sign in sign up
<<
Home , Nutrient depletion, Overexploitation, Resource consumption

wwwww.wun.uenpe.opr.gorg UnitedUnited Nations Nations Environment Environment Programme Programme P.O. P.O.Box 30552Box 30552 Nairobi, Nairobi, 00100 00100 Kenya Kenya Tel: Tel:(254 (25420) 7621234 20) 7621234 Fax: Fax: (254 (25420) 7623927 20) 7623927 E-mail:E-mail: [email protected] [email protected] web:web: www.unep.org www.unep.org

FOOD SYSTEMS AND NATURAL Acknowledgements

Editor The International Panel (IRP) Working Group on Systems and Natural Resources chaired by Maarten Hajer

Lead Authors Henk Westhoek (lead coordinating author, PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency), John Ingram (University of Oxford), Siemen van Berkum (LEI –Wageningen UR), Leyla Özay (PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency) and Maarten Hajer (Professor at Utrecht University and former Director General of PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency). Contributions were received from: Maurits van den Berg (PBL), Martha van Eerdt (PBL), Maria Amélia Enríquez (Brazilian Society for Ecological Economy), Len R. Garces Braz (WorldFish – Philipines), Jeff Herrick (USDA-ARS), Lotte Huisman (PBL), Ma Lin, James Lomax (UNEP), Llorenç Mila-I-Canals (UNEP), Kazunobu Onogawa (IGES, Japan), Maripaz Perez (WorldFish – Philipines); Martijn Vink (PBL), Guus de Hollander (PBL) and Gete Zeleke (WLRC- Ethiopia). The authors would like to thank PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency for its support in the preparation of this report. They would also like to thank participants of the workshops organized by the IRP in Paris (5-6 September 2012); Nairobi (8-9 November 2013); Jakarta (30 April–1 May 2014); and The Hague (17-18 September 2014) for the inputs provided during the preparation of this report. The report went through a peer review process coordinated by Elias Ayuk with the support of the IRP Secretariat. The authors thank the anonymous peer reviewers for their constructive comments. Special thanks go to Janez Potočnik and Ashok Khosla, Co-Chairs of the IRP during the preparation of this report, for their dedication and commitment, as well as to all members of the IRP and its Steering Committee for their constructive comments. The Secretariat of the IRP coordinated the preparation of this report with the technical support of María José Baptista. The main responsibility for errors remains with the authors. Copyright © United Nations Environment Programme, 2016 This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or nonprofit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. UNEP would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from the United Nations Environment Programme.

Printed by: UNESCO Design/layout: Marie Moncet, SOURIBLE Cover photos@: 1. SvedOliver, Shutterstock.com; 2. littlesam, Shutterstock.com; 3. Panom, Shutterstock. com; 4. Arjen de Ruiter, Shutterstock.com; 5 gpointstudio, Shutterstock.com; 6 Nila Newsom, Shutterstock.com.

Graphics: Filip de Bois and Arie den Boer (PBL) Disclaimer The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations Environment Programme concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Moreover, the views expressed do not necessarily represent the decision or the stated policy of the United Nations Environment Programme, nor does citing of trade names or commercial processes constitute endorsement

The full report should be referenced as follows UNEP (2016) Food Systems and Natural Resources. A Report of the Working Group on Food Systems of the International Resource Panel. Westhoek, H, Ingram J., Van Berkum, S., Özay, L., and Hajer M.

Job Number: DTI/1982/PA

ISBN: 978-92-807-3560-4 www.unep.org United Nations Environment Programme P.O. Box 30552 Nairobi, 00100 Kenya Tel: (254 20) 7621234 Fax: (254 20) 7623927 E-mail: [email protected] web: www.unep.org

Summary for Policymakers FOOD SYSTEMS

Credit: Andrzej Kubik, Shutterstock.com AND NATURAL RESOURCES Produced by the International Resource Panel

This document highlights key findings from the report, and should be read in conjunction with the full report. References to research and reviews on which this Credit: Panom, Shutterstock.com report is based are listed in the full report. The full report can be downloaded at http://www.unep. org/resourcepanel. If you are reading a hardcopy, the CD-Rom can be found in the back cover. Additional copies can be ordered via email: [email protected],

