Firstly, I would like to thank all of you who read and engaged in interesting discussions with me on the course of this blog, I really appreciate it! I never knew there was a blogger inside me, but I throughly enjoyed writing this blog and I have a feeling I will be back here soon. It was interesting and liberating, in a way, to be able to incorporate different kinds of resources and engage in a wider discussion than I would be able to with 'traditional' piece of coursework. I hope I provided a good overview of the issues concerning our hungry planet and provided you an opportunity to draw your own conclusions.
Main topics and key words to take away from my blog.
I started my journey with a few questions (mostly to myself): how does our food system affect the global climate today? How can we make food production and farming more sustainable and healthier for the planet? How do consumers choices enter the picture and how can we be part of the solution? I hope that my previous post on climate-friendly diet already gave you an idea how consumer choice makes a difference in today's food industry If you are still wondering about the answers to the rest, here is a summary of where this blog has taken me.
In the past months I have talked about many aspets of today's foor production, which harm the environment and if you asked me now 'what is wrong with our food system?', I think my first answer would be 'everything!'. But how does our food system really affect the global climate change today? Without even taking a look at my previous posts I would have to say the biggest polluters in our food system today are meat production, food waste, food trade and the improper use of agro-chemicals. Other environmental issues relating to food production are food processing and the (over)use of palm oil and its unsustainable management. In terms of sustainable farming solutions, moving away from monocultures and meat factories is the first step that would bring significant improvements to environmental health. I talked about a few agroecological practices in one of my previous posts and turns out, these changes do not require us to sacrifice production yields or need significant investment of resources.
But how do we promote sustainable farming and change the public opinion about food production? To be honest, I had no idea about how harmful today's food industry actually is to the environment and how big of a role meat consumption plays. In my opinion, the biggest players with power to change the perception of food are international organisations, media and the global community (public and scientific). And doesn't it also start with information outlets exactly like this blog here? It is important that there is a global discussion out there surrounding these issues and that the wider public starts to think more critically about what goes on their plate. There is obviously the issue of largely higher prices for 'environmentally friendly' food products but with advancements in technology and science, I see these costs shrinking in the future and sustainable farming becoming a norm.
Having pointed out the things wrong with today's food production, I thought it would be a nice closing remark to suggest a plan for a climate-friendly diet. After reading and writing about the topic for the past three months, I want to leave you with an useful post that can help you change your eating habits for the better (and fulfill the purpose of my blog!).
People tend to acknowledge the role of packaging of food products has to play in the climate change discussion but many of us do not realise the harm meat consumption does to our planet. Even though cutting down meat is not necessarily difficult and can save you money, people seem to be reluctant to do it (Mäkiniemi and Vainio, 2013). It also depends on whether people perceive climate change as a moral issue. Although diets can be controlled at an individual level, changes in our society are also needed. We are in a need of clear labeling and availability of climate-friendly products alongside with public knowledge about environmentally harmful food products (Mäkiniemi and Vainio, 2013). So what basic steps could we take to make our everyday diets more sustainable? After going through the posts on my blog you should already have a good idea of the action we should all take, but this post should act as a helpful guide to anyone interested in making their eating habits more environmentally sustainable.
Baroni et al (2006) have once again confirmed through empirical testing that diets based on high meat consumption and chemical conventional agriculture have the greatest environmental impact than any other diet out there. The objective of their study was to tease out the 'critical points' of environmental impacts, the smallest changes in our eating habits that will lead to largest environmental benefits (without any extreme changes). And cutting down on meat consumption is the main trigger. Even though people are often reluctant to change their consumption of meat, raising awareness of its climate change impacts may change public opinion about meat consumption. So rule number one for a climate friendly diet: trade your meat for vegetables.
