Can We Feed The World? - Scientific American Article - Jonathan Foley

Can We Feed The World? - Scientific American Article - Jonathan Foley

• 1.
  Jonathan A. Foleyis director of the Institute on the Environment at the University of Minnesota, where he is also McKnight Presidential Chair of Global Ecology. s u sta i n a b i l i t y Can We Feed the World Sustain the planet? A five-step global plan could double food production by 2050 while greatly reducing environmental damage By Jonathan A. Foley 60  Scientific American, November 2011
• 2.
  Photograph by KevinVan Aelst November 2011, ScientificAmerican.com  61
• 3.
  ight now aboutone billion people suffer from chronic hunger. the world’s farmers grow enough food to feed them, but it is not properly distributed and, even if it were, many cannot afford it, because prices are escalating. But another challenge looms. the amount of edible crops harvested per hectare. Unfortunately, By 2050 the world’s population will increase by two billion or the world is running into significant barriers on both counts. three billion, which will likely double the demand for food, ac- Society already farms roughly 38 percent of the earth’s land cording to several studies. Demand will also rise because many surface, not counting Greenland or Antarctica. Agriculture is by more people will have higher incomes, which means they will eat far the biggest human use of land on the planet; nothing else more, especially meat. Increasing use of cropland for biofuels comes close. And most of that 38 percent covers the best farm- will make meeting the doubling goal more difficult still. So even land. Much of the remainder is covered by deserts, mountains, if we solve today’s problems of poverty and access—a daunting tundra, ice, cities, parks and other unsuitable growing areas. The task—we will also have to produce twice as much to guarantee few remaining frontiers are mainly in tropical forests and savan- adequate supply worldwide. nas, which are vital to the stability of the globe, especially as And that’s not all. stores of carbon and biodiversity. Expanding into those areas is By clearing tropical forests, farming marginal lands and in- not a good idea, yet over the past 20 years five million to 10 mil- tensifying industrial farming in sensitive landscapes and water- lion hectares of cropland a year has been created, with a signifi- sheds, humankind has made agriculture the planet’s dominant cant portion of that in the tropics. These additions enlarged the environmental threat. Agriculture already consumes a large net area of cultivated land by only 3 percent, however, because of percentage of the earth’s land surface and is destroying habitat, farmland losses caused by urban development and other forces, using up freshwater, polluting rivers and oceans, and emitting particularly in temperate zones. greenhouse gases more extensively than almost any other hu- Improving yield also sounds enticing. Yet our research team man activity. To guarantee the globe’s long-term health, we must found that average global crop yield increased by about 20 per- dramatically reduce agriculture’s adverse impacts. cent in the past 20 years—far less than what is typically report- The world’s food system faces three incredible, interwoven ed. That improvement is significant, but the rate is nowhere challenges, then. It must guarantee that all seven billion people near enough to double food production by midcentury. Whereas alive today are adequately fed; it must double food production in yields of some crops improved substantially, others saw little the next 40 years; and it must achieve both goals while becoming gain and a few even declined. truly environmentally sustainable. Feeding more people would be easier if all the food we grew Could these simultaneous goals possibly be met? An interna- went into human hands. But only 60 percent of the world’s tional team of experts, which I coordinated, has settled on five crops are meant for people: mostly grains, followed by pulses steps that, if pursued together, could raise by more than 100 per- (beans, lentils), oil plants, vegetables and fruits. Another 35 per- cent the food available for human consumption globally, while sig- cent is used for animal feed, and the final 5 percent goes to bio- nificantly lessening greenhouse gas emissions, biodiversity losses, fuels and other industrial products. Meat is the biggest issue water use and water pollution. Tackling the triple challenge will be here. Even with the most efficient meat and dairy systems, feed- one of the most important tests humanity has ever faced. It is fair ing crops to animals reduces the world’s potential food supply. to say that our response will determine the fate of our civilization. Typically, grain-fed cattle operations use 30 kilograms of grain to make one kilogram of edible, boneless beef. Chicken and pork Bumping Up against Barriers are more efficient, and grass-fed beef converts nonfood material at first blush, the way to feed more people would seem clear: into protein. No matter how you slice it, though, grain-fed meat grow more food, by expanding farmland and improving yield— production systems are a drain on the global food supply. in brief The world must solve three food problems simultane- goals: stop agriculture from consuming more tropical A system for certifying foods based on how well each ously: end hunger, double food production by 2050, and land, boost the productivity of farms that have the low- one delivers nutrition and food security and limits envi- do both while drastically reducing agriculture’s damage est yields, raise the efficiency of water and fertilizer use ronmental and social costs would help the public to the environment. worldwide, reduce per capita meat consumption and choose products that push agriculture in a more sus- Five solutions, pursued together, can achieve these reduce waste in food production and distribution. tainable direction. 62  Scientific American, November 2011
• 4.