Credit: Marco Alhelm, Shutterstock.com

Credit: Aleksandar Todorovic, Shutterstock.com Summary for Policymakers 4 Dr. Poto Janez Preface consumption will increaseconsumption pressures the even more. to expected unhealthyunsustainable and expansion shifts The growth, of population cities, dietary impacts air, on and quality, contributing to gas emissions climate greenhouse and change. degradation, impactsstocks, on of depletion fish nutrientlosses, terrestrialand aquatic , perspective. way systems The food in these which currently operate are responsible for that many our systems finds areof food report currentlyThe unsustainablefrom a natural resources complex interlinkages the and all of these. outcomes, between structures, socio-economic natural the resourceabout environmental impacts and use of all related food activities, governance their of unsustainable agricultureonly. consequences the and about talking longer areWe talking is changing conversation. the International We IRP (IRP). Panel the are Resource this no report, With Working of Group the Systems developed of by this new report systems Food the is at heart the role of natural fundamental the Understanding globalfood resources of functioning our sound in the effectively be implemented. cannot Agenda Development for Sustainable 2030 the eliminating hunger, improving and world of population, the achieving nutrition and health security food this debate it puts at and top the of policy agendas worldwide. It is well that without acknowledged of recently 2of the crystallizes number adopted outcome the Goals, Goal Development Sustainable debate within internationalthe raisedsecurity policy andprofile the of science the communities. food changing of patterns price resource volatility, food consumption, have others, among malnutrition, and Co-Chairs, International Panel Resource Co-Chairs, č nik nik Dr. Alicia Bárcena Concerns from , climate growth, population from change, Concerns and wellbeing,and planet. of our health the and culture their people, threadsconnecting between is therefore consume and essential of the one wefood grow, trade, store, , transport, sell directly state the on natural of our resources. The depends food to, time, our same food. At the availability the on depend of,a society access and therefore, any aspirations of the we might have as We are we what eat, they say. existence Our and, ensure continuity of supplyensure for future continuity generations. our planet, towhile nurturing nutritious food it is to possible sufficient with feed globalpopulation the that new remarkable gives practices with work fullest hope Their us attention. engaged and actors, wewhat believe is a valuable to contribution advance systems thinking in a topic that requires the We are grateful Hajer, very rest the and Westhoek, team of to for the Ingram, Maarten Henk John point. starting necessary a (e.g. connections their and outcomes cultural dimensions). health and the right framework is Defining impactsand agriculture, from system food there data other gaps are on activities, their still important system. the intervention along there While is of alarge literature amount covering use that there shows is still assessment more to if much we do The want effective to points of identify gas emissions. greenhouse and lower nutrient lead losses to could countries up to in these 40% consumption dairy of and meat reducedeveloped by could cereal global countries the demand 15%; reduction while the by 50% waste and loss in food in across systems, food consumption alevelling and dairy of and meat off processing food efficient (e.g. of -sourcedextraction protein) dry possible. is also A reduction improve and loses transparency markets in food reducing thus price volatility. water and More weatherand related information to remote farmers, sensing monitoring) food help reduce can on-farm related innovations (e.g. decision-making and farm- New to provide technology of use mobile price lower waterlosses, use, higher and ), allowing resources to less with produce more food stresses) heath and have potential the multipleat to levels increase efficiency the (lower nitrogen drip , till ‘low precision and agriculture’) improved and varieties (e.g. more resilient to water around is 20%), only for nitrogen phosphorus and water. and genetics (e.g. farming technologies New around total of 35% the crop production),consume nutrients (the globalaverage nutrient efficiency natural of include options resourcelivestock increasing base. efficiencies feed Some animals (farmed improvingdegradation, and the of management the both increasingby specifically efficiencies are,There however, system food decouple to activitiesenvironmentalfrom opportunities significant 5

Food systems and natural resources Summary for Policymakers 6 Foreword greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture from gas emissions greenhouse may increase 24% from to 30%. will world of expected population the an living be in severely 40% water-stressed river basins and tosupermarketization more resource-intensive trends, 2050, shifts food. By as well as dietary natural resource base are expected to increase significantly population, with and andthe populations, overexploitation fish the world’sof 20% of pressuresaquifers.These our on of degraded of depletion , 61% 33% the gas emissions, globalgreenhouse the of ‘commercial’ Globally, systems food of are terrestrial global responsible around 24% for 60% loss, biodiversity of imperativean achievement for the of at least 12 17of the out (SDGs). Goals Development Sustainable systems’, food provide to authors need transition solid the to evidenceThe on more ‘resource-smart activities. of these environmental outcomes and items)food-related various socio-economic the and and of food disposing and marketing, consuming, packaging, processing, transporting, harvesting, we food eat (growing, the with all activities to discussions connect concerned production-centered more comprehensive, complex yet realistic systems beyond approach. classic lens’ the goes A‘food to vision a a new way that proposes at moves food, one acompartmentalized from of IRP looking the integrate pillars of . social, In this the economic environmental and report, will that require and decisions balance science-based hunger, and to a world free of poverty global commitment ahistoric Agenda Development, for Sustainable 2030 The whichthey with areto improvemanaged. efficiency the options the and of that management consequences the them, we managing are at and how using looking inputs, these for to account International (IRP) Panel Resource iseffort an Natural and Resources”Systems developed by the for granted. precioustaken “Food gifts these report, This inputs to feed we and us, have necessary in many occasions of years, nature thousands has gracefullyFor provided the Poto Alicia Bárcena Janez and International leadership Panel,The the Resource Co-Chairs of under the impacts. private Governments, all have sector consumers actors, and acritical civil role to society play. and resources system the certain 30% for lead throughout gains to could of up resourceto efficiency tells action at different that us combined IRP points of intervention by and The of actors adiversity information play role. afundamental and choices lifestyle to infrastructure,and knowledge technology. from finance, , suffering countries In nets created for vulnerable groups (e.g. of population the farmers), smallholder access their on and way the on markets national, at local, the regional function levels, global and safety social the on while overdeficiencies, are 2 billion depend will people obese. Ensuring often to nutritious access food are million people hungry, over micronutrient 800 from 2billion Nearly health. systems suffer our on areThere of disparities alarming anumber also worldwide that reveal impacts the of current food year round. year we seize must to ensureopportunities by all access tofood, all safe, people sufficient and nutritious ofpiece literature, scientific magnitudelight the on of some challenges which must sheds we andface we are living to I wish . in the with congratulate for this important authors the thank and č nik, has produced a state of the art analysis has producednik, reveals which astate greatest of art of the the some complexities UN Under-Secretary-General UN UNEP Executive Director Executive UNEP Achim Steiner Steiner Achim 7

