the new mandatory disclosure rules means the whole of the economy will be seen through a climate risk lens, not just large companies listed on the stock market. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/super-funds-are-feeling-the-financial-heat-from-climate-change-146191">Super funds are feeling the financial heat from climate change</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Banks will need to think seriously about <a href="https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/speech/2015/breaking-the-tragedy-of-the-horizon-climate-change-and-financial-stability">transition, physical and liability</a> risk when lending and offering insurance to households and small and medium size enterprises (SMEs). This matters most to domestic real estate, by far the <a href="https://bankdashboard.rbnz.govt.nz/asset-quality">largest item</a> on the balance sheet of New Zealand banks, and agricultural and small businesses more generally. </p>
<p>It would be unreasonable to ask SMEs and households to disclose climate risks, so the task is being delegated to banks and insurers. </p>
<p>Figuring out what climate risks lie within banks is not a simple task. Banks will need to scale up their ability to <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3489445">estimate flooding risk</a> from extreme rain, storms and sea level rise on residential housing. </p>
<p>New Zealand’s <a href="https://www.mfe.govt.nz/climate-change/state-of-our-atmosphere-and-climate/new-zealands-greenhouse-gas-inventory">emissions profile</a> is dominated by agricultural emissions. Banks will need to evaluate whether future loan applications for dairy intensification are consistent with the <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement">Paris Agreement</a>, or if those farm loans might become stranded assets through future regulatory changes, such as the eventual <a href="https://www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz/2019/07/16/interim-climate-change-committees-recommendations-expert-reaction/">entry of agriculture</a> into <a href="https://www.mfe.govt.nz/ets">New Zealand’s Emissions Trading Scheme</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/nzs-environmental-watchdog-challenges-climate-policy-on-farm-emissions-and-forestry-offsets-114281">NZ's environmental watchdog challenges climate policy on farm emissions and forestry offsets</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>The Kiwi tail wagging the Aussie dog</h2>
<p>The policy could cause some interesting spillover effects for other countries. Around 20% of <a href="https://www.asx.com.au/asx/share-price-research/company/ANZ">ANZ Banking Group</a> assets are from its ANZ New Zealand subsidiary. Might this force greater disclosure by the Australian parent? Or will banks try to wriggle out of New Zealand’s disclosure requirements through “foreign exempt issuers status”? </p>
<p>The latter seems improbable, since the policy explicitly mentions banks with more than NZ$1 billion in assets. This threshold could cover <a href="https://bankdashboard.rbnz.govt.nz/balance-sheet">13 banks registered in New Zealand</a>. It will be interesting to see how large international banks such as the Bank of China, which has a “small” presence in New Zealand, will respond. </p>
<p>The policy will also mean the half of NZX-listed companies currently not disclosing greenhouse gas emissions will have to do so. Our <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3692096">recent study</a> reveals substantial climate transition risks for a number of listed companies. </p>
<p>The table below presents how climate change could hit the bottom lines of major companies in New Zealand, showing projected percentage decreases in revenue for 2018, 2030 and 2050. These calculations are based on carbon prices in the New Zealand Productivity Commission’s <a href="https://www.productivity.govt.nz/inquiries/lowemissions/">report</a> on New Zealand’s transition to a low-emissions economy. </p>
<p><iframe id="HBdx2" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/HBdx2/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p><a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3692096">Our research</a> shows it is generally smaller and less profitable firms that do not disclose.</p>
<p>Having all listed firms disclose will level the playing field. Importantly, it will allow investment managers (who also need to disclose their climate risks) to overcome past issues of insufficient data to create genuinely climate-friendly investment products. </p>
<p>The task of <a href="https://www.mfe.govt.nz/climate-change/climate-change-and-government/mandatory-climate-related-financial-disclosures">independent monitoring, reporting and enforcement of the rules</a> will fall to the financial regulator, the <a href="https://www.fma.govt.nz/">Financial Markets Authority</a>. </p>
<p>Reporting by the 200 or so affected entities will be on a “report or explain basis”. But companies with significant risks that choose the explain option will be disciplined by the market and potentially by the authority. </p>
<p>Disclosure will increase and companies, investment managers, insurers and banks will be comparable on a like-for-like basis — finally allowing consumers to make fully informed decisions about where their money goes. These new rules will unleash the market and drive it in a more climate-friendly direction — beginning the long process of delivering a genuinely sustainable financial system. </p>
<p><em>Editor’s note: The table reported in this article is based on 2018 reported emissions. For some firms emissions will have changed materially since then. For instance, in March 2020 Vector divested from the Kāpuni gas processing plant which, according Vector disclosures, accounted for 83% of reported Scope 1 and 2 emissions. The table, therefore, does not reflect Vector’s current and future climate liability and associated climate transition risk, which is significantly lower than indicated in the table and associated working paper.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/146392/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ivan Diaz-Rainey is on the Technical Working Group of the Aotearoa Circle's Sustainable Finance Forum. </span></em></p>I have criticised this government’s climate policy in the past for being big on promise but short on concrete policies. But this financial disclosure policy has some real teeth.Ivan Diaz-Rainey, Associate Professor of Finance & Director, Climate and Energy Finance Group, University of OtagoLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1258702019-10-30T03:33:08Z2019-10-30T03:33:08ZWhy water quality should have been an issue when NZ government joined with farm sector to curb emissions<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/299352/original/file-20191029-183120-16n4ora.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C131%2C5176%2C3313&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The New Zealand government has announced a partnership with the farming sector to develop voluntary measures to reduce farm emissions.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">from www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>After months of deliberations, New Zealand’s coalition government last week announced a <a href="https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/world-first-plan-farmers-reduce-emissions">partnership with the farming sector</a>, with a five-year plan to quantify and price farm emissions by 2025.</p>
<p>Agriculture is responsible for <a href="https://www.mpi.govt.nz/protection-and-response/environment-and-natural-resources/emissions-trading-scheme/agriculture-and-greenhouse-gases/">half of New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions</a>. Earlier this year, the Interim Climate Change Committee (<a href="https://www.iccc.mfe.govt.nz/who-we-are/meet-the-committee/">ICCC</a>) <a href="https://www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz/2019/07/16/interim-climate-change-committees-recommendations-expert-reaction/">recommended</a> that agricultural emissions should be brought under the <a href="https://www.mfe.govt.nz/ets">New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme</a> as soon as possible. It <a href="https://www.iccc.mfe.govt.nz/assets/PDF_Library/f15921453c/FINAL-ICCC-Agriculture-Report.pdf">cautioned against a voluntary collaboration with the sector</a> as this would “result in ongoing policy uncertainty that could weaken investment signals and reduce preparedness by the sector”.</p>
<p>The partnership announcement comes just as a consultation period is closing on proposed changes to water quality legislation. What is missing in the government’s approach is any acknowledgement of the strong links between agricultural emissions to the atmosphere and water.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/new-zealand-launches-plan-to-revive-the-health-of-lakes-and-rivers-123079">New Zealand launches plan to revive the health of lakes and rivers</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Environmental cost of agriculture</h2>
<p>Under the partnership arrangement, the sector will have five years before having to pay for 5% of its share of emissions. The government built in a backstop of bringing agricultural emissions into the ETS by 2025, or earlier, if there isn’t sufficient progress on curbing emissions. </p>
<p>But reducing farming intensity would have multiple positive outcomes, from freshwater to human health. The New Zealand situation is a microcosm of a failed global agriculture system that is driving <a href="https://www.cbd.int/agro/whatstheproblem.shtml">biodiversity loss</a>, <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317664769_Our_deadly_nitrogen_addiction">nitrogen pollution</a> and <a href="https://www.grain.org/article/entries/5976-emissions-impossible-how-big-meat-and-dairy-are-heating-up-the-planet">climate change</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-battle-for-the-future-of-farming-what-you-need-to-know-106805">The battle for the future of farming: what you need to know</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>New Zealand could be a global showcase for sustainable agriculture. The country is blessed with many natural advantages like nutrient-rich soils, abundant rainfall, low human population and a global perception of clean and healthy ecosystems. </p>
<p>Rather than taking advantage of its natural attributes, New Zealand intensified and industrialised agriculture. It went from a low-input sustainable food production system to one based on fossil-fuel-derived, synthetic nitrogen fertiliser and energy. </p>
<p>New Zealand’s agricultural intensification involved adding more cows per hectare on pasture, rather than in feedlots or by housing animals. While this form of intensification is more visually appealing and perceived as less harmful, it nonetheless comes with its own set of environmental issues.</p>
<p>In the last three decades, sheep numbers have halved, but the number of dairy cattle has more than doubled and <a href="https://www.lic.co.nz/documents/450/NZ_DAIRY_STATISTICS_2017-18-WEB-10_OCT.pdf">milk production trebled</a>. New Zealand is now the world’s <a href="https://www.dcanz.com/about-the-nz-dairy-industry/">eighth-largest dairy producer</a> and <a href="http://www.worldstopexports.com/top-milk-exporting-countries/">biggest dairy exporter</a>. But this production growth was achieved through massive <a href="https://www.stats.govt.nz/indicators/irrigated-land">increases in irrigation</a>, <a href="https://www.stats.govt.nz/indicators/nitrogen-and-phosphorus-in-fertilisers">fertiliser use</a>, <a href="https://www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?country=nz&commodity=palm-kernel-meal&graph=imports">imported animal feed</a> and <a href="https://www.otago.ac.nz/centre-sustainability/otago623147.pdf">energy use</a>. </p>
<h2>From riches to rags</h2>
<p>Ecologists have described the ecological consequences of this land-use intensification as a “<a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271431966_Riches_to_rags_the_ecological_consequences_of_land-use_intensification_in_New_Zealand">riches to rags</a>” transformation. The <a href="https://www.publish.csiro.au/MF/MF18028">negative impacts on freshwater biodiversity</a> have been extreme. For example, a world-record three-quarters of native New Zealand fish are listed as threatened with extinction. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/despite-its-green-image-nz-has-worlds-highest-proportion-of-species-at-risk-116063">Despite its green image, NZ has world's highest proportion of species at risk</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Unsurprisingly, given the increased external inputs, the amount of nitrogen leaching from livestock each year <a href="https://www.stats.govt.nz/indicators/nitrate-leaching-from-livestock">more than doubled</a> in a few decades. These leached nutrients as well as pathogens resulting from intensification had significant negative impacts on <a href="https://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/21/1149/2017/">rivers</a>, <a href="https://www.stats.govt.nz/indicators/groundwater-quality">groundwater</a>, <a href="https://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/environmental-reporting/environment-aotearoa-2019">lakes</a> and <a href="https://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/environmental-reporting/environment-aotearoa-2019">oceans</a>. </p>
<p>Intensification also <a href="https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs13280-019-01177-y.pdf">increases risks</a> to human health. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6068531/">Evidence</a> linking exposure to nitrate in drinking water to negative health outcomes is growing. The list includes increased risks of developing colorectal cancer, thyroid disease and neural tube defects. </p>
<p>Swimming in many rivers in farmed areas now poses a <a href="https://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/media/Fresh%20water/spatial-modelling-of-river-water-quality-state.pdf">risk to human health from the ingestion of pathogens</a>. </p>
<h2>Future foods</h2>
<p>Climate change is another risk to human health. In New Zealand, emissions from agriculture have increased by 13.5% since 1990, predominantly from <a href="https://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/media/Climate%20Change/snapshot-nzs-greenhouse-gas-inventory-1990-2017.pdf">growth in dairy farming</a>.</p>
<p>It is now <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13280-019-01177-y">widely recognised</a> that land-use intensification in high-input agriculture sectors globally and in New Zealand has negative environmental impacts. Future food production therefore needs innovative agricultural systems that protect and enhance natural resources. </p>
<p>Opinion polls show New Zealanders <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/109701626/water-pollution-the-number-one-concern-for-new-zealanders-in-new-poll">rate freshwater degradation as their most important environmental issue</a>. They have also taken to the streets demanding climate action. The true solutions are simple, inexpensive and have multiple benefits.</p>