  l ay of t h e l a n d Farming Hits the Wall, But Not the Ceiling Humankind now farms 38 percent of the earth’s ice-free land. Crops cover one-third of that area; pastures and ranges for livestock cover the rest. Little room exists for expansion because most of the remaining land is deserts, mountains, tundra or urban. Still, farms in many existing areas could be more productive (insets). Type of None Agriculture 100% cropland 100% pasture Better Breadbaskets The world could grow much more food if the productivity of the poorest farms were raised toward the maximum possible, given Yield of Maize Farmland climate and soil conditions. For example, the yield for maize (shown), could rise significantly across parts of Mexico, West Africa and Eastern Far from maximum Close to maximum Europe if seeds, irrigation, fertilizer and markets were improved. Another deterrent to growing more food is the cost in dam- nutrition: coastal fishing grounds. Fertilizer certainly has been a age to the environment, which is already extensive. Only our use key ingredient of the green revolution that has helped feed the of energy, with its profound impacts on climate and ocean acidi- world, but when nearly half the fertilizer we apply runs off rather fication, rivals the sheer magnitude of agriculture’s environmen- than nourishes crops, we clearly can do better. tal insults. Our research team estimates that agriculture has al- Agriculture is also the largest single source of greenhouse ready cleared or radically transformed 70 percent of the world’s gas emissions from society, collectively accounting for about 35 prehistoric grasslands, 50 percent of the savannas, 45 percent of percent of the carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide we re- the temperate deciduous forests and 25 percent of the tropical lease. That is more than the emissions from worldwide trans- forests. Since the last ice age, nothing has disrupted ecosystems portation (including all cars, trucks and planes) or electricity more. Agriculture’s physical footprint is nearly 60 times that of generation. The energy used to grow, process and transport the world’s pavements and buildings. food is a concern, but the vast majority of emissions come from Maps courtesy of James Gerber, Institute on the Environment, University of Minnesota Freshwater is another casualty. Humans use an astounding tropical deforestation, methane released from animals and rice 4,000 cubic kilometers of water per year, mostly withdrawn paddies, and nitrous oxide from overfertilized soils. from rivers and aquifers. Irrigation accounts for 70 percent of the draw. If we count only consumptive water use—water that is Five Solutions used and not returned to the watershed—irrigation climbs to 80 modern agriculture has been an incredibly positive force in the or 90 percent of the total. As a result, many large rivers such as world, but we can no longer ignore its dwindling ability to ex- the Colorado have diminished flows, some have dried up alto- pand or the mounting environmental harm it imposes. Previous gether, and many places have rapidly declining water tables, in- approaches to solving food and environmental issues were often cluding regions of the U.S. and India. at odds. We could boost food production by clearing more land Water is not only disappearing, it is being contaminated. Fer- or using more water and chemicals, but only at a cost to the envi- tilizers, herbicides and pesticides are being spread at incredible ronment. Or we could restore ecosystems by taking farmland out levels and are found in nearly every ecosystem. The flows of nitro- of cultivation, but only by reducing food production. This either- gen and phosphorus through the environment have more than or approach is no longer acceptable. We need truly integrated doubled since 1960, causing widespread water pollution and solutions. enormous hypoxic “dead zones” at the mouths of the world’s ma- After many months of research and deliberation—based on jor rivers. Ironically, fertilizer runoff from farmland—in the name analysis of newly generated global agricultural and environmen- of growing more food—compromises another crucial source of tal data—our international team has settled on a five-point plan November 2011, ScientificAmerican.com  63
• 5.