Food systems and natural resources

Credit: Andrzej Kubik, Shutterstock.com Key Messages 9

Food systems and natural resources 1. Resource-Smart Food Systems are needed to achieve Sustainable Development

The sustainable and efficient management for processing and for packaging or of natural resources is now an imperative cooking. So as to ensure all people have safe for the achievement of all 17 United Nations and nutritious food, in appropriate amounts, Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). these natural resources need to be managed Restoring and maintaining the health of the sustainably and used efficiently, thereby natural resource base is not only needed reducing environmental impacts. We therefore

Summary for Policymakers to adequately feed current and projected need ‘resource-smart’ food systems to deliver populations, but to provide a better quality of on the Sustainable Development Goals. in the years to come. The food sector is globally the dominant user Food systems are at the heart of the 2030 Agenda of a number of natural resources, particularly for Sustainable Development, a historic global land, biodiversity, , nitrogen and commitment to eradicate poverty and hunger phosphorus. While food production is a major while ensuring healthy, prosperous and fulfilling driver of , soil degradation, . The food we grow, harvest, process, water depletion and greenhouse gas emissions, trade, transport, store sell and consume is the other food systems activities also contribute essential connecting thread between people, to environmental degradation through water prosperity, and planet. use, and energy use. Therefore, the people who directly or indirectly manage our Food systems crucially depend on natural food systems are also the largest group of resources: land, soil, water, terrestrial and natural resource managers in the world and marine biodiversity, (essential nutrients could become critical agents of change in the for crops and animals) and fossil fuels. The use transformation of current consumption and of these natural resources goes beyond systems. food production, e.g. the use of fresh water

10 Figure 1. Conceptual Framework of Food System Activities and Natural Resources

• Atmospheric composition (e.g. from GHG emissions) Environmental • Air quality impacts • Water quantity and quality, , toxicity Biophysical • Biodiversity loss drivers Changes in: Land cover and Food system activities affect environment soils, Climate variability and means, Renewables: Non-renewables: Water availability • Land, and soils • Fossil fuels and quality, Natural • Fresh water • Minerals (nutrients) Nutrient • Genetic resources resources availability and • Biodiversity, cycling, Biodiversity marine resources, services

Food system activities draw Food system activities

on natural resources affect natural resources Food systems and natural resources

Food system activities and actors ´Exchange of information, contracts, Food systems standards, monetary flows outcomes, e.g. • Food Retailers, affordability Traders, Food food processors industry service • Food safety Input Farmers, Waste • Food and industry fishermen Consumers process, health • Rural and urban Subsistence farmers livelihoods

Socioeconomic conditions influence food system actors

Socio-economic drivers Changes in: Demographics, Economics, Socio-political context, Labour availability, Cultural context, Science & Technology, Regulators, Institutions, NGOs

11 Credit: Panom, Shutterstock.com 2. What is a Food Systems Approach and Why is it Important?

A food systems approach “gathers all the Benefits of this approach include: elements (environment, people, inputs, −−It considers opportunities within all food processes, infrastructures, institutions, etc.) system activities (such as farming, fishing, and activities that relate to the production, food processing, retailing and preparing) to processing, distribution, preparation and attain more across the consumption of food, and the outputs of these whole system. Reducing food losses and waste activities, including socio-economic and offers an especially important opportunity, and environmental outcomes”. (HLPE, 2014a) this has received more attention in recent years. −−It considers the socio-economic Many studies assess the impact of a given food consequences of certain measures or choices, system activity (e.g. producing or transporting Food systems and natural resources such as changes in demand or the effects of food) on a given resource (e.g. land, water, changes in trade regimes. minerals) or environmental outcome (e.g. GHG −It addresses more directly the important emissions). The food system concept provides − a framework to integrate such studies to provide issues of both undernutrition a more complete description of the ‘food’ two- and overconsumption. A production-oriented way interaction with both natural resources and approach fails to take into account the serious socio-economic conditions. Its main value is health implications that arise from current food therefore in showing where the feedbacks to consumption patterns. both socio-economic and environmental drivers −−It considers changes such as lie, as these interactions are often the ultimate “supermarketization”, a trend that is cause for further natural resource degradation. particularly seen in Asia and South America. A thorough analysis of existing food systems can This supermarketization not only affects the assist in identifying the most important issues power relations in the food supply chain, regarding natural resources, as well as the but very often also affects eating habits and opportunities for effective policy, fiscal, social product sourcing. A rapid consolidation and/or technical interventions. process has taken place both in the input and