<p>In New Zealand, a <a href="https://institut-fuer-welternaehrung.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Agriculture-at-a-tipping-point_EN.pdf">transformation towards holistic farming approaches</a>, such as <a href="http://www.regenerativeagriculturedefinition.com/">regenerative agriculture</a>, <a href="http://www.regenerativeagriculturedefinition.com/">agroecology</a>, <a href="http://www.fao.org/forestry/agroforestry/80338/en/">agro-forestry</a> and <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13280-019-01177-y">climate-smart agriculture</a>, is imperative and should build on indigenous and traditional knowledge.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/125870/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mike Joy does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The New Zealand government’s decision to partner the farming sector to encourage voluntary reductions in farm emissions failed to acknowledge that agricultural emissions also affect water quality.Mike Joy, Senior Researcher; Institute for Governance and Policy Studies, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of WellingtonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1215512019-08-08T08:01:42Z2019-08-08T08:01:42ZUN climate change report: land clearing and farming contribute a third of the world’s greenhouse gases<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287124/original/file-20190807-84215-1d8y1s9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Farming emits greenhouse gases, but the land can also store them.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Johny Goerend/Unsplash</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>We can’t achieve the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement without managing emissions from land use, according to a <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/srccl/">special report released today</a> by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).</p>
<p>Emissions from land use, largely agriculture, forestry and land clearing, make up some 22% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. Counting the entire food chain (including fertiliser, transport, processing, and sale) takes this contribution up to 29%. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/want-to-beat-climate-change-protect-our-natural-forests-121491">Want to beat climate change? Protect our natural forests</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The report, which synthesises information from some 7,000 scientific papers, found there is no way to keep global warming under 2°C without significant reductions in land sector emissions. </p>
<h2>Land puts out emissions – and absorbs them</h2>
<p>The land plays a vital role in the carbon cycle, both by absorbing greenhouse gases and by releasing them into the atmosphere. This means our land resources are both part of the climate change problem and potentially part of the solution. </p>
<p>Improving how we manage the land could reduce climate change at the same time as it improves agricultural sustainability, supports biodiversity, and increases food security. </p>
<p>While the food system emits nearly a third of the world’s greenhouse gases – a situation <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-is-a-global-top-ten-deforester-and-queensland-is-leading-the-way-87259">also reflected in Australia</a> – land-based ecosystems absorb the equivalent of about 22% of global greenhouse gas emissions. This happens through natural processes that store carbon in soil and plants, in both farmed lands and managed forests as well as in natural “<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-desperately-need-to-store-more-carbon-seagrass-could-be-the-answer-105524">carbon sinks</a>” such as forests, seagrass and wetlands.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-is-a-global-top-ten-deforester-and-queensland-is-leading-the-way-87259">Australia is a global top-ten deforester – and Queensland is leading the way</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>There are opportunities to reduce the emissions related to land use, especially food production, while at the same time protecting and expanding these greenhouse gas sinks. </p>
<p>But it is also immediately obvious that the land sector cannot achieve these goals by itself. It will require substantial reductions in fossil fuel emissions from our energy, transport, industrial, and infrastructure sectors.</p>
<h2>Overburdened land</h2>
<p>So, what is the current state of our land resources? <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/srccl/">Not that great</a>.</p>
<p>The report shows there are unprecedented rates of global land and freshwater used to provide food and other products for the record global population levels and consumption rates. </p>
<p>For example, consumption of food calories per person worldwide has increased by about one-third since 1961, and the average person’s consumption of meat and vegetable oils has more than doubled. </p>
<p>The pressure to increase agricultural production has helped push about a quarter of the Earth’s ice-free land area into various states of degradation via loss of soil, nutrients and vegetation. </p>
<p>Simultaneously, biodiversity has declined globally, largely because of deforestation, cropland expansion and unsustainable land-use intensification. Australia has experienced <a href="https://theconversation.com/to-reduce-fire-risk-and-meet-climate-targets-over-300-scientists-call-for-stronger-land-clearing-laws-113172">much the same trends</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/to-reduce-fire-risk-and-meet-climate-targets-over-300-scientists-call-for-stronger-land-clearing-laws-113172">To reduce fire risk and meet climate targets, over 300 scientists call for stronger land clearing laws</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Climate change exacerbates land degradation</h2>
<p>Climate change is already having a major impact on the land. Temperatures over land are rising at almost twice the rate of global average temperatures. </p>
<p>Linked to this, the frequency and intensity of <a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-change-means-more-extreme-weather-heres-what-the-uk-can-expect-if-emissions-keep-increasing-112745">extreme events</a> such as heatwaves and flooding rainfall has increased. The global area of drylands in drought has increased by over 40% since 1961.</p>
<p>These and other changes have reduced agricultural productivity in many regions – <a href="https://theconversation.com/australian-farmers-are-adapting-to-climate-change-76939">including Australia</a>. Further climate changes will likely spur soil degradation, loss of vegetation, biodiversity and permafrost, and increases in fire damage and coastal degradation. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-desperately-need-to-store-more-carbon-seagrass-could-be-the-answer-105524">We desperately need to store more carbon – seagrass could be the answer</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Water will become more scarce, and our food supply will become less stable. Exactly how these risks will evolve will depend on population growth, consumption patterns and also how the global community responds.</p>
<p>Overall, proactive and informed management of our land (for food, water and biodiversity) will become increasingly important.</p>
<h2>Stopping land degradation helps everyone</h2>
<p>Tackling the interlinked problems of land degradation, climate change adaptation and mitigation, and food security can deliver win-wins for farmers, communities, governments, and ecosystems.</p>
<p>The report provides many examples of on-ground and policy options that could improve the management of agriculture and forests, to enhance production, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and make these areas more robust to climate change. Leading Australian farmers are already <a href="https://www.aciar.gov.au">heading down these paths</a>, and we have a lot to teach the world about how to do this.</p>
<p>We may also need to reassess what we demand from the land. Farmed animals are a major contributor to these emissions, so plant-based diets are increasingly being <a href="https://theconversation.com/is-vegetarianism-healthier-we-asked-five-experts-112133">adopted</a>. </p>
<p>Similarly, the report found about 25-30% of food globally is lost or wasted. Reducing this can significantly lower emissions, and ease pressure on agricultural systems.</p>
<h2>How do we make this happen?</h2>
<p>Many people around the world are doing impressive work in addressing some of these problems. But the solutions they generate are not necessarily widely used or applied comprehensively. </p>
<p>To be successful, coordinated policy packages and land management approaches are pivotal. Inevitably, all solutions are highly location-specific and contextual, and it is vital to bring together local communities and industry, as well as governments at all levels.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-explained-will-we-be-less-healthy-because-of-climate-change-115800">Climate explained: will we be less healthy because of climate change?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Given the mounting impacts of climate change on food security and land condition, there is no time to lose.</p>
<p><br></p>
<hr>
<p><em>The author acknowledges the contributions to authorship of this article by Clare de Castella, Communications Manager, ANU Climate Change Institute.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/121551/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Howden is a Vice Chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change</span></em></p>The world has no hope of reaching the goals of the Paris Agreement without seriously reducing emissions from agriculture, forestry and land clearing.Mark Howden, Director, Climate Change Institute, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1181092019-06-12T05:09:00Z2019-06-12T05:09:00ZHow New Zealand’s well-being budget delivers for the environment<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278770/original/file-20190610-52758-ht1qot.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=80%2C125%2C5883%2C3259&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">One of the government's spending priorities is a transformation towards a low-emissions economy.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">from www.shutterstock.com</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Internationally, the Ardern government is seen <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/22/world/asia/new-zealand-wellbeing-budget.html">as a progressive beacon</a>, and its recent <a href="https://www.budget.govt.nz/index.htm">budget</a> was watched closely as a milestone in the “year of delivery” for Ardern’s well-being agenda. </p>
<p>The budget is a leap ahead of other Western democracies in that it replaces the gross domestic product (<a href="https://www.stats.govt.nz/topics/gross-domestic-product">GDP</a>) with a <a href="https://treasury.govt.nz/information-and-services/nz-economy/living-standards">set of well-being measures</a> and <a href="https://www.budget.govt.nz/budget/2019/wellbeing/investing-nz/initiatives-keeping-new-zealand-secure.htm">six focal areas to justify investment</a>. Transforming the economy and society towards environmental sustainability is one of them. </p>
<p>The recently released <a href="https://www.mfe.govt.nz/environment-aotearoa-2019">state of the environment report</a> highlighted deep concerns about trends in biodiversity conservation, greenhouse gas emissions and freshwater health. Budget 2019 signals a meaningful shift, but more in intention than sufficient funding.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/nz-has-dethroned-gdp-as-a-measure-of-success-but-will-arderns-government-be-transformational-118262">NZ has dethroned GDP as a measure of success, but will Ardern's government be transformational?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Two tactics for delivery</h2>
<p>Two very different tactics are at play in the well-being budget, and both can be seen in areas related to the environment. First, in conservation, government officials know where support is needed and can use the budget to address historic underinvestment. </p>
<p>Where the path for delivery isn’t clear, the government has budgeted a minimum credible investment over four years and is working through the complexity of directing that investment. This second tactic dominates climate change, freshwater, and their convergence in sustainable land use. </p>
<p>To better understand how these tactics play out, it helps to look at the way information is presented in New Zealand’s budgets, which are seen as a <a href="http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1802/S00246/new-zealand-1-least-corrupt-public-sector-in-the-world.htm">model for transparency</a>. Announcements describe investment of new money, typically over four years, but not necessarily how the money will be spread out across the years. More detailed information that appears with the budget helps to clarify when spending will occur, as well as whether spending will really happen. </p>
<p>A budget includes main estimates, estimated actuals and actuals, listed over three years. These reveal useful insights, including a persistent pattern through the past decade of underspending compared to what was announced in budgets. </p>
<h2>Conservation spending</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://treasury.govt.nz/publications/estimates/vote-conservation-environment-sector-estimates-2019-2020">conservation budget</a> provides a typical example, showing how significant the signalled increases in funding will be. Expenditure increases from steady budget estimates of less than NZ$450 million from 2008 to 2018 to NZ$600 million in 2020.</p>
<p>But from 2010 through to 2016, there was a persistent pattern of underspending by NZ$30–49 million each year, relative to the budget announcements. The pattern ended after becoming <a href="https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/305139/doc-funding-cut-by-$40m-independent-expert">controversial</a>, but resulted in a cumulative underinvestment of NZ$275 million, which the latest budget aims to redress.</p>
<iframe title="Conservation spending " aria-label="Interactive line chart" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/MEIjU/1/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border: none;" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<p>Budget 2019 also highlights major investments in <a href="https://treasury.govt.nz/publications/estimates/vote-agriculture-biosecurity-fisheries-and-food-safety-primary-sector-estimates-2019-2020">biosecurity</a>. By 2020, this budget will be nearly double the NZ$205 million spent in 2017. Historically, funding for biosecurity has been stable but low compared to the benefits of maintaining New Zealand’s natural isolation from pests and disease. Such benefits are hard to measure until they are lost following an incursion of a new pest or disease. </p>
<p>Several such cases are a main driver of increased funding for biosecurity, including <a href="https://www.mpi.govt.nz/protection-and-response/mycoplasma-bovis/what-is-mycoplasma-bovis/">Mycoplasma bovis infecting cattle</a> throughout much of New Zealand, the arrival of <a href="https://www.mpi.govt.nz/protection-and-response/responding/alerts/myrtle-rust">myrtle rust</a> and the disease-causing <a href="https://www.kauridieback.co.nz/">Kauri dieback</a>. </p>
<h2>Climate change and freshwater</h2>
