Finding Hope Between the Lines of the 2021 IPCC Report
How the impact of our food system went largely unrecognized in the IPCC’s evidence for the climate crisis
On August 9th, 2021, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released its sixth assessment report on Climate Change. The IPCC is the “United Nations body for assessing the science related to climate change. Since 2014, the IPCC has been compiling the research for this 3,949-page report filled with an updated, relevant physical science basis for climate change.
News about the report has flooded news sources with facts and statistics about the impending catastrophe that is threatening the livelihood of our planet. The average citizen is unlikely to leaf through the academic language and scientific jargon found among the pages of this report. However, there is only one outcome of the report that truly matters: we must act now.
Many climate scientists sound like a broken record in their pleas to global leaders, corporations, and citizens. For years, we have been told that climate change threatens our very existence and we must transform the way we live on this planet in order to avoid fatal consequences. The unfortunate reality is that we still live in a world of global inequality, climate science deniers, and unsustainable modes of production that stand in the way of fostering the change we desperately need for this world.
Rather than simply acknowledging the problems, we must also identify solutions. This report is filled with scientific evidence and recommendations of how we can work to achieve net-zero emissions. One of the most evident and dire places that require a transformation in food and agriculture.
In order to understand how food and agriculture must be transformed from the IPCC report, you have to read a little between the lines. The word “food” was mentioned just 121 times in the almost 4,000-page report. Phrases such as “food supply,” “food production,” “food security,” and “food chain,” are sprinkled throughout the report, but many of these honorable mentions are found in the citations. The word “agriculture” received a bit more recognition in the report, ranking 576 mentions in the document. However, many references to agriculture commented only on the risk of “agricultural and ecological drought” and the consequences of “agricultural intensification.”
Given that agriculture, forestry, and other land-use activities represent 23% of all total GHG emissions, it is surprising that the role of food and agriculture is conservatively mentioned. Not to mention that these activities were also responsible for “around 13% of CO2, 44% of methane, and 82% of nitrous oxide emissions from human activities during 2007–2016.”
People across the food and agriculture industry have found themselves at odds with the lack of representation found in the most recent IPCC report. Some institutions, such as the Rockefeller Foundation’s “True Cost of Food” report, have created their own documents that offer a regional approach to the dire need for food systems transformation. Others, like reporter Tom Philpott, are noticing how the impacts of our food system were “buried” in the pages of the report, and are making efforts to redirect climate conversations to food systems transformation. For writers like Errol Schweizer, the “IPCC has never really been clued in to the food side,” of the climate crisis- let alone the sides of political economy and social justice.
The agriculture industry is the driver of our food system. From the crops growing on the fields to the feed that sustains our access to animal products, food is central to the management of agriculture. To really address the climate crisis, we must take a critical lens to the foundations and functions of agricultural systems around the world.
The IPCC report lays out exactly what is at stake for our food system. Jelisa Castrodale does a great job of explaining how the report warns of the impacts that climate change will have on our food system. However, for many around the world, some of the effects are right in front of their faces.
We know that climate change threatens the very existence of our food system. The real question is: what do we do about it?
We EAT! This acronym reminds us of three actions that could revolutionize the way we interact with food and agriculture. Not only do these actions work to dismantle unsustainable production systems and methods of over-extraction that have brought our global food system to where it is today, but they also offer a framework to move forward towards a healthier future for all.
*It is important that wealthy and western citizens recognize that many people, specifically indigenous communities, around the world have ethical, sustainable food models which serve as blueprints to transform our food system. It is essential that rather than disenfranchising these communities through agricultural development and expansion, we find ways to empower and support the work they are doing to preserve the health of the Earth.*
E: Educate About Regenerative Practices
Globally, ⅓ of all the food we produce is thrown away. We have enough food to feed the world, but weak supply chains and a lack of international and regional distribution networks continue to add pressure on the agriculture industry to produce food that we don’t even need. What wasn’t mentioned in the IPCC report is that “food waste and loss has a huge carbon footprint,” ranking at around 3.3 billion tons of carbon equivalent.
All ends of the supply change can be addressed to reduce waste. Some solutions are as simple as “encouraging farmers to collect tomatoes in plastic crates instead of big sacks [because] they squish and rot less.” Others require more technological resources, such as the app TooGoodToGo and local community fridge projects, but work wonders in transforming food waste into food redistribution.
Other solutions require more extensive changes in the way we care for our communities and show solidarity with people around the world. There is a stark divide between the Global North and South’s food waste attributed to consumption. The Global South wastes significantly less food and many countries in this region simultaneously suffer from effects of hunger and malnutrition as they undergo a nutritional transition. In order to reduce waste and achieve net zero emissions, we must allocate resources such as clean technology, establish indigenous and ecological education, and provide financial aid to female farmers in the Global South.