13 the processing industries, resulting in dually by non-linear feedbacks that emerge from their structured food chains with a small number of interactions with other segments in the food companies dominating the market. system, but also from changes in the socio- −−It looks at multiple objectives. This approach economic context. The food systems approach can help identify and map multiple social, deals with these complexities and enables the economic and environmental objectives (e.g. identification of the mix of factors that clarify food security, poverty eradication, actors responses and behaviours consumption and production) and the potential and particular outcomes. synergies and trade-offs between these. −−It looks at solutions from a range of viewpoints. −−It deals with complexity. There are numerous It helps identify several points of intervention food system ‘actors’ who undertake ‘food system by different actors for the improvement of food activities’ and behave, act and influence each system outcomes. other in a certain way to attain their objectives. −−It looks at opportunities from a business These are however no sets of linear acts and viewpoint. The food system ‘lens’ helps Summary for Policymakers influences that follow each other in a predictable enterprises understand better where certain or sequential order. Food system actors decide policy and/or technical interventions can have and behave in response to what they perceive the best impact for their business, and also as incentives (opportunities, challenges helps them to consider what might otherwise and risks) and constraints (environmental, have been the unforeseen consequences of institutional and financial) in a particular context. such interventions. These perceptions are continuously re-shaped

What are Resource-Smart Food Systems? A ‘Resource-Smart’ or ‘Environmentally-sustainable’ food system is a food system in which the environmental bases to deliver food security for future generations is not compromised. Three main principles must be followed to transition towards a resource-smart food system: 1. Sustainable use of renewable resources, implying no degradation or depletion of renewable resources, such as land and soils, water and biodiversity. 2. Efficient use of all resources. 3. Low environmental impacts from food system activities. Resource-smart food systems are not only about sustainable and efficient food production; the key challenge is to be effective in terms of overall food security, livelihoods and human health while protecting essential natural resources.

14 Table 1. Principles and indicators for sustainable food systems from the natural resource perspective Indicator of efficient use Indicator of reduced Principle of sustainable use In italics: ambition at food system level environmental impacts Renewable Resources Land, No or very limited Optimized crop yields, closing the ‘yield gap’ No / limited conversion of and soils (in all forms) / soil , prevent without increasing environmental impacts natural areas into agricultural contamination, maintenance of No further land needed in food systems land; maintenance of landscape landscape diversity, aiming at diversity sustained crop yields Water No depletion of / High water-use efficiency along Limited changes in hydrological of water systems; Low total amount of water needed in food regimes prevent pollution / contamination systems Biodiversity Conservation - no degradation of Biodiversity maintained/enhanced Reduced disturbance / biodiversity of species Genetic resources Conservation of genetic diversity for Genetic potential of crops and farmed animals resilient food systems exploited, not only in terms of productivity but also in terms of robustness and nutritional quality

Marine resources Conservation / no depletion of fish Avoidance of by-catch, proper use of by-catch Limited disturbance of marine Food systems and natural resources stocks – no disturbance of marine environment environment Non-renewable Resources Minerals - High nutrient efficiency along the food chain Reduced pollution by minerals Low total amount of ‘new’ minerals for food systems - High energy efficiency / Reduced burning fossil fuels / sources clean burning methods (GHG Low total amount of fossil fuels for food systems emissions, ) Use of agents - Minimized use Reduced pollution and / synthetic contamination (soil, air and water components quality)

(1) The columns ‘sustainable use’ and ‘efficient use’ are not meant to indicate a contradiction; in most cases both are needed simultaneously. (2) For reasons of simplicity, this is defined in physical terms. Farmers might be more interested in outputs related to revenue or employment.

15 Credit: Marco Alhelm, Shutterstock.com 3. Food Security and Human Health both depend on our Natural Resource Base

Although much progress has been made in Nutrition is the cornerstone of sustainable some aspects, current food systems are not development. To achieve the international delivering food security and healthy food for targets set by the United Nations Secretary- everyone nor are they sustainably using the General Zero Hunger Challenge and Sustainable limited natural resource inputs as explained Development Goal 2 we must re-think the way in above. Food production has more than doubled, which food system activities are structured and diets have become more varied (and often more carried out. Ensuring access to nutritious food for energy-intense) satisfying peoples’ preferences all is at the core of this change and this will often Food systems and natural resources in terms of form, taste and quality; numerous depend on the way markets function at the local, local, national and multi-national food-related national, regional and global levels, on the social enterprises have emerged providing livelihoods safety nets created for vulnerable groups of the for millions. Nonetheless over 800 million people population (e.g. the urban poor and smallholder are hungry (Figure 2), over 2 billion suffer farmers), and on their access to infrastructure, from micronutrient deficiencies, in particular finance, knowledge and technology. In societies vitamin A, iodine, iron and zinc, and over 2 suffering from overconsumption, lifestyle billion people overweight or obese (Figure 3). choices and consumer information play a This situation, and particularly the unhealthy fundamental role. overconsumption by an increasing number of people, is unsustainable and needs to change.