<p>The budget includes a sustainable land use package of NZ$229 million over four years, including several components. It addresses the mounting <a href="https://www.mfe.govt.nz/environment-aotearoa-2019">environmental challenges</a> facing agriculture. The sector generates excess nutrient flows to iconic lakes and rivers, and roughly half of New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/new-zealands-urban-freshwater-is-improving-but-a-major-report-reveals-huge-gaps-in-our-knowledge-115695">New Zealand’s urban freshwater is improving, but a major report reveals huge gaps in our knowledge</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The government has committed to <a href="https://www.budget.govt.nz/budget/2019/wellbeing/transforming-economy/index.htm">transforming the economy toward sustainability</a>, but the budget signals only the broad direction of investment. One clear signal in the budget is an end to government subsidies for intensifying agriculture, confirming last year’s decision to end support for <a href="https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/government-wind-down-irrigation-funding-while-honouring-existing-commitments">large irrigation projects</a>, on which the previous government spent NZ$13 million in 2017. </p>
<p>But most components in the new package will not reach full funding levels until the 2021 financial year. The amounts of funding signal a credible start, but are unlikely to be enough. On an annual basis, the new package is only about 0.14% of the <a href="https://www.mpi.govt.nz/news-and-resources/open-data-and-forecasting/situation-and-outlook-for-primary-industries-data/">NZ$40 billion value of land-based primary sector exports</a>.</p>
<p>Past budgets show that complex expenditure that depends on further planning, reorganisation or new structures is often delayed beyond initial projections. This applies to this budget, too. A major <a href="https://www.mfe.govt.nz/fresh-water/cross-government-water-taskforce">freshwater taskforce</a> is now underway but was delayed from its original plan, which means its work is not reflected in this budget. <a href="https://www.pce.parliament.nz/publications/overseer-and-regulatory-oversight-models-uncertainty-and-cleaning-up-our-waterways">Reform</a> of the software platform that links farm management to environmental regulations will receive NZ$30.5 million, but there are no clear objectives.</p>
<p>Overall, spending with an environmental classification increased 40% from NZ$0.92 billion in 2017 to NZ$1.28 billion last year. However, with a decrease to NZ$1.17 billion estimated for this year, it may make sense to ask whether the projected increase to NZ$1.55 billion for 2020 will be achieved. </p>
<iframe title="Climate change spending " aria-label="Interactive line chart" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/VQs20/1/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border: none;" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<p>To understand the challenges of funding complex environmental issues, we can look to the history of items in the budget – officially called appropriations – containing the words climate change. Budget projections went as high as NZ$64 million to be spent in 2009. But actual spending peaked at NZ$49 million in 2010. This spending bottomed out under NZ$12 million in 2014, and is estimated to be NZ$30 million this year. Estimated expenditure for 2020 exceeds the 2009–10 peak for the first time, at nearly NZ$70 million. </p>
<p>Estimates overshot actual spending by an average of NZ$7 million each year from 2010 through 2018. It makes sense to assume this signals a backlog of work to figure out what needs to be done on climate change issues. </p>
<p>Overall, for science and the environment, a first glance suggests this is hardly a “year of delivery”. Despite a <a href="https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2019/05/30/612559/budget-long-on-rhetoric-and-short-on-transformative-funding">focus on transformation</a> in six areas of spending, including natural and social capital rather than GDP, the budget kicks any real plans for change down the road. But it prioritised achievable goals fairly well, given the big constraints posed by past underinvestment combined with a political commitment to <a href="https://treasury.govt.nz/information-and-services/financial-management-and-advice/fiscal-strategy">fiscal responsibility</a>. </p>
<p>If the budget succeeds in delivering for New Zealand’s environment, it will be by spending wisely to reverse past underinvestment in specific areas and ensuring that degradation stops and reverses in the relevant areas of environmental well-being. Success can only come through the latter, if groups like the <a href="https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/landmark-climate-change-bill-goes-parliament">climate change commission</a> and freshwater task force forge clear paths through the political constraints that will guide investment in future budgets.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/118109/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Troy Baisden receives funding from Te Pūnaha Matatini Centre of Research Excellence, New Zealand's Endeavour Fund, and as the Bay of Plenty Regional Council Chair in Lake and Freshwater Science.</span></em></p>A recent report on the state of New Zealand’s environment painted a bleak picture of species losses and freshwater pollution. Budget 2019 signals a shift, but more in intention than sufficient funding.Troy Baisden, Professor and Chair in Lake and Freshwater Sciences, University of WaikatoLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1173172019-05-20T19:55:08Z2019-05-20T19:55:08ZTurning methane into carbon dioxide could help us fight climate change<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/275352/original/file-20190520-69186-19p6jdr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">It's not cows' fault they fart, but the methane they produce is warming the planet.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Robert Bye/Unsplash</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Discussions on how to address climate change have focused, very appropriately, on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, particularly those of carbon dioxide, the major contributor to climate change and a long-lived greenhouse gas. Reducing emissions should remain the paramount climate goal.</p>
<p>However, greenhouse gas emissions have been increasing now for two centuries. Damage to the atmosphere is already profound enough that reducing emissions alone won’t be enough to avoid effects like extreme weather and changing weather patterns. </p>
<p>In a paper published today in <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0299-x">Nature Sustainability</a>, we propose a new technique to clean the atmosphere of the second most powerful greenhouse gas people produce: methane. The technique could restore the concentration of methane to levels found before the Industrial Revolution, and in doing so, reduce global warming by one-sixth.</p>
<p>Our new technique sounds paradoxical at first: turning methane into carbon dioxide. It’s a concept at this stage, and won’t be cheap, but it would add to the tool kit needed to tackle climate change.</p>
<h2>The methane menace</h2>
<p>After carbon dioxide, methane is the second most important greenhouse gas leading to human-induced climate change. Methane <a href="https://theconversation.com/methane-is-a-potent-pollutant-lets-keep-it-out-of-the-atmosphere-103055">packs a climate punch</a>: it is 84 times more powerful than carbon dioxide in warming the planet over the first 20 years of its molecular life.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/methane-is-a-potent-pollutant-lets-keep-it-out-of-the-atmosphere-103055">Methane is a potent pollutant – let's keep it out of the atmosphere</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><a href="https://www.globalcarbonproject.org/methanebudget/">Methane emissions</a> from human activities are now larger than all natural sources combined. Agriculture and energy production generate most of them, including emissions from cattle, rice paddies and oil and gas wells.</p>
<p>The result is methane concentrations in the atmosphere have increased by 150% from pre-industrial times, and continue to grow. Finding ways to reduce or remove methane will therefore have an outsize and fast-acting effect in the fight against climate change.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/275104/original/file-20190517-69199-o9wzu1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/275104/original/file-20190517-69199-o9wzu1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/275104/original/file-20190517-69199-o9wzu1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=360&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/275104/original/file-20190517-69199-o9wzu1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=360&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/275104/original/file-20190517-69199-o9wzu1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=360&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/275104/original/file-20190517-69199-o9wzu1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/275104/original/file-20190517-69199-o9wzu1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/275104/original/file-20190517-69199-o9wzu1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/en/CH4-emissions">Global Carbon Atlas</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What we propose</h2>
<p>The single biggest challenge for removing methane from the atmosphere is its low concentration, only about 2 parts per million. In contrast, carbon dioxide is now at <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2019/05/12/co2-in-the-atmosphere-just-exceeded-415-parts-per-million-for-the-first-time-in-human-history/">415 parts per million</a>, roughly 200 times higher. Both gases are much more diluted in air than when found in the exhaust of a car or in a cow’s burp, and both would be better served by keeping them out of the atmosphere to start with.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, emissions continue. What if we could capture the methane after its release and convert it into something less damaging to climate? </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-a-pre-industrial-climate-and-why-does-it-matter-78601">What is a pre-industrial climate and why does it matter?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>That is why our paper proposes removing all methane in the atmosphere produced by human activities – by oxidising it to carbon dioxide. Such an approach has not been proposed before: previously, all removal techniques have only been applied to carbon dioxide.</p>
<p>This is the equivalent of turning 3.2 billion tonnes of methane into 8.2 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide (equivalent to several months of global emissions). The surprising aspect to this trade is that it would reduce global warming by 15%, because methane is so much more warming than carbon dioxide. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/275105/original/file-20190517-69189-1gtapaf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/275105/original/file-20190517-69189-1gtapaf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/275105/original/file-20190517-69189-1gtapaf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/275105/original/file-20190517-69189-1gtapaf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/275105/original/file-20190517-69189-1gtapaf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/275105/original/file-20190517-69189-1gtapaf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/275105/original/file-20190517-69189-1gtapaf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Proposed industrial array to oxidise methane to carbon dioxide.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Jackson et al. 2019 Nature Sustainability</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This reaction yields energy rather than requires it. It does require a catalyst, though, such as a metal, that converts methane from the air and turns it into carbon dioxide.</p>
<p>One fit-for-purpose family of catalysts are zeolites. They are crystalline materials that consist of aluminum, silicon and oxygen, with a very porous molecular structure that can act as a sponge to soak up methane. </p>
<p>They are well known to industrial researchers trying to oxidise methane to methanol, a valuable chemical feedstock.</p>
<p>We envision arrays of electric fans powered by renewable energy to force large volumes of air into chambers, where the catalyst is exposed to air. The catalyst is then heated in oxygen to form and release CO₂. Such arrays of fans could be placed anywhere where renewable energy – and enough space – is available. </p>
<p>We calculate that with removal costs per tonne of CO₂ rising quickly from US$50 to US$500 or more this century, consistent with mitigation scenarios that keep global warming below 2°C, this technique could be economically feasible and even profitable.</p>
<p>We won’t know for sure, though, until future research highlights the precise chemistry and industrial infrastructure needed.</p>
<p>Beyond the clean-up we propose here, methane removal and atmospheric restoration could be an extra tool in humanity’s belt as we aim for stringent climate targets, while providing new economic opportunities.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-methane-should-be-treated-differently-compared-to-long-lived-greenhouse-gases-97845">Why methane should be treated differently compared to long-lived greenhouse gases</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Future research and development will determine the technical and economic feasibility of methane removal. Even if successful, methane- and other carbon-removal technologies are no substitute for strong and rapid emissions reductions if we are to avoid the worst impacts of global warming.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/117317/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Pep Canadell receives funding from the National Environmental Science Program in Australia and from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation in the USA.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rob Jackson receives methane-related funding from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and the California Energy Commission. </span></em></p>Removing human-related methane from the atmosphere could reduce global warming by 15%.Pep Canadell, Chief research scientist, CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere; and Executive Director, Global Carbon Project, CSIRORob Jackson, Chair, Department of Earth System Science, and Chair of the Global Carbon Project, globalcarbonproject.org, Stanford UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1167062019-05-10T12:44:13Z2019-05-10T12:44:13ZWales’s past was in coal but its future is in carbon farming<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/273795/original/file-20190510-183080-h5pe4s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/sheep-on-mountain-south-wales-159339512?src=LKhXky-93RR2u4PtITC23A-1-15">Thomas Jeffries/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>A <a href="https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/net-zero-the-uks-contribution-to-stopping-global-warming/">new report</a> from the Committee on Climate Change has outlined how the UK should – and could – reduce its carbon emissions to net zero by 2050. While an ambitious target in itself, the commission predicts Scotland can meet it a little earlier, by 2045, while England will hit the target on time. Wales, however, has only been set a goal of 95% reduction by 2050.</p>