  for dealing withfood and environmental chal- s t r at e g y lenges together. Stop expanding agriculture’s footprint. Our first recommendation is to slow and ulti- Output Expands, Food production mately stop the expansion of agriculture, par- ticularly into tropical forests and savannas. Harm Contracts By 2050 global population will be two to three billion greater, and a larger proportion of people will The demise of these ecosystems has far-reach- To feed the world without ruining the plan- have higher incomes, so they will ing impacts on the environment, especially et, agriculture will have to produce much consume more per person. Farmers through lost biodiversity and increased car- will need to grow twice as much as more food (blue) and find better ways to they do today. bon dioxide emissions (from clearing land). distribute it (red), while significantly cut- Slowing deforestation would dramatically ting the damage it does to the atmosphere, reduce environmental damage while impos- habitat and water (yellow). ing only minor constraints on global food production. The resulting dip in farm capaci- ty could be offset by reducing the displace- ment of more productive croplands by urban- ization, degradation and abandonment. Many proposals have been made to reduce deforestation. One of the most promising is the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) mechanism. Under REDD, rich nations pay tropical nations to protect their rain forests, in exchange for car- bon credits. Other mechanisms include devel- oping certification standards for agricultural products so that supply chains can be assured that crops were not grown on lands created by deforestation. Also, better biofuel policy that Food access More than one billion of the earth’s relies on nonfood crops such as switchgrass seven billion people suffer from instead of food crops could make vital farm- Environmental damage chronic hunger. Poverty and poor To reduce harm, agriculture must stop land newly available. distribution of food must be expanding into tropical forests, raise the Close the world’s yield gaps. To double glob- overcome to provide adequate productivity of underperforming farmland al food production without expanding agri- calories for everyone. (which could boost production 50 to 60 culture’s footprint, we must significantly im- percent), use water and fertilizer far more prove yields of existing farmlands. Two op- efficiently and prevent soil degredation. tions exist: We can boost the productivity of our best farms—raising their “yield ceiling” through improved crop genetics and manage- ment. Or we can improve the yields of the world’s least produc- from organic and agroecological systems can also be adopted, tive farms—closing the “yield gap” between a farm’s current yield such as leaving crop residues on fields so they decompose into nu- and its higher potential yield. The second option provides the trients. To close the world’s yield gaps, we also have to overcome largest and most immediate gain—especially in regions where serious economic and social challenges, including better distribu- hunger is most acute. tion of fertilizer and seed varieties to farms in impoverished re- Our research team has analyzed global patterns of crop yields gions and improving access to global markets for many regions. and found that much of the world has a significant yield gap. In Use resources much more efficiently. To reduce the environ- particular, yields could increase substantially across many parts mental impacts of agriculture, low- and high-yield regions alike of Africa, Central America and eastern Europe. In these regions, must practice agriculture with vastly greater efficiency: far more better seeds, more effective fertilizer application and efficient ir- crop output per unit of water, fertilizer and energy. rigation could produce much more food on the same amount of On average, it takes about one liter of irrigation water to grow land. Our analysis suggests that closing the yield gap for the one calorie of food, although some places use much more. Our world’s top 16 crops could increase total food production by 50 to analysis finds that farms can significantly curb water use with- 60 percent, with little environmental damage. out much reduction in food production, especially in dry cli- Reducing yield gaps in the least productive agricultural lands mates. Primary strategies include drip irrigation (where water is may often require some additional fertilizer and water. Care will applied directly to the plant’s base and not wastefully sprayed have to be taken to avoid unbridled irrigation and chemical use. into the air); mulching (covering the soil with organic matter to Many other techniques can improve yield. “Reduced tillage” retain moisture); and reducing water lost from irrigation sys- planting techniques disturb less soil, preventing erosion. Cover tems (by lessening evaporation from canals and reservoirs). crops planted between food-crop seasons reduce weeds and add With fertilizers, we face a kind of Goldilocks problem. Some nutrients and nitrogen to the soil when plowed under. Lessons places have too few nutrients and therefore poor crop produc- 64  Scientific American, November 2011 Graphic by Jen Christiansen
• 6.