17 Summary for Policymakers 18 Figure 2. Prevalence of undernourishment Source: (FAO, 2015) (FAO, Source: 1000 1100 millions 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1990 Number (leftaxis) 995 23.6% Undernourishment inthedevelopingregions N S o A U o rther u f r nder 4 t 1995 i c h 281 a e n r O n

c

A no e 1 s a i n a ur i Sub-Sa a i C s C a hm entra u c h 220 2000 a a ent 6 s 18.8% Prevalence (rightaxis) r 939 u a l

s n A

a

s A

n i a i f d n 2014-2016,by r i

c a E a s D t 145 e e r v 2005 n e

16.7% l A Percentage undernourished o 893 W s p i 1 La a e e 5 d t s t h

t i r n e S 1 e e

r o 9

A g C n Total =786million u i m o a

15.5% 3 A t 863 r n h-E r e 4 i s bbe s r i a egi i 6 c

a 1 a 2010 s a

t a n e n o r d n n

14.3%

A MDG 827 s WFS target i a - target 2015 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 5 Figure 3. Prevalence of obesity

Prevalence of obesity* , ages 18+, both sexes, 2014

* BMI =30 kg/m2 Prevalence of obesity (%)

< 10 10 - 19.9 20 - 29.9 = 30 Data not available Food systems and natural resources

Source: (WHO, 2014)

19 Credit: Aleksandar Todorovic, Shutterstock.com 4. Current Food Systems are Unsustainable and the Pressures on Natural Resources are expected to Increase

While there is still a considerable lack of reliable −−Of the total input in the form of nitrogen- and data on the current condition of natural resources phosphorus fertilizers, only 15-20% is actually related to food system activities, key statistics embedded in the food that reaches the show the crucial role of these systems in the consumers’ plates, implying very large nutrient degradation or depletion of natural resources losses to the environment. Some regions have

and provide evidence of unsustainable and/or lower efficiency and higher losses (North Food systems and natural resources inefficient practices at the global level: America, East Asia), while in Sub-Saharan −−33% of soils is moderately to highly degraded Africa soil nutrient depletion (where extraction due to erosion, nutrient depletion, acidification, is higher than input) is common. salinization, compaction and chemical −−Globally, food systems account for around pollution. 24% of the global greenhouse gas emissions. −−61% of ‘commercial’ fish populations are fully Current food systems vary worldwide from fished and 29% are fished at a biologically ‘modern’ food systems in industrialized and unsustainable level and therefore overfished. emerging regions to more ‘traditional’ food −−At least 20% of the world’s are systems in rural areas in developing countries. overexploited, including in important This variety in food systems, in combination production areas such as the Upper Ganges with the social and in which (India) and California (US). they operate, has important implications on the −−60% of global terrestrial biodiversity loss is possible pathways towards sustainable food related to food production, while ecosystem systems and on the logic of intervention. In services supporting food production are often developing regions, there is a rapidly evolving under pressure.

21 Summary for Policymakers 22 operating at anational level (or level) at city start suggested that actors governments other and ofGiven limitations aglobalapproach, the it is risks for future production. food .and increased This pressure creates vulnerable areasecologically as savannahs such by 10–15% mainly at expense the of up to 2050, cropland the demand, area is projected to grow water). example, For to due increased the food nutrientand to ground surface and activities (such gas emissions as greenhouse environmental impacts to due system food (Figure 4). will This lead also to higher climate production impacts change food on drinks) associated increased with wealth; and andfruits, fish, processed vegetables, food resource-intensive products (e.g. dairy, meat, towards shifts Asia) more dietary with coupled (especially growth population in and Africa system activities will increase expected the with pressureThe natural on resources food from pressure natural our on resources. developments increase significantly the These ‘supermarketization’ of world. the in many parts and patterns trends in dietary changes also imply intertwined These developments. demographic and socio-economic wealth other and as urbanization, such macro-trends increased systems. food trend This ismodern driven by replacement of traditional systems food by does not geographically not the coincide with does and relatedfisheries processing) food generally system’ production (including agriculture, ‘food The intervention. for opportunities effective and natural resources system, the from drivers their most significant pressures on the of identification regional system. food assist in can the This acomprehensive analysiswith national/ of the National andLocalFoodSystems or to soil degradation. to soil or pesticides or nutrients by pollution water to led has yields crop higher on focus the example for occurred, have trade-offs slower, or been has progress such cases, lower greenhouse gas emissions. In other and quality water improved efficiency, land), increased nutrient- and water-use agricultural of use efficient more (meaning yields crop higher to, example, for leading systems food their in use resource of over recent on decades various aspects made been has progress cases, many In companies. food large and retailers as such players large with regions, urbanized highly in systems to food systems, ranging from subsistence characteristics, indifferences terms of socio-economic large also are There concern. greater of are quality water and air in to declines leading losses nutrient high regions other in while issues, major the are loss biodiversity some regions, land degradation and In resources. natural on impacts their of nature the hence and systems, food in differences regional large are There ‘food consumption system’ and hence the as national governments generally have more importance of trade and transport infrastructure. influence over national natural resources as The share of imported or exported food in the needed to support the food system, then they total food production and consumption does have over those used to produce food elsewhere not only depend on the share of food that is in the world. The growing urban populations are produced at the given level, but also on the a special case as almost all of the food will come related socioeconomic and political contexts. from outside the city’s boundaries. In this case, The difference between nationally- (or locally-) a food systems approach is particularly useful. produced food and imported food is relevant

Figure 4. Per capita consumption of meat in selected countries or regions (in 2003, 2013 and 2023) Consumption of meat into selected countries or regions kg per capita per year 60