<p>Coming just days after <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-48093720">Wales declared a climate emergency</a>, the reduced goal has been <a href="https://gov.wales/written-statement-committee-climate-change-advice-long-term-emissions-target">met with understanding</a> from the Welsh government – but why is it that the committee believes Wales cannot meet net zero? With wind power now cheaper than fossil fuel sources, polluting coal and gas fired power stations will not be replaced in Wales, meaning that the electricity sector should be relatively straightforward to decarbonise. </p>
<p>However, the accompanying analysis notes that Wales has relatively little capacity for carbon capture and storage, to take carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and trap it underground. Progress in other areas has been slow too. The report states that less than 5% of the energy used for heating buildings comes from low-carbon sources across the UK, and less than 0.5% of the miles driven are in low-carbon vehicles. But the reduced target is not because of these areas alone – it is mainly due to the fact that the agricultural industry will be difficult to decarbonise. </p>
<h2>Farmers’ burden</h2>
<p>Some <a href="https://gweddill.gov.wales/statistics-and-research/survey-agricultural-horticulture/?lang=en">90% of the land</a> in Wales is in the hands of
“<a href="https://gov.wales/sites/default/files/consultations/2018-07/brexit-and-our-land-consultation-document_0.pdf">farmers, foresters or other stewards of the landscape</a>”. Climate, soil quality and landscape make the country relatively unsuited to arable agriculture, so the industry is dominated by cattle and sheep, which produce the potent greenhouse gas methane as part of their digestive process. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-climate-change-will-affect-dairy-cows-and-milk-production-in-the-uk-new-study-101843">How climate change will affect dairy cows and milk production in the UK – new study</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>From a farmer’s perspective, it might seem that agriculture is being asked to shoulder a large burden of emission reductions compared to other sectors. But looking at the detail, the report suggests almost the opposite. It recognises that agriculture is particularly hard to decarbonise but, the problem is that given the measures proposed for other sectors, the committee’s figures show agriculture will go from its current position as one of the UK’s lower emission sectors to a major emitter by 2050. </p>
<iframe title="2050 emissions by sector in the UK." aria-label="Stacked Column Chart" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/eYKuX/3/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="569"></iframe>
<p>Livestock farming is the lifeblood of the rural economy in Wales, with enormous cultural and historical significance. The <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/society/2005/mar/04/communities.business">economic collapse</a> that followed the closure of coal mines in the South Wales valleys is a lesson in how not to change the status quo. Unemployment is still high in this area decades afterwards. The question then is how Welsh farming can respond to changes in consumer demand and climate change without damaging the economy.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/carbon-farming-how-agriculture-can-both-feed-people-and-fight-climate-change-111593">Carbon farming: how agriculture can both feed people and fight climate change</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The committee’s recommendations include a reduction of between 20% and 50% in beef, lamb and dairy consumption. It notes that even this target would still mean we will be eating more of these foods than recommended in healthy eating guidelines. In order for these dietary shifts to reduce emissions in practice, farmers will need to produce less livestock rather than simply export any excess. This means that <a href="http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/science-and-technology-committee/technologies-for-meeting-clean-growth-emissions-reduction-targets/oral/101230.html">redesigning agricultural support payments</a> will be an essential component of any change.</p>
<h2>From coal to carbon</h2>
<p>Work by our colleagues in Aberystwyth has led to <a href="https://impact.ref.ac.uk/casestudies/CaseStudy.aspx?Id=42089">incremental improvements</a> in the efficiency of ruminant agriculture via grassland improvement and animal breeding. For example, reseeding pasture with high sugar grass increases milk production in dairy cattle and weight gain in both beef and sheep, and reduces negative environmental impacts. These grass varieties now account for almost a third of perennial rye grass seed sales across Wales, as farmers improve their land. </p>
<p>However, livestock efficiency gains alone are unlikely to be sufficient, so by 2050 Wales will need to be farming differently. The committee’s report suggests that a fifth of agricultural land will need to be used for other purposes, such as growing <a href="https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/biomass-in-a-low-carbon-economy/">bioenergy crops</a>, which can be burned to generate electricity, and forestry that can <a href="https://www.iwa.wales/click/2018/02/wales-needs-trees-arent-planting/">sequester carbon</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/agroforestry-can-help-the-uk-meet-climate-change-commitments-without-cutting-livestock-numbers-108395">Agroforestry can help the UK meet climate change commitments without cutting livestock numbers</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The day-to-day practicalities of farming for carbon are not the same as farming for food, but turning over 20% of a farm to a different purpose does not need to spell the end of a culture or a way of life. By 2050 Wales can have a bio-economy, one based on natural resources rather than fossil fuels. Other industries that are reliant on fossil fuels will also need to change; plastics can already be made from <a href="https://www.wrap.org.uk/content/understanding-plastic-packaging-pdf">plants instead of oil</a>, and the construction industry is increasingly turning to <a href="https://www.arup.com/perspectives/publications/research/section/rethinking-timber-buildings">timber engineering</a> to reduce its reliance on concrete. These changes will create demand for plant feedstocks that Welsh farmers will be well placed to provide. </p>
<p>Reaching the 95% emission target by 2050 is ambitious but achievable. For Wales to reach net zero, sacrifices will need to be made, both by industry and the public. As a nation, Wales is blessed with natural resources — they are not in short supply. Farmers are key to realising this opportunity. While the recent history of Wales was built on coal, its future will be built on the bio-economy.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/imagine-newsletter-researchers-think-of-a-world-with-climate-action-113443?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKengagement&utm_content=Imagineheader1116706">Click here to subscribe to our climate action newsletter. Climate change is inevitable. Our response to it isn’t.</a></em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/116706/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Judith Thornton works for Aberystwyth University, on the BEACON project. BEACON is funded through the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) by the Welsh European Funding Office (WEFO), part of the Welsh Government, under the Convergence programme for West Wales and the Valleys. She has an interest in low carbon building materials and bioenergy crops.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Iain Donnison works for Aberystwyth University and receives research funding principally from the Biotechnology & Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) for projects including a Core Strategic Programme in Resilient Crops, and the Supergen Bioenergy Hub, and also the Welsh European Funding Office for the BEACON Biorefing Centre through European Regional Development funds. He was a member of the external advisory group for the Climate Change Committee's Report on Bioenergy. </span></em></p>To hit emissions targets, Wales will need to drastically reassess how 90% of its landscape is used.Judith Thornton, Low Carbon Manager (BEACON), Aberystwyth UniversityIain Donnison, Professor of Biological Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1167242019-05-08T20:12:11Z2019-05-08T20:12:11ZNZ introduces groundbreaking zero carbon bill, including targets for agricultural methane<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/273277/original/file-20190508-183083-12mudi2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=145%2C179%2C7318%2C4800&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Agriculture – including methane from cows and sheep – currently contributes almost half of New Zealand's greenhouse emissions.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">from www.shutterstock.com</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>New Zealand’s long-awaited <a href="https://www.mfe.govt.nz/climate-change/zero-carbon-amendment-bill">zero carbon bill</a> will create sweeping changes to the management of emissions, setting a global benchmark with ambitious reduction targets for all major greenhouse gases.</p>
<p>The bill includes two separate targets – one for the long-lived greenhouse gases carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide, and another target specifically for biogenic methane, produced by livestock and landfill waste.</p>
<p>Launching the bill, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Carbon dioxide is the most important thing we need to tackle – that’s why we’ve taken a net zero carbon approach. Agriculture is incredibly important to New Zealand, but it also needs to be part of the solution. That is why we have listened to the science and also heard the industry and created a specific target for biogenic methane.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The <a href="https://www.mfe.govt.nz/climate-change/zero-carbon-amendment-bill">Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill</a> will:</p>
<ul>
<li>Create a target of reducing all greenhouse gases, except biogenic methane, to net zero by 2050</li>
<li>Create a separate target to reduce emissions of biogenic methane by 10% by 2030, and 24-47% by 2050 (relative to 2017 levels) </li>
<li>Establish a new, independent climate commission to provide emissions budgets, expert advice, and monitoring to help keep successive governments on track</li>
<li>Require government to implement policies for climate change risk assessment, a national adaptation plan, and progress reporting on implementation of the plan.</li>
</ul>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-change-is-hitting-hard-across-new-zealand-official-report-finds-115661">Climate change is hitting hard across New Zealand, official report finds</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Bringing in agriculture</h2>
<p>Preparing the bill has been a lengthy process. The government was committed to working with its coalition partners and also with the opposition National Party, to ensure the bill’s long-term viability. A consultation process in 2018 yielded 15,000 submissions, more than <a href="https://www.mfe.govt.nz/node/24401">90% of which</a> asked for an advisory, independent climate commission, provision for adapting to the effects of climate change and a target of net zero by 2050 for all gasses. </p>
<p>Throughout this period there has been discussion of the role and responsibility of agriculture, which <a href="http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/climate-change/new-zealands-greenhouse-gas-inventory-1990-2017">contributes 48% of New Zealand’s total greenhouse gas emissions</a>. This is an important issue not just for New Zealand and all agricultural nations, but for world food supply. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/273276/original/file-20190508-183112-f5jfsv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/273276/original/file-20190508-183112-f5jfsv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=642&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/273276/original/file-20190508-183112-f5jfsv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=642&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/273276/original/file-20190508-183112-f5jfsv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=642&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/273276/original/file-20190508-183112-f5jfsv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=807&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/273276/original/file-20190508-183112-f5jfsv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=807&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/273276/original/file-20190508-183112-f5jfsv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=807&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Ministry for the Environment</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Another critical question involved forestry. Pathways to net zero involve planting a lot of trees, but this is a short-term solution with only partly understood consequences. Recently, the <a href="https://www.pce.parliament.nz/">Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment</a> suggested an approach in which forestry could <a href="https://www.pce.parliament.nz/our-work/news-insights/media-release-climate-policy-needs-a-landscape-approach">offset only agricultural, non-fossil emissions</a>. </p>
<p>Now we know how the government has threaded its way between these difficult choices.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/nzs-environmental-watchdog-challenges-climate-policy-on-farm-emissions-and-forestry-offsets-114281">NZ's environmental watchdog challenges climate policy on farm emissions and forestry offsets</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Separate targets for different gases</h2>
<p>In signing the <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement">Paris Agreement</a>, New Zealand agreed to hold the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C and to make efforts to limit it to 1.5°C. The bill is guided by the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (<a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/">IPCC</a>) <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2018/07/SR15_SPM_version_stand_alone_LR.pdf">report</a>, which details three pathways to limit warming to 1.5°C. All of them involve significant reductions in agricultural methane (by 23%-69% by 2050). </p>
<p>Farmers will be pleased with the “two baskets” approach, in which biogenic methane is treated differently from other gasses. But the bill does require total biogenic emissions to fall. They cannot be offset by planting trees. The climate commission, once established, and the minister will have to come up with policies that actually reduce emissions. </p>
<p>In the short term, that will likely involve decisions about livestock stocking rates: retiring the least profitable sheep and beef farms, and improving efficiency in the dairy industry with fewer animals but increased productivity on the remaining land. Longer term options include methane inhibitors, selective breeding, and a possible methane vaccine. </p>
<h2>Ambitious net zero target</h2>