Second guideline towards a sustainable diet: eat real food that is free from processing. Remembering my previous post on processed food we know that, each step of the way on the processing cycle heats our climate: processed foods require more energy than whole foods. From chemical fertilisers and synthetic additives to freezing and canning, these foods carry a higher energy need than whole foods. Look for foods that are as close to their natural state as possible to be sure they have not gone through energy-intensive processing. Here is a video that takes on a tour on a typical American supermarket with two food specialists (learn to look out for the processed food):
Third suggestion for a climate-friendly diet: eliminate food waste. While approximately one third of the global food is getting lost or wasted (FAO, 2011), our individual efforts to cut down on the food we bin every day can go a long way. Food waste brings horrific environmental impacts (remind yourself from my earlier post): emission release, toxin infiltration into soil and waterways and land loss to land-fills. With helpful tips by Love Food Hate Waste, cutting down food waste can be easy, cut down your spending in the supermarket and bring improved environmental health. And if despite all efforts to bring your food waste to zero, make sure you compost the food that you no longer want. Consumers with gardens are especially lucky, getting a viable source of fertiliser, but even urbanites without a green space can often dump their compost in local farmers markets.
Having addressed the issues of food trade and agro-chemicals in previous posts, the fourth guideline for sustainable eating is: look for local and organic produce. It is important to get to know the food miles and the way your food is grown. Although finding organic and local produce can turn out to be challenging due to limited availability and priciness, the 'locavore' movement is growing. In order to really push for the organic movement, appropriate labeling is needed for customers to identify desirable products and that is largely in the hands of the policy makers and producers. But as the demand for organic produce increases, so does the need for labeling. And a final suggestion for the fans of climate-friendly eating: grow and cook as much of your own food as possible. This is the purest form of local and organic eating and has been largely in the shadows during the course of this blog. Why not start your own sustainable farm? Everyone with a garden is lucky enough to benefit from available green space but even in urban areas, technological advances and new ideas are making way for agricultural solutions that can be practiced by urbanites like many of us. A good example of this is Incredible Edible (check previous post), bringing gardens to urban areas. I am currently experimenting with Click & Grow to see how my own little garden turns out in the heart of London. Growing your own food can be one of the best ways to cut down individual impact on the environment. (Plus it is fun!)
I hope this gives you a guideline where to go from here as my blog slowly comes to a close. For me, reading and writing about the global industrial food production has definitely changed the way I think about food. Thanks for reading! Till next time, Laura
Happy New Year everyone! This time, I want to continue on the topic of cultured meat. Livestock is the biggest contributor to environmental damage in the agricultural sector. It takes up 30% of global ice-free land and produces 18% of global greenhouse gases (FAO, 2006). As the world's population is estimated to increase to 9 billion by 2050 and many nations are becoming wealthier, demand for meat is going to rise inevitably. Unless we manage to reduce meat consumption through individual diets, there is an immediate need to change how meat is produced. But even if diets change and the world becomes less meat hungry, total elimination of meat consumption is unrealistic and alternatives for conventional production should be considered. An interesting alternative, which is still in the research stage, is cultured meat. This is meat that has never been part of a living animal and is produced through tissue growth by adding protein to initial muscle cells. It is meat production without the animal, also referred to as vertical farming.
Tuomisto and Mattos (2011) have compared the production process of in vitro meat to the conventional method and the results are impressive. Cultured meat emits significantly less greenhouse gases: the energy use in in vitro production can be up to 45% lower while greenhouse emissions are reduced by 78-96%. On top of that, due to the fact that meat will be produced in laboratories cultured meat is less land intensive with 99% (!) lower land use than with conventional meat production. Tumisto and Mattos also point out that most of the emissions released during in vitro production are related to fuel and electricity, emissions could be further reduced if using renewable energy. In contrast to in vitro production, conventional meat industry has little chance of cutting its emissions because most emissions (57% if 100 years global warming potential is used) are due to methane release by cows (Tuomisto and Mattos, 2011). Below is a graph showing the comparison of primary energy input, greenhouse emissions, land use and water of in vitro meat with conventionally produced meat:
An additional benefit of cultured meat production can be cutting down in transport, as production sites can be located closer to demand. This will reduce the emission toll on meat production dramatically. Alongside reduced transportation, refrigeration needs can be reduced as in vitro meat is free from excess bones, fat and other parts that are discarded during meat production. Cultured meat would also eliminate unwanted waste occurring production, not to mention the fact that all the feed that is currently grown for feeding our livestock could be used for human consumption. In vitro meat production seems to address all the harmful environmental impacts that follow today's conventional meat industry. But in reality, cultured meat is still unrealistically expensive and public acceptance is a problem still to overcome. In order to commercialise lab-grown meat, a further estimated $ 160 million is needed to invest in research and further efforts are needed to tackle the public opinion about the so called 'zombified' food (Tuomisto and Mattos, 2011).