50 Food systems and natural resources

40

30

20 2003 10 2013 2023

0 Pigmeat Pigmeat Pigmeat Pigmeat Pigmeat Pigmeat Pigmeat Poultry meat Poultry meat Poultry meat Poultry meat Poultry meat Poultry meat Poultry meat Beef and veal Beef and veal Beef and veal Beef and veal Beef and veal Beef and veal Beef and veal

China European India Indonesia Latin America North America Sub Saharan Union-28 and Caribbean Africa

Source: (OECD & FAO, 2014)

23 Summary for Policymakers 24 various are options lacking,from findings studies potential combined of of the assessments integratednatural good resources. Although ofmanagement sustainable efficient) and current through improved trajectory (more to the change areThere many opportunities 5.1. Options Biophysical 5. How to Decouple Food System depletion ratedepletion resources (e.g. of non-renewable fossil minerals). and fuels impacts (e.g. gas emissions) lower and greenhouse alower and eutrophication nutrient from run-off a more of sustainable use renewable resources (e.g. fresh water reserves), lower environmental use efficient Increasing the areas, wetlands. and hedges as wooded resourceor valuation) adopting and practices effective such management of elements landscape ecosystem services), by reducing overexploitation (for example through regulation, pricing strategies management resource Sustainable in FoodSystems Sustainable ManagementandEfficient Use ofNaturalResources Degradation? Environmental from Activities of all resources in all system food activities will help move towards is about preventing is about degradation of resources (land, ,

assuming limitedassuming rebound effects. impacts and resources certain for 20–30% when could combined, the be increase up to improvement in efficiency; estimated 5–20% indicate leadcould that anthese to efficiency at individual to options looking increase resource

Figure 5. Options for sustainable and efficient use of natural resources and reduced environmental impacts in food systems

Natural Options for Options for more efficient use in food systems ( ) resource sustainable use No over- Increase production per ha consumption, Land, Prevent land dietary shifts landscape, degradation: soils cover soil, provide Improve feed organic matter, conversion maintain landscape Reduction of food losses elements, avoid contemination Primary food production More crop per drop Crops Fresh water No depletion of Food processing aquifiers, prevent pollution Reduction of food Food distribution Livestock Fisheries wastes Biodiversiy and No degradation of and retailing Food systems and natural resources EGS biodiversity and EGS, Increase protection, no use of EGS Food contamination Improve consumption manure Improved recylcling Genetic Maintain diversity. varieties resource Avoid invasive Waste species management Optimal No catches quantity beyond MSY; Recycle nutrients conserve , More efficient especially water use / breeding grounds Improve fuel efficiency less pollution Reduction of on farms / fisheries by-catches Minerals Input industry Fossil fuels

Reduce pressures from outside the food system: • Loss of good land due to urbanization Increase fuel efficiency of / less • Cropland use for fuel and fibers processing, transport and cooling • , urban water use Replace renewable energy sources

25 Summary for Policymakers 26 an analysisan current of the system food its and point is starting Agood regulatory framework. andinstitutional the in setting task important an civil and society.companies Governments initiatedbe by various actors governments, from actions can systems.sustainable food These towards identified be interventions can system food usingBy the effective lens, Pathways Institutional 5.2. − − − − − include could (Figurebut 5): dependent, systems location are context and very towardsOptions food environmentally-sustainable − − − − − coastal systems. impact less and on lower nutrient losses aquaculture efficient More systems,with etc.).cities, recyclingfeed compost, or of minerals from manure, of use by-products wastes food or as (e.g. better of minerals in animal chain the food along nutrient efficiency Higher systems. pastoral welfare)animal of higher and productivity feed conversion (withoutBetter reducing pesticide use). (e.g. integrated to reduce management pest effective ofMore use services impacts). environmental (e.g. increasing higher yields without intensification’ of crop‘Sustainable production have have categories are presented figure in the above. ofof measures these possible within each one system. food the outside options and Anumber (including recycling)increase resource efficiency supply the chainproduction, to along options food to increase in primary resource efficiency ofsustainable use natural resources, options categories:four option main to options reach a propose authors the purposes, analytical For − − − food systemfood are hardly included prices. in food (externalities) environmental costs The of the sustainable encourage resource not do use. limitedand markets to access output input and regulation, weak levelswith poor of education water)and to access and , coupled tenuredeveloping poor rights countries, (of land implications for natural resources. Especially in − − − plant-based diets).plant-based more to societiesanimal-based from affluent (e.g. patterns of unhealthy dietary in shift of overconsumptionReduction change and systems. reductionand waste of food food throughout fisheries, in and farms losses of food Reduction processing. energy- water-efficient More and food The pricing of environmental externalities, 1. Removal of subsidies that encourage reinforcement of legislation to prevent pollution unsustainable production or practices and other forms of environmental degradation, (e.g. fossil fuel subsidies). and the removal of harmful subsidies (e.g. fossil 2. Creation of adequate legal frameworks fuels) could provide important incentives to to secure property rights and improve resource efficiency. Governments play and regulate access to and use of water, an important role in education, which is relevant biodiversity, and ecosystems services. both for food producers, as well as for food 3. Creation of adequate legal frameworks to consumers. Children need to be taught how to regulate environmental impacts from food prepare food from basic ingredients, and need systems (e.g. regulation to prevent nutrient to be aware of its nutritional aspects. losses at all stages, but easpecially in the livestock sector). In all countries there is currently a large number 4. Investment in management practices and of laws, financial and other regulations that are research development to enable a more influencing directly or indirectly food systems and effective use of biodiversity and ecosystem the use of natural resources. These can be policies Food systems and natural resources services in food production. at the international level (e.g. trade regulations), 5. Investment in technology and research at the national level, but also at the local level development for locally suitable seeds (e.g. local farming extension services, location and breeds (with proper infrastructure, of restaurants, urban , etc.). distribution system, quality assurance and Aligning these policies in such a way that these certification schemes). better contribute to sustainable food systems is 6. Creation of incentives for local or regional thus an important mission for authorities at various sourcing and investment in sustainable levels of government. Governments have also a local supply chains. role in stimulating and facilitating innovations, new 7. Attraction of investments in rural initiatives, collaboration and cooperation along the infrastructure, small enterprise development system. In general, special attention is needed (e.g. inputs, local storage and processing for the role of women, as they are usually critical facilities, logistic and transport). participants in food production and main managers 8. Facilitation of collaborative schemes of food consumption in their households. between different food system actors (e.g. A number of concrete actions that governments cooperation agreements among retailers to could implement are: establish marketing codes of conduct).