<p>Net zero by 2050 on all other gasses, including offsetting by forestry, is still an ambitious target. New Zealand’s emissions <a href="https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12221417">rose sharply in 2017</a> and effective mechanisms to phase out fossil fuels are not yet in place. It is likely that with <a href="https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12142444">protests</a> in Auckland over a local 10 cents a litre fuel tax – albeit brought in to fund public transport and not as a carbon tax per se – the government may be feeling they have to tread delicately here. </p>
<p>But the bill requires real action. The first carbon budget will cover 2022-2025. Work to strengthen New Zealand’s <a href="http://www.mfe.govt.nz/ets">Emissions Trading Scheme</a> is already underway and will likely involve a falling cap on emissions that will raise the carbon price, currently capped at NZ$25.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-nzs-emissions-trading-scheme-should-have-an-auction-reserve-price-102984">Why NZ's emissions trading scheme should have an auction reserve price</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In initial reaction to the bill, the <a href="http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1905/S00072/national-welcomes-climate-change-commission.htm">National Party</a> welcomed all aspects of it except the 24-47% reduction target for methane, which they believe should have been left to the climate commission. Coalition partner <a href="http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1905/S00071/winston-peters-press-release-on-climate-change-announcement.htm">New Zealand First</a> is talking up their contribution and how they had the agriculture sector’s interests at heart.</p>
<p>While climate activist groups welcomed the bill, <a href="http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1905/S00097/toothless-zero-carbon-bill-has-bark-but-no-bite.htm">Greenpeace</a> criticised the bill for not being legally enforceable and described the 10% cut in methane as “miserly”. The youth action group <a href="http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1905/S00096/generation-zero-celebrates-zero-carbon-act-announcement.htm">Generation Zero</a>, one of the first to call for zero carbon legislation, is understandably delighted. Even so, they say the law does not match the urgency of the crisis. And it’s true that since the bill was first mooted, we have seen a stronger sense of urgency, from the <a href="https://rebellion.earth/international-rebellion/">Extinction Rebellion</a> to <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWsM9-_zrKo">Greta Thunberg</a> to the UK parliament’s declaration of a climate emergency.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/uk-becomes-first-country-to-declare-a-climate-emergency-116428">UK becomes first country to declare a 'climate emergency'</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>New Zealand’s bill is a pioneering effort to respond in detail to the 1.5ºC target and to base a national plan around the science reported by the IPCC. </p>
<p>Many other countries are in the process of setting and strengthening targets. Ireland’s Parliamentary Joint Committee on Climate recently <a href="https://data.oireachtas.ie/ie/oireachtas/committee/dail/32/joint_committee_on_climate_action/reports/2019/2019-03-28_report-climate-change-a-cross-party-consensus-for-action_en.pdf">recommended</a> adopting a target of net zero for all gasses by 2050. <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-48123960">Scotland</a> will strengthen its target to net zero carbon dioxide and methane by 2040 and net zero all gasses by 2045. Less than a week after this announcement, the Scottish government <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-48191110">dropped</a> plans to cut air departure fees (<a href="https://greens.scot/sites/default/files/Air%20Departure%20Tax%20report%20for%20Green%20MSPs.pdf">currently</a> £13 for short and £78 for long flights, and double for business class). </p>
<p>One country that has set a specific goals for agricultural methane is Uruguay, with a <a href="http://ccacoalition.org/en/news/uruguays-minister-agriculture-tackling-enteric-methane">target</a> of reducing emissions per kilogram of beef by 33%-46% by 2030. In the countries mentioned above, not so different from New Zealand, agriculture produces 35%, 23%, and 55% of emissions, respectively.</p>
<p>New Zealand has learned from processes that have worked elsewhere, notably the UK’s Climate Change Commission, which attempts to balance science, public involvement and the sovereignty of parliament. Perhaps our present experience in balancing the demands of different interest groups and economic sectors, with diverse mitigation opportunities and costs, can now help others.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/116724/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robert McLachlan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>New Zealand’s government has released a bill that sets targets to bring long-lived greenhouse gases to net zero by 2050 and reduce emissions of the shorter-lived methane by 10% within a decade.Robert McLachlan, Professor in Applied Mathematics, Massey UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1156612019-04-18T02:25:57Z2019-04-18T02:25:57ZClimate change is hitting hard across New Zealand, official report finds<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/269904/original/file-20190418-139088-13sw1xb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=124%2C178%2C5052%2C3267&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Finance minister Grant Robertson (left) and climate minister James Shaw address school children during a climate protest, promising that New Zealand will introduce zero carbon legislation this year. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Boris Jancic</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The major focus on climate change in <a href="http://www.mfe.govt.nz/environment-aotearoa-2019">Environment Aotearoa 2019</a>, a stocktake on New Zealand’s environment <a href="http://www.mfe.govt.nz/news-events/new-report-signals-nine-top-environmental-issues-facing-new-zealand">released today</a>, is a welcome change.</p>
<p>The report describes an environment that faces <a href="http://www.mfe.govt.nz/news-events/new-report-signals-nine-top-environmental-issues-facing-new-zealand">serious pressures</a>, including species at risk of extinction, polluted rivers and streams, the loss of productive land as cities expand, and climate change. </p>
<p>On climate change, the report is more detailed and hard-hitting than <a href="http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/environmental-reporting/environment-aotearoa-2015">past</a> <a href="http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/environmental-reporting/environment-new-zealand-2007">reports</a> have been.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/new-zealands-urban-freshwater-is-improving-but-a-major-report-reveals-huge-gaps-in-our-knowledge-115695">New Zealand’s urban freshwater is improving, but a major report reveals huge gaps in our knowledge</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>New Zealand’s global share of emissions</h2>
<p>New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions are high <a href="http://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/media/Environmental%20reporting/environment-aotearoa-2019.pdf#page=94">internationally</a>. In 2015, New Zealanders produced 17.5 tonnes of greenhouse gases (measured as carbon dioxide equivalent) per person, 33% higher than the average of 13.2 tonnes from industrialised countries. </p>
<p>In the <a href="https://emissionstracker.mfe.govt.nz/#NrAMBoEYF12TwCIByBTALo2wBM4eiQDs2AHEltEA">latest figures</a> from 2017, gross emissions <a href="https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12221417">rose 2.2% from 2016</a> and remain 23% above 1990 levels. The immediate causes are clearly stated: high emissions of methane and nitrous oxide from agriculture and sharply rising emissions of carbon dioxide from transport. </p>
<p>The report is silent on the root causes of rising emissions, including ineffective government action and community attitudes that rank <a href="http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/7128-most-important-problems-facing-new-zealand-february-2017-201702271519">climate change as a relatively low priority</a>. Instead it states:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Our high per-person emissions are reversible if we adopt policies, technologies, or other means that reduce our production of greenhouse gases.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But this obscures the story of 30 years of policy work on climate change and 11 years trying to make <a href="http://www.mfe.govt.nz/ets">New Zealand’s Emissions Trading Scheme</a> work.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-nzs-emissions-trading-scheme-should-have-an-auction-reserve-price-102984">Why NZ's emissions trading scheme should have an auction reserve price</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>An earlier <a href="http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/environmental-reporting/environment-aotearoa-2015">report</a> on climate change did not foresee the flood of vehicles entering the country. This has now given New Zealand the highest rate of vehicle ownership in the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264268203-en">OECD</a>. New Zealand has <a href="https://www.transport.govt.nz/mot-resources/vehicle-fleet-statistics/">4.36 million vehicles</a>, up half a million since 2015, but lacks the regulations found in many other countries, such as CO₂-linked registration fees and fuel efficiency standards. With a flood of cheap, high-emission used imports, it is no surprise that New Zealand’s transport emissions continue to rise.</p>
<h2>Known unknowns</h2>
<p>A key function of this latest report is to identify knowledge gaps. An important one for New Zealand is the relative strengths of different carbon sources and sinks, for example by different types of vegetation, soils and agricultural practices. </p>
<p>As emphasised recently by the <a href="https://www.pce.parliament.nz/about-us/the-commissioner">Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment</a>, New Zealand is still focusing too much on <a href="https://www.pce.parliament.nz/publications/farms-forests-and-fossil-fuels-the-next-great-landscape-transformation">plantation forestry as a short-term fix for our emissions problem</a>. It is a risk because it creates a carbon liability for the future, as well as exposure to diseases and fires. Its true environmental impact is not well understood.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-scandal-of-calling-plantations-forest-restoration-is-putting-climate-targets-at-risk-114858">The scandal of calling plantations 'forest restoration' is putting climate targets at risk</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The <a href="http://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/media/Environmental%20reporting/environment-aotearoa-2019.pdf#page=98">section</a> on current climate impacts could not be more clear. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Climate change is already affecting Aotearoa New Zealand. Changes include alteration to temperature, precipitation patterns, sea-level rise, ocean acidity, wind, and sunshine.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>New Zealand’s temperature has increased by 1ºC since 1909. While this is close to the global average, it is less than the <a href="https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/global/time-series/globe/land/ytd/12/1880-2017">global land average</a> which has increased by 1.4ºC. New Zealand is protected to some degree by the Southern Ocean. </p>
<p>Warm days have increased and frosts decreased. Soils have dried, glaciers have melted, sea levels have been rising, the oceans have warmed and acidified, and sunshine hours have increased. No surprises so far. Climate science predicts an increase in extreme rainfall events, but this has not yet been detected statistically. At one-third of the measured sites, extreme wind has decreased, whereas an overall increase in wind is expected. </p>
<h2>New Zealand not immune to climate change</h2>
<p>If anything, the section on current impacts is too conservative. The data stops in 2016 before the epic years of 2017 and 2018, which saw <a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab012a">many extreme weather events</a> of all types. These were linked in part to El Niño, which raises global temperatures, and in part to an extreme <a href="https://theconversation.com/farmed-fish-dying-grape-harvest-weeks-early-just-some-of-the-effects-of-last-summers-heatwave-in-nz-110577">Southern Annular Mode</a>, an indicator whose strengthening is itself linked to climate change. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/farmed-fish-dying-grape-harvest-weeks-early-just-some-of-the-effects-of-last-summers-heatwave-in-nz-110577">Farmed fish dying, grape harvest weeks early – just some of the effects of last summer's heatwave in NZ</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Few New Zealanders will forget the sequence of ex-tropical cyclones, 1-in-100-year floods, the sight of the <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/102181406/our-barren-alps-aerial-survey-shows-snow-loss-incredibly-extreme">Southern Alps without snow</a> or the <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/101276704/port-hills-fires-one-year-on-youd-think-they-would-try-to-help-us-out">Port Hills on fire</a>.</p>
<p>The report’s final <a href="http://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/media/Environmental%20reporting/environment-aotearoa-2019.pdf#page=100">section</a> covers future impacts in the most forceful official statement seen yet. It lays out a blizzard of impacts in all areas of the environment, country, economy and infrastructure, including coastal flooding, erosion, tsunami risk, liquefaction risk and saltwater intrusion.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>All aspects of life in New Zealand will be impacted.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>The way forward</h2>
<p>The uncertainties are clear. We don’t have a clear idea of the rate of future emissions, or the impacts under different emission scenarios. Some of the most important impacts, such as sea-level rise, are also the most uncertain. The report notes that information on cumulative and cascading impacts is limited. Climate change has the capacity to undermine environmental efforts elsewhere.</p>
<p>Polls show a <a href="https://horizonpoll.co.nz/page/504/climate-con">rising awareness of climate change</a> and a <a href="https://www.iag.co.nz/latest-news/articles/IAG-Ipsos-poll-Kiwis-pessimistic-that-we-will-meet-the-challenge-of-climate-change.html">hunger for stronger action</a>. The <a href="https://www.mfe.govt.nz/have-your-say-zero-carbon">Zero Carbon bill</a> is expected to go to select committee before June, but even when passed, emissions will not start falling <a href="https://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2018688375/james-shaw-defends-climate-change-action">until the mid-2020s</a>, with the heavy lifting left to the 2040s and future emission reductions technologies. </p>