Beyond the environmental benefits that may yield with commercialising cultured meat, human health may also benefit. It is argued that cultured meat can prevent the spread of animal-borne diseases by reducing human-animal contact and since tissue engineering is able to control the quality and quantity of fat, nutrition-based diseases can be eliminated as well (Tuomisto and Roy, 2012). Lab-grown meat will be free from ethical issues relating to animal rights but may be tainted with other concerns about its 'unnatural' way of production. This comes down to a matter of value judgement but as any unconventional approach, in vitro meat remains highly controversial in public opinion.
In my opinion, cultured meat shows great potential and a possibility of replacing our conventional, energy intensive and emission rich way of meat production with a sustainable, clean, waste-free and animal friendly one. Cultured meat is becoming hugely popular in various fields of science and technology. The interest around it predicts its future to be promising and as research advances, I believe that sooner or later, cultured meat will find its way onto our plates.
Here are some interesting (and crazy) news about in vitro meat:
Reading and searching for interesting action on sustainable food and farming, I came across this exciting network that turns our urban spaces into vegetable gardens. Started in North of England, this network is an example of how small ideas have true power to change the way we think, from England to New Zealand! Here is a TED talk by Pam Warhurst, one of the cofounders, to introduce you to the idea (truly inspiring, worth watching):
'Starting with small herb gardens and community plots, the group has since founded a food knowledge hub and fishery at the local high school, as well as a market garden for young people to grow and sell their own produce. It has also backed successful campaigns such as encouraging the keeping of free range chickens and bees.'
Have a look at their website and find out about the work they do here: http://incredibleediblenetwork.org.uk/. If this is not considered eating local and sustainably then I do not know what is! Thought it is a great idea worth sharing.
Having looked at all the problems that appear with today's industrial food sector, let me now move on to give some suggestions how we could produce food more efficiently and with less environmental damages. Modern agriculture has increasingly amended countless ecosystems, depleted habitats and continues to harm the environment. Sustainable agriculture on the other hand tries to bring back natural properties of ecosystems without significant losses to productivity. Many of you might think that looking at today's industrial food production, we are past the point of no return. But with evidence of climate-friendly farms popping up around the world, recovery can happen fast and be hugely successful. Of course, it takes time to undo the wrongs of the food industry's past but all is not lost yet.
Jules Pretty (2013) has identified the key principles of sustainable farming as follows:
integration of biological and ecological processes such as nutrient cycling, nitrogen fixation, soil regeneration, competition and others.
minimisation of the use of non-renewable inputs that harm the environment, farmers or consumers.
productive use of the knowledge and skills of farmers and people's collective capacities to work together towards sustainable agriculture.
Pretty also emphasises that sustainable farming does not rule out any technologies but incorporates technologies that do not harm the environment and enhance efficiency. It is often though that sustainable farming means cutting down inputs that go into the practice, but here the focus is on changing the inputs: from fossil fuels to renewable energy, from chemical fertilisers to nitrogen-fixing vegetables, from ploughing to zero-tillage (Pretty, 2006).