27 Summary for Policymakers 28 resources, small and farms helping smallholder of naturalmanagement better for fishermen and actions as paying such undertake farmers could sustainable supply chains. Private companies term interest it inseeing long their to invest in more However, are increasingly companies many incentives to promote more sustainable practices. always not systemsfood does give actors right the of enterprises. current of The logic many business systems, systems as food are acollation in effect actors to solving sustainable development” businesses “ all has called upon global The 12. 11. 10. 9.

patterns and health. and patterns natural links resources, between consumption the Creation on programmes of education environmental impacts; systems, in food asneeded well as their statusof natural of the the resources systems Creation of adequate monitoring stimulates healthy sustainable diets). and food, create environment which afood research, stricter marketing for rules unhealthy (e.g. behaviour to promote consumption policies ofAdoption consumption-oriented sourcing, environment regulations, food etc.). farming, sustainable campaigns, education systemssustainable food are tested (urban innovation incubators where ideas on Creation of incentives for cities to become are crucially important players are crucially in food important to apply their creativity innovation and . Private challenge incumbent actorschallenge incumbent to act more swiftly. niche players, stimulatecan certain thus and awareness raising campaigning. and also They ofform in by the constructiveeither or dialogue governments private and actors to take action, Finally, actors civil from society margins. towardsdemand products attractive with profit driven influencing byis partly companies food high diseases. This consumption obesity-related public moreover to and due health undermines environmental costs, brings disproportionate (often food processed calories’) ‘empty containing basedof products, animal as well as of ultra- ‘developed’or regions high – the consumption both in – society of sections ‘developing’ In affluent increase production in asustainable way. supply chains,in while assisting local to farmers Actors invest could as retailers companies food and markets. export largely or target urban consumers value food are chains that to connected not modern In many developing farmers smallholder countries, for consumers. easier choices sustainable food systems,food as well healthy and as in making role in reducing waste, food especially in modern activities. Privatefarm-gate actors have akey storagefood processing, and post- in and other in improving water energy and use-efficiency invest in more sustainable activities including developing in countries businesses agri-food can stimulate can Draft framework for analyzing national food systems, with focus on national resources

On the present prevailing food systems 1. What is the prevalent type of food system? Who are the principal actors? What is the relation between national food production and food consumption? 2. How is food production (farming, fishing) organized? What farms and types are dominant? What is the size and nature of livestock and aquaculture production? 3. Where is primary and secondary processing done and by whom? 4. Where is food being transported from and how? 5. How is food consumption being organized? What is the share of supermarkets and out-of-home consumption in total expenditures?

On natural resources 1. What is the nature and extent of : is there expansion or contraction of the agricultural area? What is the situation regarding land degradation? How are crop yields compared to similar regions / potentially attainable yields? How is land being used? 2. How are fisheries managed? What is the status of fish stocks? Is there aquaculture, and what are the related environmental impacts? 3. What is the situation regarding plant and animal breeds: availability, diversity, quality, genetic

potential? Food systems and natural resources 4. What is the nutrient use efficiency, amount of nutrients (minerals) being used, nutrient losses? 5. Is water being used sustainably and efficiently in irrigation and food processing? Are groundwater levels being monitored? Is there potential for expansion of irrigated area? 6. What are the amounts and proportions of fossil and biomass fuel used in which food system activities? 7. What are the overall environmental impacts: GHG emissions, nutrient losses, pesticide emissions, soil and ? 8. How are property rights and land tenure organized?

With respect to food demand 1. What is the food security situation (stability of food availability, food access, food utilization)? 2. What is the nutritional security situation (prevalence of undernutrition, overnutrition, other forms of malnutrition? What is the trend in diets over the last 10 – 20 years? What are the expectations for the future? What is the share of livestock products in diets? 3. How much fossil fuels and packaging are used in food consumption? 4. How much food waste occurs? What is happening to food waste, food residues and human excreta? 5. What is the fate of nutrients entering urban food systems?