<p>A <a href="https://www.productivity.govt.nz/inquiry-content/3254?stage=4">recent report</a> on New Zealand’s transition to a low-emission economy outlines many more immediate actions. Let’s hope that this report, along with the public pressure from the <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/111447430/kids-feel-the-fear-and-march-the-streets">School Strike 4 Climate</a> and <a href="https://extinctionrebellion.nz/">Extinction Rebellion</a> movements, give the government the courage to act decisively.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/115661/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robert McLachlan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The latest report on the state of New Zealand’s environment delivers a forceful official statement on climate change impacts.Robert McLachlan, Professor in Applied Mathematics, Massey UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1097062019-02-27T11:40:57Z2019-02-27T11:40:57ZCultured meat seems gross? It’s much better than animal agriculture<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/261094/original/file-20190226-150688-xe5k35.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">World's first lab-grown beef burger. Would you eat it?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://culturedbeef.org/media-resources/14044">David Parry / PA Wire</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The world is in the grips of a food-tech revolution. One of the most compelling new developments is cultured meat, also known as clean, cell-based or slaughter-free meat. It’s grown from stem cells taken from a live animal without the need for slaughter.</p>
<p>Proponents hail cultured meat as the long-awaited <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/es200130u">solution to the factory farming problem</a>. If commercialized successfully, it could solve many of the environmental, animal welfare and public health issues of animal agriculture while giving consumers exactly what they’re used to eating. </p>
<p>Despite this, <a href="https://theconversation.com/would-you-eat-meat-from-a-lab-consumers-arent-necessarily-sold-on-cultured-meat-100933">the public is</a> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.04.008">uncertain about cultured meat</a>. Scientists and high-profile supporters, <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/23/bill-gates-and-richard-branson-bet-on-lab-grown-meat-startup.html">including investors</a> like Bill Gates and Richard Branson, are pushing for broader adoption, but it’s difficult to sell the public on new food technology – case in point, <a href="https://www.sentienceinstitute.org/gm-foods">genetically modified food</a>.</p>
<p><iframe id="A6BEA" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/A6BEA/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p><a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=SWkOeHoAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">As a moral psychologist</a>, my research explores people’s perceptions of cultured meat, both the good and the bad. Below I discuss some of the top reasons people say they don’t want to eat cultured meat, compiled from <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.04.008">opinion surveys</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.11.013">focus groups</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980015000622">online comments</a>. But I’m optimistic that champions of this new technology can alleviate the public’s concerns, making a convincing case for consumers to embrace cultured meat. </p>
<h2>‘Cultured meat is not necessary’</h2>
<p>While there is <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/animals-farmed/2018/feb/21/animals-farmed-welcome-series-farming-agriculture-environment">increasing awareness</a> of the downsides of factory farming, this knowledge has still not spread to all meat consumers, or at least is not reflected in their purchasing behavior. Factory farming supports what many consider cruel and restrictive practices where animals raised in such farms are subjected to extreme suffering, and estimates suggest that <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1iUpRFOPmAE5IO4hO4PyS4MP_kHzkuM_-soqAyVNQcJc/edit">over 99 percent</a> of U.S. farmed animals live on factory farms.</p>
<p>Animal agriculture <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0229(01)00504-X">is also inefficient</a>. Growing and feeding an entire animal for only part of its body is inevitably less efficient than growing just the parts that you want to eat.</p>
<p>Factory farming <a href="http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/resources/en/publications/tackling_climate_change/index.htm">degrades the environment</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0269-7491(02)00115-X">contaminates local land and water</a>, in addition to emitting around <a href="http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/resources/en/publications/tackling_climate_change/index.htm">14.5 percent of human-induced greenhouse gas emissions</a> worldwide. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2015.302870">use of antibiotics</a> in farming leads to antibiotic resistance, which could have <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10807030490281016">devastating consequences for human health</a> globally. In 2016, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration reported that over 70 percent of medically important drugs were <a href="https://www.fda.gov/downloads/forindustry/userfees/animaldruguserfeeactadufa/ucm588085.pdf">sold for use in animal agriculture</a>.</p>
<p>Some people who believe farmed meat is problematic would prefer a plant-based food system. Despite recent <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/apr/01/vegans-are-coming-millennials-health-climate-change-animal-welfare">hype around veganism</a>, the number of people who don’t eat animal products remains extremely low. Only <a href="https://animalcharityevaluators.org/blog/is-the-percentage-of-vegetarians-and-vegans-in-the-u-s-increasing/">2 to 6 percent of Americans</a> identify as vegetarian or vegan. And only around 1 percent of adults identify as vegetarian and report never eating meat. This figure shows little change since the mid-1990s, despite the ongoing activism of the animal rights and environmental movements.</p>
<p>I’d argue that the plant-based solution to factory farming is not a feasible outcome for the foreseeable future. Cultured meat might be. Individuals can still choose to eat a plant-based diet. But for those who are unwilling to give up meat, they can have their steak and eat it too.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/261131/original/file-20190226-150694-1j3pdfg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/261131/original/file-20190226-150694-1j3pdfg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/261131/original/file-20190226-150694-1j3pdfg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=421&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/261131/original/file-20190226-150694-1j3pdfg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=421&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/261131/original/file-20190226-150694-1j3pdfg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=421&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/261131/original/file-20190226-150694-1j3pdfg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=529&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/261131/original/file-20190226-150694-1j3pdfg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=529&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/261131/original/file-20190226-150694-1j3pdfg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=529&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Farm animals won’t be turned loose to fend for themselves.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Poland-Runaway-Cow/0c47b3576a594c298635b5ccb73750bd/2/0">AP Photo/Maciej Zych</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>‘I’m worried about the animals and farmers’</h2>
<p>Some people express concern about the fate of chickens and cows, imagining them abandoned to die or released into the wild.</p>
<p>The time frame for cultured meat renders this consideration moot. Even by optimistic estimates, large-scale production is <a href="http://cleanmeat.org/#what">likely still</a> <a href="https://www.new-harvest.org/faq#/when_will_cultured_foods_be_commercially_available">several years away</a>. As new processes are adopted, the demand for farm animals will slowly decrease. Fewer animals will be bred, thus the animals at the center of these concerns will never exist.</p>
<p>Many people are also concerned about the negative impact a transition to cultured meat may have on farmers. But this new technology is far from the only threat farmers already face as the industry becomes ever more centralized. <a href="https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/The-Meat-Racket/Christopher-Leonard/9781451645835">Eighty-five percent of beef</a> in the U.S. comes from just four main producers.</p>
<p>In fact, cultured meat provides <a href="https://agfundernews.com/what-do-farmers-think-about-cultured-meat.html">a new industry</a>, with opportunities to grow and process products for use in cellular agriculture. The meat industry can learn a lesson from how taxis lost out to Uber and Lyft; they must adapt to new technologies to survive and thrive. And the industry is already taking steps in this direction – <a href="https://www.tysonfoods.com/">Tyson Foods</a> and <a href="https://www.cargill.com/meat-poultry/cargill-meat-solutions">Cargill Meat Solutions</a>, two of the biggest meat producers in the U.S., <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-29/tyson-joins-bill-gates-cargill-to-invest-in-lab-meat-producer">have made investments</a> in this new future.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/261132/original/file-20190226-150724-1y7uidv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/261132/original/file-20190226-150724-1y7uidv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/261132/original/file-20190226-150724-1y7uidv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/261132/original/file-20190226-150724-1y7uidv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/261132/original/file-20190226-150724-1y7uidv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/261132/original/file-20190226-150724-1y7uidv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/261132/original/file-20190226-150724-1y7uidv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/261132/original/file-20190226-150724-1y7uidv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Cultural norms have a lot to do with whether dog, pig or cultured meat is a delicacy or disgusting.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/North-Korea-Dog-Days/5eec5c55956e48d89d6069f05da43003/1/0">AP Photo/Dita Alangkara</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>‘Cultured meat is disgusting’</h2>
<p>Disgust is a common reaction to cultured meat. It’s difficult to rebut, as it is not an argument per se – disgust is in the eye of the beholder.</p>
<p>However, disgust is often not a good guide for rational decision-making. <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/09/why-we-only-eat-certain-animals/571255/">Cultural differences in meat consumption</a> illustrate this point. Typically, Westerners are happy to eat pigs and cows, but consider <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/33223450/why-the-uk-doesnt-eat-dog-meat-but-people-in-china-do">eating dogs</a> disgusting. But <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/39577557/the-countries-where-people-still-eat-cats-and-dogs-for-dinner">dog meat is consumed</a> in some Asian cultures.</p>
<p>So what is disgusting appears to be somewhat determined by what is normal and accepted in your community. With time, and exposure to cultured meat, it’s possible that these feelings of disgust will disappear.</p>
<h2>‘Cultured meat is unnatural’</h2>
<p>Perhaps the loudest opposition to cultured meat is that it’s unnatural. This argument relies on the premise that natural things are better than unnatural things.</p>
<p>While this outlook is reflected in recent consumer preferences, the <a href="https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/36/Appeal-to-Nature">argument is fallacious</a>. Some natural things are good. However, there are many things that are unnatural that are fundamental to our society: glasses, motorized transport, the internet. Why single out cultured meat?</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/261135/original/file-20190226-150694-pvzlf8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/261135/original/file-20190226-150694-pvzlf8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/261135/original/file-20190226-150694-pvzlf8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=542&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/261135/original/file-20190226-150694-pvzlf8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=542&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/261135/original/file-20190226-150694-pvzlf8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=542&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/261135/original/file-20190226-150694-pvzlf8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=681&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/261135/original/file-20190226-150694-pvzlf8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=681&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/261135/original/file-20190226-150694-pvzlf8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=681&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A preference for natural foods might be a proxy for things that do matter.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/natural-ingredients-stamp-230917213">Arcady/Shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Perhaps the argument is only applicable to food – natural food is better. But “natural” food is a myth; almost all the food you buy is <a href="https://theconversation.com/all-our-food-is-genetically-modified-in-some-way-where-do-you-draw-the-line-56256">modified in some way</a>. Moreover, I’d argue the overuse of antibiotics in conventional meat and other practices of modern animal agriculture – including the selective breeding used to produce modern farmed animals – throws it into the same unnatural category.</p>
<p>Of course, naturalness can be a proxy for things that really do matter in food: safety, sustainability, animal welfare. But cultured meat <a href="https://www.beaconbroadside.com/broadside/2018/11/cultured-meat-is-natural-in-all-the-ways-that-matter.html">fares far better</a> than conventional meat on those metrics. If we dismiss cultured meat on the grounds of being unnatural then, to be consistent, we must also dismiss a vast number of other products that make modern lives better and easier. </p>
<p>It’s early days, but a number of companies are working to bring cultured meat to the table. As consumers, we have both the right and obligation to be informed about which products we choose to eat. Yes, we should be cautious with any new technology. But in my opinion, the objections to cultured meat can’t hold a candle to the potential benefits for humans, animals and the planet.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/109706/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Matti Wilks does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Surveys suggest fewer than half of Americans are looking forward to lab-grown meat. A moral psychologist examines common objections and why for the most part they’re not logical.Matti Wilks, Postdoctoral Research Associate in Psychology, Yale UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1097122019-02-14T22:14:54Z2019-02-14T22:14:54ZHow to fight climate change in agriculture while protecting jobs<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259138/original/file-20190214-1745-xi3jh1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Agriculture is a unique sector for a just transition.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Agriculture has become a carbon-intensive endeavour. Crop, livestock and fossil fuel use in agriculture <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg3/">account for about 25 per cent of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions</a>. </p>