Sustainable farming should fit the land and for that, soil matter should be restored through minimised nutrient leaks. A healthy soil should be rich with microorganisms and bacteria, able to absorb water and oxygen. Conventional farming degrades soil (thanks to fertilisers, pesticides and other agro-chemicals), the opposite of what we should be doing! We need to close the loop of nutrient flows: from microorganisms to soil to plants to animals and back (Fedoroff et al, 2010). Regenerating soil will also bring back the lost biodiversity as degraded soils become a hostile habitat for biodiversity. Agroecological practices that promote sustainability should include integrated pest and nutrient management. Due to the harm that is caused by chemical fertilisers and pesticides (a little reminder here). Alongside its environmental damage through greenhouse gas emissions, these chemicals undermine soil's natural ability to produce and maintain crops.
But you ask me, isn't moving away from fertilisers and pesticides going to sacrifice productivity in our hungry world where nearly 870 million people suffer chronic undernourishment? Pretty et al (2006) has showed that there is reason to be optimistic. The challenge is to seek sustainable intensification without relying on fossil fuels or chemicals. This study showed how sustainable agriculture projects (integrated pest and nutrient management etc.) introduced increased crop yields. The authors had a look at resource conserving farms in 57 poor countries covering 37 million hectares and found that with sustainable farming methods, crop yields increased on average by 79%. Although their data shows large disparities between results, in nearly all cases there was an increase with the project. In addition, projects where pesticide data was monitored, 77% of cases showed decline in pesticide use by 71%, while yields grew by 42%. Pretty et al (2006) paper shows how sustainable farming techniques can help increase yields (without conventional food production techniques) in developing countries where hunger is most prevalent, while preserving natural ecosystems and staying environmentally sound. There remains room for criticism as these technologies are not certain to cover all future food demand but there is reason to be optimistic. The critical focus should be to give universal access to productive technologies on local, national and international scale.
What we need is to move away from conventional mono-cultures (CAFOs, corn industry) towards a more multifunctional farming idea where the farm is divided between crops and livestock while ensuring healthy ecosystem services. Agriculture should be fundamentally multifunctional but let us further look at how moving away from monocultures (growing only one crop or animal rather than a diversified set of crops) can help food production become more environmentally friendly. Integrated crop-livestock systems (ICLS) are agricultural systems that take advantage of the relationship between animals and crops (Bonaudo et al, 2013). Animals are used to make use of the crops that are not suitable for human consumption (nonfood biomass) and due to animal mobility, non-farming areas can be used for 'promoting fertility transfer across diverse and heterogeneous landscapes' (Bonaudo et al, 2013). Authors look at two ICLS in France and Brazil to find out what are the benefits of designing integrated and more sustainable ICLS, coming to a conclusion that reconstructing links between soils, crops and animals is an essential mechanism that should be a focus of future agriculture. Here is a figure showing the benefits of an ICLS instead of a previous conventional farming method in one of the case studies in France, where self-sufficiency and avoidance of external inputs is common mantra:
Upper diagram showing the situation of the farm before the introduction of agroecological practices and the lower diagram showing the state after becoming an ICLS
One must realise that such farming methods do not eliminate all environmental damage (especially as we are talking about livestock production), but in order to start moving towards sustainable methods, gradual improvements must be made and ICLS are a good start. In addition other benefits, some argue that the main gain of combining animals and crops is the fact that animal manure becomes a resource rather than being nuisance (Dumont et al, 2013). It is rich in nutrients and microorganisms, providing soil with an essential source of energy. In many regions of southeast Asia, farmers are adding an aquaculture to an already integrated crop-livestock farm. This systems works as a cycle where animal manure fertilises the fish pond and crop land while pond sediments fertilise crops and give feed for livestock, increasing stability and sustainability. All links must work together in order to result in a healthy farm cycle. For example is there is uneaten feed in the pond that contaminates water, fish population can decline, sediment can decrease and there is little fertiliser left for the cropland. Below is a simplified figure showing the basic workings of such integrated farms:
Interactions within farms that operate an integrated agriculture-aquaculture system.