With respect to actors, institutions, regulation 1. What kinds of regulation are in place to regulate food system activities, and the use of and access to natural resources? 2. What kinds of environmental regulation are in place? How are they implemented and enforced? 3. Which subsidies are installed? What is the tax regime? Are there import and export tariffs?

29 Summary for Policymakers 30 Figure 6. Spiral movements created by the co-evolution of different pathways different of co-evolution by the created movements 6. Spiral Figure arrangements to enable scaling up, until the practice is applied by 80–90% of the industry. the of 80–90% by applied is practice the until up, scaling enable to institutional by arrangements respond governments actors), (private frontrunners by over taken gradually are innovations and actions (1) Small Towards sustainablefoodsystems Source: PBL 1. N G 2. b O u

Fo s i n i by businesses 3. Scaling-up n i r t e e i r a s u s t n i v n e i

n g 1. b

u Fo s i n r e e r s u s n n i n r g 4. G e

f o r o m v by N 2. Supported e s

r o n r m

l G e e by businesses 3. Scaling-up g O n i s t

l a t i o n r 1. G e f o r o m v e s r n b 2. m u by businesses 3. Scaling-up Fo e s n i n r t e e

r s u s Repeat ofstep1 n n New standardset by governments i n g

Time Twelve critical shifts towards Resource-Smart Food Systems 1. Reduce food loss and waste. 2. Reorient away from resource-intensive products such as meat, ‘empty calories’ and ultra- processed food; and rethink the ‘food environment’ (the physical and social surroundings that influence what people eat, especially relevant in urban areas) to facilitate consumers adopting more healthy and sustainable diets. 3. Reframe thinking by promoting ‘resource-smart food systems’ in which ‘Climate-Smart Agriculture’ (CSA) plays one part, and search for linkages to new dominant values such as ‘wellbeing’ and ‘health’. 4. Reconnect rural and urban, especially in developing regions, where urban actors (e.g. supermarkets) could invest in regional supply chains and improve the position of smallholders. 5. Revalue the pricing of environmental externalities, reinforce legislation to prevent pollution and other forms of environmental degradation and remove subsidies that provide disincentives for better resource efficiency.

6. Reconnect urban consumers with how their food is produced and how it reaches their Food systems and natural resources plates, and inform them about both the health and environmental consequences of dietary choices, protect peri-urban zones around cities and use them for production. 7. Research the current functioning of the local, national or regional food systems and their impact on national resources. 8. Reconnect flows between urban areas and rural areas, as well as between crop and livestock production. 9. Reform policies on land and water rights, develop and implement policies at all levels of governments (multilateral, national and local) to enable better resource management and encourage synergistic ‘adaptive governance’ by the wide range of non-state actors (i.e. businesses and civil society) within the food system. 10. Reinvigorate investment in rural infrastructure, education, training, technology, knowledge transfer and payments of environmental services. 11. Research and innovate, to decouple food production from resource use and environmental impacts, and to replace certain inputs (such as pesticides) with ecosystem services. 12. Rebuild feedback loops by functional and informative monitoring and reporting, at various levels, such as countries, cities and companies.

31

For more information, contact:

International Resource Panel Secretariat, Division of Technology, Industry and Economics, United Nations Environment Programme, Email: [email protected] Website: www.unep.org/ resourcepanel Twitter: @UNEPIRP Global food systems have radically changed over the last 50 years. www.unep.org Food production has more than doubled, diets have become more varied (and often more energy-intense) satisfying people’s preferences United Nations Environment Programme P.O. Box 30552 Nairobi, 00100 Kenya in terms of form, taste and quality, and numerous local, national and Tel: (254 20) 7621234 multi-national food-related enterprises have emerged providing Fax: (254 20) 7623927 E-mail: [email protected] livelihoods for millions. Nonetheless, over 800 million people are still web: www.unep.org hungry (70% of which live in rural areas in developing countries), about two billion suffer from poor nutrition, and over two billion are overweight or obese. Job Number: DTI/1982/PA

The resource use implications and environmental impacts of these ISBN: 978-92-807-3560-4 food systems are significant. In general, of all economic activities, the food sector has by far the largest impact on natural resource use as well as on the environment. An estimated 60% of global terrestrial biodiversity loss is related to food production; food systems account for around 24% of the global greenhouse gas emissions and an estimated 33% of soils are moderately to highly degraded due to erosion, nutrient depletion, acidification, salinization, compaction and chemical pollution.

This report looks at food as a crucial connection point (a ‘node’) where various societal issues coincide, such as human dependence on natural resources, the environment, health and wellbeing. Rather than looking separately at resources such as land, water and minerals, the International Resource Panel (IRP) has chosen a systems approach. The report looks at all the resources needed for the primary production of food, as well as for other food system activities (e.g. processing, distribution) considering not only the set of activities, but also the range of actors engaged in them and the outcomes in terms of food security, livelihoods and human health.

The IRP assesses the current status and dynamics of natural resource use in food systems and their environmental impacts and identifies opportunities for resource efficiency improvements in global food systems, responding to policy-relevant questions like what do sustainable food systems look like from a natural resource perspective? How can resource efficiency improvements be made to enhance food security? How to steer transition towards sustainable food systems?