<p>At the same time, more than <a href="http://www.fao.org/save-food/news-and-multimedia/news/newsdetails/ru/c/429182/">800 million people around the world are hungry and two billion are overweight or obese</a>. About 30 per cent of food is <a href="http://www.fao.org/save-food/en/">lost or wasted</a>, and yet we <a href="http://www.fao.org/nr/solaw/main-messages/en/">need 70 per cent more food</a> to feed 10 billion people by 2050. </p>
<p>If we produce more food, in the same ways we have been, GHGs from agriculture will only rise. To introduce further complexity, the agriculture sector must reduce 20 to 30 per cent of its emissions to meet the <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement">Paris Agreement’s goal</a> of keeping the average increase in global temperature 2°C below the pre-industrial levels.</p>
<p>Already, climate change disproportionately affects vulnerable people across the world. For example, the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2014.942022">people living in the Karnali mountains of the Himalayas, have experienced famine for the past six decades</a>. Although they don’t contribute much to global GHG emissions, they bear the unfair burden of extreme droughts and floods, later rain in lower altitudes and reduced snow in the mountains. <a href="https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2F978-3-319-92288-1.pdf">Melting of Himalayan glaciers</a> can disrupt over two billion people’s lives and livelihoods in Asia.</p>
<p>What we need is a “just transition” in agriculture to secure jobs, livelihoods and food for vulnerable people while eliminating emissions from agricultural industries.</p>
<h2>Just transition in action</h2>
<p>World leaders have recently agreed to the principle of just transition when they adopted <a href="https://cop24.gov.pl/presidency/initiatives/just-transition-declaration/">the Solidarity and Just Transition Silesia Declaration</a> in Poland in December 2018. And this concept has made headlines across the world. One such example is the U.S. Democrats’ <a href="https://www.dataforprogress.org/green-new-deal/">Green New Deal</a>, which is a climate change spin to the New Deal of the post-Great Depression. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9EmsA7wG2lo?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Just transition explained.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>A just transition doesn’t come from taking either the business-as-usual approach or by shutting down industries without a plan. For example, when Ontario <a href="https://www.ontario.ca/page/end-coal">completed a phase out of all coal-fired power plants in 2014</a>, those in <a href="https://www.opg.com/generating-power/thermal/stations/Pages/stations.aspx">Thunder Bay and Atikokan were retrofitted to run on wood</a> to maintain the local economy and jobs. The just transition of these two plants also facilitated advanced biomass research and innovation. </p>
<h2>Climate action in agriculture</h2>
<p>In agriculture, climate action usually involves one of two approaches: <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcu205">sustainable intensification</a> to increase agricultural yield while maintaining the ecosystem integrity or agroecological farming to restore agriculture’s <a href="https://www.millenniumassessment.org/en/index.html">ecosystem services</a>. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5226894/">Sustainable intensification</a> relies on new mitigation technologies, the use of modern crop varieties, improved animal breeds, digital technologies and the efficient use of water, nutrients and chemicals. For instance, <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/agriculture-agri-food/news/2018/03/government-of-canada-launches-agricultural-clean-technology-program.html">the Canadian government</a> counts on “climate smart” and “precision” technologies to become the global leader of just agricultural transition. While enthusiasm for these new and emerging technologies is understood, caution is warranted to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.01.023">avoid repeating industrial agriculture’s problems</a>. </p>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-015-0424-2">Critics also argue</a> that sustainable intensification focuses too much on food production and not enough on its equitable distribution and responsible consumption. For example, plants may be transformed into biofuel reducing the land available for food production and animals may suffer poor health in factory farms. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.fao.org/agroecology/knowledge/definitions/en/">Agroecology</a> includes a mix of social, economic and environmental goals. It has implications beyond technological innovation and sustainable production, beyond its environmental impacts. </p>
<p>Case studies confirm the optimism that the adoption of agroecological principles and practices would feed the growing population in <a href="https://www.globalagriculture.org/report-topics/about-the-iaastd-report/about-iaastd.html">socially, morally and environmentally responsible ways</a>. For example, Yacouba Sawadogo, a farmer from Burkina Faso, who won <a href="https://www.rightlivelihoodaward.org/media/2018-right-livelihood-award-laureates-announced/">the 2018 Right Livelihood Award</a>, reversed desertification in the Sahel <a href="https://www.rightlivelihoodaward.org/2018-announcement/yacouba-sawadogo/">using ancient farming techniques</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/258015/original/file-20190208-174887-1lp06ov.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/258015/original/file-20190208-174887-1lp06ov.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258015/original/file-20190208-174887-1lp06ov.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258015/original/file-20190208-174887-1lp06ov.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258015/original/file-20190208-174887-1lp06ov.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258015/original/file-20190208-174887-1lp06ov.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258015/original/file-20190208-174887-1lp06ov.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Yacouba Sawadogo, a farmer from northern Burkina Faso, is known as ‘the man who stopped the desert.’</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(The Right Livelihood Award/Handout)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Closer to home, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.09.003">our research in rural Ontario</a> looked at how high-speed internet transformed an off-the-grid family operated agroecological farm. Wind turbines, solar panels and wood meet all their energy needs to produce fruits and vegetables, run a bed and breakfast, publish books and host on-site workshops on lifestyle change. </p>
<p>But agroecology is not critique-free either. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2007.11.010">Organic agriculture</a> is more resource intensive than industrial agriculture. Organic agriculture reduces nitrate leaching and pesticide use, but a 100 per cent conversion to organic requires <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-01410-w">more land than conventional agriculture</a>.</p>
<p>There are overlaps between sustainable agriculture and agroecology, including <a href="http://www.fao.org/climate-smart-agriculture/en/">climate smart agriculture</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14307">conservation agriculture</a>, <a href="https://www.biodynamics.com/what-is-biodynamics">biodynamic agriculture</a>, <a href="https://www.ifoam.bio/en/organic-landmarks/definition-organic-agriculture">organic agriculture</a> and <a href="https://permaculturenews.org/what-is-permaculture/">permaculture</a>. </p>
<p>One example of the overlap is the “<a href="http://sri.ciifad.cornell.edu/">System of Rice Intensification</a>,” which increases yield with lower inputs and lesser environmental damage. Seedlings are planted further apart to allow for robust growth that reduces seed, fertilizer and agrochemical use, and controlled irrigation — instead of conventional flooding — increases water use efficiency and decreases methane emissions. </p>
<h2>Transition agriculture</h2>
<p>If neither sustainable intensification nor agroecological farming alone delivers a just transition, what’s the solution? While the former would continue at least some problems of industrial agriculture, the latter fall short of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.03.001">being adopted into the mainstream</a>. </p>
<p>A more promising solution is to integrate <a href="https://www.doi.org/10.1126/science.1234485">the best approaches from conventional practices, sustainable intensification and agroecological farming, among others</a>. </p>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.07.006">Transition agriculture can learn from specific case studies to reduce or eliminate</a> poverty, unemployment, injustice, labour exploitation, animal suffering and food insecurity. Sustainable intensification or ecological farming reinforces the <a href="https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/?menu=1300">United Nations Sustainable Development Goals</a> of reducing GHG emissions and ending hunger. </p>
<p>Agriculture is a unique sector for a just transition. It is both source of greenhouse gasses as well as a “sink” where crops and soils can capture carbon. We should exploit this feature as leverage in developing local and global strategies for a just agricultural transition.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/109712/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Laxmi Pant receives funding from SSHRC, IDRC, National Science Foundation, and the United Nations. </span></em></p>Agriculture needs to cut its greenhouse gas emissions, yet we must also find a way to produce more food if we are to feed 10 billion people by 2050. A “just transition” could help make that happen.Laxmi Prasad Pant, Adjunct Professor, Associated Graduate Faculty, University of GuelphLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1050072018-11-06T11:42:02Z2018-11-06T11:42:02ZA game plan for technology companies to actually help save the world<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/242837/original/file-20181029-76411-1xzi1i9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Working together, people and technology companies can make a lot of progress.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/saving-world-10199140">Pedro Tavares/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Smartphones, computers and social media platforms have become indispensable parts of modern life, but the technology companies that make them and write their software are under siege. In any given week, <a href="https://www.recode.net/2018/9/28/17915864/facebook-data-breach-mark-zuckerberg-hack-personal-data">Facebook</a> or <a href="https://slate.com/technology/2018/10/google-is-losing-users-trust.html">Google</a> or <a href="https://gizmodo.com/new-documents-show-amazons-face-scanning-tech-for-cops-1830032358">Amazon</a> does something to erode public trust in them. Now could be a moment for the industry to make good on Bill Gates’s promise of technology to do good, by “<a href="https://www.wired.com/2013/11/bill-gates-wired-essay/">unlocking the innate compassion</a> we have for our fellow human beings” and improving the world – or Mark Zuckerberg’s dream of building a “<a href="https://www.facebook.com/notes/mark-zuckerberg/building-global-community/10154544292806634">new social infrastructure</a> to create the world we want for generations to come.”</p>
<p>Around the globe, countries and societies are <a href="https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/files/report/2018/TheSustainableDevelopmentGoalsReport2018.pdf">falling behind</a> on reducing social inequalities and meeting goals for economic development and environmental sustainability. The <a href="http://www.ipcc.ch/">Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change</a> is issuing increasingly dire warnings about the effects climate change will have on human life on Earth – the beginnings of which are already unfolding. </p>
<p>I lead a major research initiative called <a href="https://sites.tufts.edu/digitalplanet/">The Digital Planet</a> at the Fletcher School at Tufts where we study how technology is changing lives and livelihoods around the world. Here is an outline of how technology giants or nimble startups could help make Gates’s and Zuckerberg’s promises a reality.</p>
<h2>Identify a big hairy problem</h2>
<p>There is a long list of global problems to combat, including hunger, drought, poverty, bad health, polluted water and poor sanitation. One that’s connected to all the others is the recent <a href="http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sr15/">bombshell news</a> that climate change is accelerating: Over the next 20 years, Earth’s atmosphere will reach average temperatures as much as 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit above preindustrial levels. Consequently, extreme weather and natural disasters, food shortages, inundated coastlines and the near-elimination of coral reefs will likely happen even sooner than previously anticipated. </p>
<p>The scope of climate change gives <a href="https://theconversation.com/big-tech-isnt-one-big-monopoly-its-5-companies-all-in-different-businesses-92791">companies like Google, Facebook and Amazon</a> excellent opportunities to find specific approaches that would have meaningful effects.</p>
<h2>Trace the root causes</h2>
<p>There are, of course, many elements driving climate change. Consider the agriculture sector, which <a href="https://www.nature.com/news/one-third-of-our-greenhouse-gas-emissions-come-from-agriculture-1.11708">produces one-third</a> of all greenhouse gas emissions. Farms emit the <a href="https://www.nature.com/news/one-third-of-our-greenhouse-gas-emissions-come-from-agriculture-1.11708">largest share</a> and could benefit from a range of technologies, such as data analytics and artificial intelligence. As a bonus, innovating in agriculture could help <a href="https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/files/report/2018/TheSustainableDevelopmentGoalsReport2018.pdf">feed more people</a>. </p>
<h2>Identify how technology can make a big difference</h2>
<p>Technological tools could help farmers collect and use data to <a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2013/10/farmer-innovation-improving-africa%E2%80%99s-food-security-through-land-and-water-management">manage their crops more precisely</a> in ways that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions – such as using less fertilizer and plowing and planting fields more efficiently. Specifically, better data on soil and plant health could help farmers know where they need to increase or decrease irrigation or pesticide and fertilizer use. These practices save farmers money and increase farms’ productivity, generating more food with less waste. </p>
<h2>Recognize how you can make money from it</h2>
<p>If companies are to get involved, there needs to be an opportunity to earn money – and the more, the better. </p>