  tion, whereas othershave too much, leading to pollution. Almost It is important to emphasize that all five points (and perhaps no one uses fertilizers “just right.” Our analysis shows hotspots more) must be pursued together. No single strategy is sufficient to on the planet—particularly in China, northern India, the central solve all our problems. Think silver buckshot, not a silver bullet. U.S. and western Europe—where farmers could substantially re- We have tremendous successes from the green revolution and in- duce fertilizer use with little or no impact on food production. dustrial-scale agriculture to build on, along with innovations in Amazingly, only 10 percent of the world’s cropland generates 30 organic farming and local food systems. Let’s take the best ideas to 40 percent of agriculture’s fertilizer pollution. and incorporate them into a new approach—a sustainable food Among the actions that can fix this excess are policy and eco- system that focuses on nutritional, social and environmental per- nomic incentives, such as payments to farmers for watershed formance, to bring responsible food production to scale. stewardship and protection, for reducing excessive fertilizer use, We can configure this next-generation system as a network of for improving manure management (especially manure storage, local agricultural systems that are sensitive to nearby climate, so less runs off into the watershed during a storm), for capturing water resources, ecosystems and culture and that are connected excess nutrients through recycling, and for instituting other con- through efficient means of global trade and transport. Such a servation practices. In addition, restoring wetlands will enhance system could be resilient and also pay farmers a living wage. their capacity to act as a natural sponge to filter out nutrients in One device that would help foster this new food system would runoff. be the equivalent of the Leadership in Energy and Environmen- Here again reduced tillage can help nourish the soil, as can tal Design program now in place for constructing new commer- precision agriculture (applying fertilizer and water only when cial buildings sustainably. This LEED program awards increas- and where they are needed and most effective) and organic farm- ingly higher levels of certification based on points that are accu- ing techniques. mulated by incorporating any of a wide range of green options, Shift diets away from meat. We can dramatically increase global from solar power and efficient lighting to recycled building ma- food availability and environmental sustainability by using more terials and low construction waste. of our crops to feed people directly and less to fatten livestock. For sustainable agriculture, foods would be awarded points Globally, humans could net up to three quadrillion addition- based on how well they deliver nutrition, food security and other al calories every year—a 50 percent increase from our current public benefits, minus their environmental and social costs. This supply—by switching to all-plant diets. Naturally, our current certification would help us get beyond current food labels such diets and uses of crops have many economic and social benefits, as “local” and “organic,” which really do not tell us much about and our preferences are unlikely to change completely. Still, what we are eating. Instead we can look at the whole perfor- even small shifts in diet, say from grain-fed beef to poultry, pork mance of our food—across nutritional, social and environmental or pasture-fed beef, can pay off handsomely. dimensions—and weigh the costs and benefits of different farm- Reduce food waste. A final, obvious but often neglected recom- ing approaches. mendation is to reduce waste in the food system. Roughly 30 Imagine the possibilities: sustainable citrus and coffee from percent of the food produced on the planet is discarded, lost, the tropics, connected to sustainable cereals from the temperate spoiled or consumed by pests. zone, supplemented by locally grown greens and root vegetables, In rich countries, much of the waste takes place at the con- all grown under transparent, performance-based standards. Use sumer end of the system, in restaurants and trash cans. Simple your smartphone and the latest sustainable food app, and you will changes in our daily consumption patterns—reducing oversize learn where your food came from, who grew it, how it was grown, portions, food thrown in the garbage, and the number of takeout and how it ranks against various social, nutritional and environ- and restaurant meals—could significantly trim losses, as well as mental criteria. And when you find food that works, you can tweet our expanding waistlines. In poorer countries, the losses are sim- about it to your social network of farmers and foodies. ilar in size but occur at the producer end, in the form of failed The principles and practices of our different agricultural sys- crops, stockpiles ruined by pests, or food that is never delivered tems—from large-scale commercial to local and organic—pro- because of bad infrastructure and markets. Improved storage, vide the foundation for grappling with the world’s food security refrigeration and distribution systems can cut waste appreciably. and environmental needs. Feeding nine billion people in a truly Moreover, better market tools can connect people who have sustainable way will be one of the greatest challenges our civili- crops to those who need them, such as cell-phone systems in Af- zation has ever faced. It will require the imagination, determina- rica that link suppliers, traders and purchasers. tion and hard work of countless people from all over the world. Although completely eliminating waste from farm to fork is There is no time to lose.  not realistic, even small steps would be extremely beneficial. Targeted efforts—especially reducing waste of the most re- more to explore source-intensive foods such as meat and dairy—could make a Global Consequences of Land Use. Jonathan A. Foley et al. in Science, Vol. 309, pages big difference. 570–574; July 22, 2005. Enough: Why the World’s Poorest Starve in an Age of Plenty. Roger Thurow and Scott Kilman. Public Affairs, 2010. Moving toward a Networked Food System Food Security: The Challenge of Feeding 9 Billion People. H. Charles J. Godfray et al. in in principle, our five-point strategy can address many food secu- Science, Vol. 327, pages 812–818; February 12, 2010. rity and environmental challenges. Together the steps could in- SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN ONLINE crease the world’s food availability by 100 to 180 percent, while For more maps showing how food production can increase while environmental significantly lowering greenhouse gas emissions, biodiversity harm can decrease, see www.ScientificAmerican.com/nov2011/foley losses, water use and water pollution. November 2011, ScientificAmerican.com  65