Not only is grain-fed livestock produced in integrated farming systems more environmentally sustainable but it is also better for human health (Daley et al, 2010). Grass-fed beef is lower in overall fat content and contains a significantly improved fatty acid composition. In order to cut down on environmental impacts our food industry creates, food production needs to become more integrated, less chemical-dependent, ecosystem focused and we need to abandon the one-size-fits-all model that is popularised today (CAFOs). In the heart of sustainable farming should be the reconstruction of soil matter, integration of species, promoting biodiversity, integrated pest and nutrient management and use of renewable energy sources. There is still a long way to go but the possibilities in hand give us an opportunity to change the way our food produced in the future. In this aspect, the responsibility relies with policy makers and stakeholders around the table of food production. If consumers have the power to dictate what, where and how much they buy, the change in farming towards sustainability must come from inside the production chain. And to my great pleasure, it is evident that climate-friendly farming is on a rise and it is happening all over the world. I leave you with a video by Michael Pollan's talk about Joel Salatin's Polyface Farm, probably one of the most famous sustainable farms in the US (you might remember it from Food Inc.). Pollan paints a picture of how farmers should understand the ecosystem life-cycles they operate in, respect the natural environment of their crops and animals and other revelations he had after visiting the farm in Virginia. Hope you enjoy it!
I am now slowly coming to the end of my blog (for my university course at least) and this will bring me to conclude and recap what I have talked about so far. In my final posts I will be giving you easy pointers towards a climate-friendly diet and discussing, where this blog has led me. Thank you for reading!
I hope everyone had a lovely Christmas break! Today, I want to focus my post on a rather different topic than usual: Click & Grow is a new technology developed in Estonia that enables us to become our own gardeners, even without a green space in our household. Inspired by my own Christmas present this year, I thought I would share this innovative technology with you on growing food in your own smart garden. There is nothing better than to pick some home-grown berries from your own garden in a summer morning to go into your breakfast. But in the absence of a garden and persistence for caring for the plant, Click & Grow smart gardens can do the trick.
Cherry tomatoes in a Click & Grow pot (what I will be growing as well)
'Inspired by NASA, we've created a solution that gives plant roots an optimal amount of water, oxygen and nutrients at all times.
It's a bit like giving plants a personal trainer, a chef, Harvard schooling, loving parents and a dog.
Flowers and herbs will love growing up in our smart garden!'
Click & Grow plants do not need any watering or fertilisation, all the work is taken care of by sensors, processor and special software in the pot itself. The fact that they do not need consistent watering means that the essential nutrients are not flushed out of the soil as in a traditional growing pot. The smart soil of Click & Grow contains required nutrients that are released according to the plant's growth cycle. The masterpiece of this all is the smart soil (nano technological growth medium) that contains pockets of oxygen even if wet and makes sure oxygen and nutrients are spread equally. Check out their website here: http://www.clickandgrow.com/.
For me it sounds like a very interesting idea, but I am still to find out how it exactly works and whether it is worth the money and can it live up to its expectations. I am not a big gardener myself (due to the obvious lack of space or a garden in central London) and I do believe robot gardens are the thing of the future. Some people might find Click & Grow taking away the need for love and care in your garden. Some say a regular pot does the exact same thing. But the fact is, Click & Grow is spreading across the globe and more people are growing their own herbs, berries and vegetables with it. The inevitability of this technology is that it is more expensive than an ordinary growing pot but I will let you decide for yourself whether you are pro-Click & Grow or not. I look forward to seeing my cherry tomatoes growing in my pot already (will definitely show you an update in a few weeks)! This technology may able us to grow our own chillies, strawberries and tomatoes without shipping them in from across the globe. I believe Click & Grow is showing us a glimpse of gardening future but it still has a long way to go with the need to make this technology more affordable. I leave you with a short video of how Click & Grow works, hope you enjoyed this little detour!
In my next post, I will return to the idea of sustainable farming and what we can do to make our food industry less energy intensive and reduce its impact on the environment.
.jpg)
.jpg)