<p>One estimate suggests that making changes in farming and food practices that enhance productivity, promote sustainable methods and reduce waste could produce <a href="http://report.businesscommission.org/uploads/BetterBiz-BetterWorld_170215_012417.pdf">commercial opportunities and new savings worth US$2.3 trillion</a> overall worldwide annually.</p>
<p><a href="https://sites.tufts.edu/digitalplanet/">Our research team</a>, in work that is ongoing, has estimated that of that $2.3 trillion a year, $250 billion could come from the application of artificial intelligence and other analytics for precision farming alone – $195 billion of which would be in the developing world, with $45.6 billion in South Asia and $13.4 billion in East Africa. Other estimates for the effects of AI and analytics are less specific, but still within the same range – <a href="https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/artificial-intelligence/visualizing-the-uses-and-potential-impact-of-ai-and-other-analytics">between $164 billion and $486 billion</a> annually. There is indeed money to be made by technology companies interested in developing climate-friendly, productivity-improving interventions in agriculture.</p>
<h2>Innovate to overcome the many barriers to change</h2>
<p>Before the commercial value can be unlocked, however, there are many barriers to consider. Many rural areas, even in the developed world, <a href="http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/05/19/digital-gap-between-rural-and-nonrural-america-persists/">don’t have affordable high-speed internet connections</a> and, particularly in the developing world, the farming community is not as technology savvy as other professions. Further, farming practices have been handed down through generations and the idea of using data to make modifications to such long-held beliefs and methods can be countercultural. </p>
<p>In addition, there are many practical realities: <a href="http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/Y3918E/y3918e10.htm">83 percent of the world’s cultivated land</a> is fed only by rain, with no irrigation systems to make use of better data. Beyond that, in most parts of the world, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/feb/02/pioneer-firms-feed-world-agriculture-india-mozambique-profit">seeds and fertilizer are not high-quality</a>, lowering crop efficiency. Further, a lot of <a href="http://www.postharvest.org/home0.aspx">farms’ output is wasted</a> because of lack of refrigeration and slow transportation from fields to consumers.</p>
<p>With all those obstacles, it is understandable that investments in data-driven agriculture <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-big-data-hasnt-yet-made-a-dent-on-farms-1494813720">dropped 39 percent</a> from 2015 to 2016.</p>
<p>There are groups still working, though. <a href="https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/farmbeats-iot-agriculture/">FarmBeats</a> is a Microsoft project that combines low-cost sensors in the ground with drones that both create aerial maps and act as wireless data relay points. Nigeria’s <a href="http://zenvus.com/">Zenvus</a> and India’s <a href="http://www.aibono.com/">Aibono</a> analyze soil data. Kenya’s <a href="https://farmdrive.co.ke/">FarmDrive</a> develops credit scores for people without formal bank accounts or standard borrowing histories by using alternative data, like mobile phone and social media activity, together with local agricultural and economic information. Ghana’s <a href="https://farmerline.co/">Farmerline</a> tells farmers about weather forecasts, market information and financial tips. </p>
<p>These are creative efforts to solve deep and complex problems, but clearly there is room for large, well-resourced technology companies to step in, make a difference with big ideas, deep pockets and global support.</p>
<h2>Invest in partnerships</h2>
<p>Technology entrepreneurs will need to develop business models and organizational structures that are better at collaborating with local agricultural communities and businesses, to navigate personal and political relationships as well as regulations and government programs. Technology will not, on its own, be some sort of silver bullet that will unlock prosperity. </p>
<p>Changing technology companies into agents for widespread global good will not be easy – and it can be done in areas beyond agricultural innovation, too. </p>
<p>There has been no shortage of talk about these ideas: <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2018/05/23/50-tech-ceos-come-to-paris-to-talk-about-tech-for-good/">50 CEOs</a> met with French President Emmanuel Macron to discuss socially positive technologies; World Economic Forum events around the world discuss societal benefits of a <a href="https://www.weforum.org/about/the-fourth-industrial-revolution-by-klaus-schwab">Fourth Industrial Revolution</a>; and some companies, such as <a href="https://www.ericsson.com/en/about-us/sustainability-and-corporate-responsibility/sustainable-development-goals">Ericsson</a> and <a href="https://www.sap.com/dmc/exp/2018-01-unglobalgoals/">SAP</a>, are already committed to fulfilling <a href="https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/?menu=1300">United Nations goals for global sustainability</a>. </p>
<p>We still have a long way to go. There is still a chance for technology companies to move fast and fix things by truly helping save the world – but sea levels are rising, so the time is now.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/105007/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bhaskar Chakravorti has founded and directs the Institute for Business in the Global Context at Fletcher/Tufts that has received funding from Mastercard, Microsoft, the Gates Foundation and the Onassis Foundation. He is a Non-Resident Senior Fellow at Brookings India and a Senior Advisor on Digital Inclusion at the Mastercard Center for Inclusive Growth.
</span></em></p>Amazon, Facebook and Google have lofty goals for their effects on global society. But people around the world are still waiting for the positive results. Here’s what the tech giants could do.Bhaskar Chakravorti, Dean of Global Business, The Fletcher School, Tufts UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/998422018-07-13T07:02:32Z2018-07-13T07:02:32ZNew Zealand’s zero carbon bill: much ado about methane<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/227520/original/file-20180712-27039-1d1g807.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">New Zealand is considering whether or not agricultural greenhouse gases should be considered as part of the country's transition to a low-emission economy.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">from www.shutterstock.com</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>New Zealand could become the first country in the world to put a price on greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture.</p>
<p>Leading up to the 2017 election, the now Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern famously described climate change as “<a href="https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11907789">my generation’s nuclear-free moment</a>”. The promised zero carbon bill is now underway, but in an unusual move, many provisions been thrown open to the public in a <a href="https://www.mfe.govt.nz/have-your-say-zero-carbon">consultation exercise</a> led by Minister for Climate Change James Shaw. </p>
<p>More than 4,000 submissions have already been made, with a week still to go, and the crunch point is whether or not agriculture should be part of the country’s transition to a low-emission economy.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/new-zealands-productivity-commission-charts-course-to-low-emission-future-96281">New Zealand's productivity commission charts course to low-emission future</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Zero carbon options</h2>
<p>Many of the 16 questions in the consultation document concern the proposed climate change commission and how far its powers should extend. But the most contentious question refers to the definition of what “zero carbon” actually means.</p>
<p>The government has set a net zero carbon target for 2050, but in the consultation it is asking people to pick one of three options:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>net zero carbon dioxide - reducing net carbon dioxide emissions to zero by 2050</p></li>
<li><p>net zero long-lived gases and stabilised short-lived gases - carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide to net zero by 2050, while stabilising methane</p></li>
<li><p>net zero emissions - net zero emissions across all greenhouse gases by 2050</p></li>
</ol>
<p>The three main gases of concern are carbon dioxide (long-lived, and mostly produced by burning fossil fuels), nitrous oxide (also long-lived, and mostly produced by synthetic fertilisers and animal manures) and methane (short-lived, and mostly produced by burping cows and sheep). <a href="https://emissionstracker.mfe.govt.nz/#NrAMBoEYF12TwCIByBTALo2wBM4eiQBs2AHEltEA">New Zealand’s emissions</a> of these gases in 2016 were 34 million tonnes (Mt), 9Mt, and 34Mt of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂e), respectively.</p>
<p>All three options refer to “net” emissions, which means that emissions can be offset by land use changes, primarily carbon stored in trees. In option 1, only carbon dioxide is offset. In option 2, carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide are offset and methane is stabilised. In option 3, all greenhouses gases are offset.</p>
<h2>Gathering support</h2>
<p>Opposition leader Simon Bridges has <a href="http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1806/S00152/simon-bridges-speech-to-fieldays-on-climate-change.htm">declared his support</a> for the establishment of a climate change commission. DairyNZ, an industry body, has appointed 15 dairy farmers as “climate change ambassadors” and has been running a nationwide series of <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/104684932/Workshop-informs-farmers-on-climate-change-challenges">workshops on the role of agricultural emissions</a>. </p>
<p>Earlier this month, Ardern and the Farming Leaders Group (representing most large farming bodies) published a <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/105049032/farming-leaders-on-board-with-zero-carbon-policy">joint statement</a> that the farming sector and the government are committed to working together to achieve net zero emissions from agri-food production by 2050. Not long after, the <a href="http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1807/S00292/nzs-leading-businesses-take-up-the-climate-change-challenge.htm">Climate Leaders Coalition</a>, representing 60 large corporations, announced their support for strong action to reduce emissions and for the zero carbon bill. </p>
<p>However, the devil is in the detail. While option 2 involves stabilising methane emissions, for example, it does not specify at what level or how this would be determined. Former Green Party co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons has argued that <a href="https://thespinoff.co.nz/society/19-06-2018/cutting-methane-hard-and-fast-is-the-best-path-to-carbon-zero/">methane emissions need to be cut hard and fast</a>, whereas farming groups would prefer to stabilise emissions at their present levels. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-methane-should-be-treated-differently-compared-to-long-lived-greenhouse-gases-97845">Why methane should be treated differently compared to long-lived greenhouse gases</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This would be a much less ambitious 2050 target than option 3, potentially leaving the full 34Mt of present methane emissions untouched. Under current international rules, this would amount to an overall reduction in emissions of about 50% on New Zealand’s 1990 levels and would likely be judged insufficient in terms of the Paris climate agreement. This may not be what people thought they were voting for in 2017.</p>
<h2>Why we can’t ignore methane</h2>
<p>To <a href="https://www.theccc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/2017-Report-to-Parliament-Meeting-Carbon-Budgets-Closing-the-policy-gap.pdf">keep warming below 2°C above pre-industrial global temperatures</a>, CO₂ emissions will need to fall below zero (that is, into net removals) by the 2050s to 2070s, along with deep reductions of all other greenhouse gases. To stay close to 1.5°C, the more ambitious of the twin Paris goals, CO₂ emissions would need to reach net zero by the 2040s. If net removals cannot be achieved, global CO₂ emissions will need to reach zero sooner.</p>
<p>Therefore, global pressure to reduce agricultural emissions, especially from ruminants, is likely to increase. A <a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/360/6392/987">recent study</a> found that agriculture is responsible for 26% of human-caused greenhouse emissions, and that meat and dairy provide 18% of calories and 37% of protein, while producing 60% of agriculture’s greenhouse gases. </p>
<p>A new <a href="http://stapgef.org/sites/default/files/publications/STAP%20Report%20on%20food%20system.PDF">report</a> by Massey University’s <a href="http://www.massey.ac.nz/massey/initiatives/sustainability/people/ralph-sims.cfm">Ralph Sims</a> for the UN Global Environment Facility concludes that currently, the global food supply system is not sustainable, and that present policies will not cut agricultural emissions sufficiently to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. </p>
<h2>Finding a way forward</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.pce.parliament.nz/media/1678/climate-change-and-agriculture-web.pdf">Reducing agricultural emissions</a> without reducing stock numbers significantly is difficult. Many options are being explored, from breeding low-emission animals and selecting low-emission feeds to housing animals off-pasture and methane inhibitors and vaccines. </p>
<p>But any of these will face a cost and it is unclear who should pay. Non-agricultural industries, including the fossil fuel sector, are already in New Zealand’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) and would like agriculture to pay for emissions created on the farm. Agricultural industries argue that they should not pay until cost-effective mitigation options are available and their international competitors face a similar cost. </p>
<p>The government has come up with a compromise. Its coalition agreement states that if agriculture were to be included in the ETS, only 5% would enter into the scheme, initially. The amount of money involved here is small - NZ$40 million a year - in an industry with annual export earnings of NZ$20 billion. It would add about 0.17% to the price of whole milk powder and 0.5% to the wholesale price of beef. </p>
<p>However, it would set an important precedent. New Zealand would become the first country in the world to put a price agricultural emissions. Many people hope that the zero carbon bill will represent a turning point. It may even inspire other countries to follow suit.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/99842/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robert McLachlan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>New Zealand could become the first country to put a price on greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture.Robert McLachlan, Professor in Applied Mathematics, Massey UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.