Most importantly, we must understand that food waste and demand starts at production. We must start with transforming production and large scale purchasing to address the ecologically detrimental foundation of our food system. Some ways governments and corporations can start altering the foundation of agricultural production are:
Get rid of production subsidies, especially subsidies for polluting agricultural industries such as meat and energy
Establish true cost accounting for polluting industries in food to understand the actual cost of production
Redirect government subsidies to regenerative agriculture, organic seed development, and carbon sequestering production
A: Advocate for Rematriation and Restoration of Land
It is impossible to tackle the many drivers of climate change without addressing social justice. Our global food system is rooted in colonial histories that have fostered the inequality and exploitative production methods that have redefined our relationships with the Earth.
Today, our relationships with Earth are still rooted in resource extraction and inequality. These relationships are typically defined by the damage the human species has imposed on the land and the influence we have on accelerating the climate crisis. For how inextricably connected social and racial justice is to mitigating the effects climate change, the IPCC report does not acknowledge the systems of oppression that fostered and sustain much of the environment damage we see today:
The words that shape the social context of climate change rarely, if at all, appear in the IPCC report:
“Justice”: 2 times
“Social justice”: 1 time
“Racial” 0 times
“Race” 0 times
“Ethnic”: 1 time
“Oppression”: 0 times
“Capitalism”: 0 times
“Capitalist”: 0 times
“Colonial”: 4 times, in the footnotes
While some may argue that this is merely a report on the physical science basis for climate change, there are whole areas of academic research, such as political ecology, dedicated to finding scientific evidence for colonialism’s impact on climate change. Whether its changes in nutritional quality or the colonial roots of environmental degradation, we cannot fully understand our changing environment without understanding the foundations of oppression and exploitation that served as a catalyst for many of the changes we fear.
So how do we address this history? Decolonization. This process considers the colonial legacy of the environmental crisis. By understanding the historical contexts which have defined the way humans inhabit the Earth, we are able to develop a holistic approach that considers structural roots of inequality that drive the climate crisis.
Decolonization also allows us to consider our pre-colonial ties to land. Concepts such as regenerative agriculture and circular economies are not new. Our idea of “sustainable production” began before colonization among indigenous peoples who have fought for years behind the curtain of industrialization. By advocating for rematriation, or a return to pre-colonial relationships with the land, we can reverse the effects of climate change and restore the land.
The days of seeing reports and environmental “slogans devoid of social thought,” must end. Once we decolonize our minds, access, and expertise, we will finally be able to address the structural roots of the climate crisis.
T: Transform Agricultural Production
Today, agricultural production is funded to encourage high volume, low costs, and support big business. According to Séverine Kodjo-Grandvaux, “We exploit both the land and the people for the sake of consumerism and pleasure somewhere far away.” Fortunately, this reality is briefly mentioned in the IPCC report:
The timeseries of regional emissions suggest that progress… was primarily driven by reductions in anthropogenic… emissions in Europe, Russia and temperate North America over 1988–2000.
The growth since 2007 is driven by increasing agriculture… emissions from East Asia (1997–2017), West Asia (2005–2017), Brazil (1988–2017) and Northern Africa (2005–2017), and fossil fuel exploitations in temperate North America.
Rather than responding to the climate crisis by changing the industrialized nature of agricultural production, these practices were exported to developing countries throughout the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Shifting environmental responsibility is not the solution to the environmental crisis. Long-standing change requires an immediate and dramatic transformation of the entire agricultural system.
Thankfully, the IPCC report lays out very clear recommendations for the agriculture industry to achieve net zero carbon emissions. Some of these suggestions include:
Use agricultural management practices to improve soil carbon storage
Store carbon in trees and soils by planting, restoring or managing forests
Store carbon in soil by creating or restoring peatlands
Encouraging the use of crop rotation cycles
Employment of low-tillage and no-tillage
Agriculture that incorporates the cultivation and conservation of trees.
While the average citizen may not have a role in shaping the nature of agricultural production, we can place accountability on the corporations and international institutions responsible for these changes. We can change our consumption practices and advocate for a healthier future. . Charles Michel, a renowned chef and activist, created a “Guide to Conscious Eating” that provides a regenerative and eco-conscious list for consumers to follow. This 10 point manifesto reveals how a little change in our consumption habits can go a long way in advocating for net zero carbon emissions. However, we must recognize that it is unethical to place all responsibility on consumers for the climate crisis. There are factors of race, class, and income that make the necessary changes out of reach for most people in the world.
The news of the sixth IPCC report was sobering for many. It seems that every other week, we are reminded of new facts and figures that force us to pause and reflect on the state of our Earth. Although the average citizen is unable to single handedly address the climate crisis, we can still educate and advocate for the changes that need to be made. There is hope found in the evidence of many organizations making progress towards food systems transformation. All we must do is not turn a blind eye to the environmental changes happening before our eyes. Here are some organizations, outside of the IPCC, where you can learn more about the many factors that influence the intersection of the climate crisis and our global food system.