Emanuele Bompan Riccardo Pravettoni

F › O › O › D › 4

G E O G R A P H I E S O F F O O D

AuthorsEmanuele Bompan, Riccardo Pravettoni

CartographerRiccardo Pravettoni

DesignAndrea Canfora

PhotoeditingGiada Connestari

TranslationMary Trease

OversightRoberto Giovannini

PublisherLa Stampa

With the sponsorship and support ofThe Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International CooperationDirectorate-General for Development Cooperation

Cover imageMalthus™ (2009)by Antonio Scarponi

Thanks for their participation toAndrea Bertaglio, Lester Brown, Mauro Buonocore, Giampaolo Cantini,Linda Fioriti, Eden Kincaid, Danielle Nieremberg, Lapo Pistelli,Cinzia Scaffidi, Donatella Spano, Giovanni Venegoni

Special thanks toMario Calabresi, Andrea Concer, Marco Este, Simone Landini,Jean Leonard Touadi, Cristiano Maggipinto, Lia Quartapelle

ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDNo part of this publication may be duplicated, reproduced, or used for other publicationswithout express permission of the authors @ Bompan, Pravettoni 2015

04 Introduction Emanuele Bompan

06 Preface Lapo Pistelli

Part one › Cereals

10 Granaries at risk Lester Brown

12 Hunger and greed Emanuele Bompan

14 Wall Street Food Danielle Nieremberg, Eden Kincaid

Part two › Livestock

18 Meat production and consumption, can it be sustainable? Andrea Bertaglio

20 More meat for all? Linda Fioriti

22 Biodiversity on the plate Emanuele Bompan

Part three › Fishing

26 Where are all the fish? Emanuele Bompan

28 Big fishing boat eats little fishing boat Emanuele Bompan

30 Inside the net Emanuele Bompan

Part four › Climate

34 If the climate changes Donatella Spano, Mauro Buonocore

36 The coming water crisis Giovanni Venegoni

38 What a waste! Emanuele Bompan

40 Biodiversity, a common good to feed the world Cinzia Scaffidi

42 Cooperation to feed the world Giampaolo Cantini

45 Sources

Index

In 1798, Robert Thomas Malthus, celebrated English economist, demog-rapher, and author, wrote in his Essay on the principle of population and its effects on the future development of society that, «the power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man». He believed that population growth would lead to cultivating less fertile lands, with food shortages suffi-cient for subsistence to reach the limit of economic development.

Although the truth of these Malthu-sian predictions remains to be seen, more than 200 years later the debate is still open on population growth, meet-ing the demand for food, fighting hun-ger, and conserving natural resources.

Our intent is to produce a universal exposition dedicated to feeding the planet – energy for life is symbolic in and of itself. Today we are faced with a world that will have a population of 9 billion people by 2050. To satisfy all, we will have to produce as much food in the next 35 years as man has produced in the last 8 thousand. With-out destroying the planet, how will we

›

›

›

›

›

preserve its biodiversity and confront the climate changes that we ourselves have caused?

A new geological era is in store for the earth: the Anthropocentric. An era in which the Earth is heavily marked by human activity. Not only in the climate, where gas emissions will have transformed the atmosphere and climate balance. But also in the chemical composition of the soils, and in the biological structure of the continents. We have cleared, burned, created vast expanses of monoculture, genetically altered plants, altered the cycle of nutrients thanks to fertilizers (potassium nitrate, nitrogen), engin-eered chains of mass-production, fished many species to extinction, and eradicated entire classes of animal species (large mammals).

An often-unbalanced growth, even in the world of humans. A world in which part of the population suffers from hunger and malnutrition for lack of access to safe and nutritious food sources. And meanwhile, another 2.1 million people are overweight or obese and suffer from related diseases.

Introduction

Cereals

Livestock

›

›

›Malthus and his successors – Aurelio Peccei and the Club of Rome come to mind – have always correctly held to a position of alarm on the demog-raphy – food safety connection, even if often excessively catastrophic. As Umberto Colombo, former ENEA director, recalled in 1978 in the Club of Rome’s seminal text, Beyond the Age of Waste, “we must always strive to equip ourselves with new knowledge and new technological paradigms with which to address and resolve issues in order to properly assess the scarcity of resources”.

New technologies and new practi-ces will be available to address the huge problem of food security in a world with 9 billion inhabitants. Without giving into the blind trust of a techno-optimist, La Stampa has documented how today holds many ways to improve our response to the challenge of food security: from preserving plant biodiversity to renewable energy in agriculture, from sustainable agro-forestry culture to control over fishing quotas, from the introducing adapted diets to urban gardens to fight the “food deserts”. We

have shown many solutions through-out La Stampa’s special report, Food4, which can be found online (view FOOD4 online).

This atlas aims to give the reader an analytical way to rapidly and effective-ly understand, perhaps not exhaustive-ly but as completely as possible, the complexity of the food issues gripping us at present. These are real issues that we will face in the years ahead: grain production, impacts of climate change, impact of meat consumption, rational use of water, the relation-ship between food commodities and finance, overfishing, and biodiversity. We wanted to create a digital instru-ment for you to read on your iPad or PC, to print and take with you to Expo 2015, to reflect on the dimensions of these issues as you try to grasp the global interconnections between these issues. The map tool has great narra-tive power; you will find evocative po-tency in the photos, and explanatory support in the text. Throughout, we continue to do our duty as journalists and researchers: to narrate the grand scenes of a world in transformation. For you readers.

Climate

Fishing

Emanuele BompanAuthor of the Food4 project, geographer,

and journalist

Roberto GiovanniniJournalist,La Stampa

Agriculture is still the main source of employment and income in rural areas of less developed countries, where a great majority of poverty persists. Worldwide, one out of every eight people still suffers from hunger. At the same time, obesity and other forms of malnutrition caused by a poor diet are growing issues with a negative impact on public health.

The global food crises of 2007-2008 and 2011, with dizzying increases in the prices of basic food products, have brought the issue of food and nutrition security and sustainable agriculture to the center of the development agenda. Millions of people have seen their ability to eat properly become compromised as levels of malnutrition have risen, with serious repercussions on the political and social stability of many countries.

Among the main factors behind this crisis – which it is feared could hap-

›

›

›

›

pen again – are numerous elements. A growing global demand for food products (particularly livestock and fishing) is not offset by an adequate increase in agricultural production. The ever more frequent extreme climactic events, high energy prices, and, above all, inequality in the dis-tribution and access to resources and market speculation.

Therefore, food and nutrition security must be at the center of policies to reverse the trends of mass poverty, unequal globalization, and environmental unsustainability. Producing more food is absolute-ly critical to meeting the growing demand, which is also driven by urbanization and higher income, but it is only a part of the challenge. The fight for food and nutrition secur-ity and agricultural sustainability must first address the disparities that often marginalize rural popula-

Preface

Cereals

Livestock

›

›

›

tions – particularly farmers and farm workers – excluding them from the process of development.

Internationally, food security and sustainable agriculture are among the most urgent priorities to be addressed by the international com-munity to ensure a better future for coming generations. The negotiation process for the post-2015 Agenda for the definition of new Sustainable Development Goals is confirming that food and nutrition security and sustainable agriculture represent a fundamental pillar of development that intersects with economic growth, social development, and environ-mental sustainability.

Food and nutrition security will be central to Expo2015, which is dedicated to the theme “Nourish the Planet, Energy for Life”. This is an opportunity to reassert the Italian

role in the promotion of increased awareness of access to food as a uni-versal right. Thanks to cooperation between institutions, the private sector, and civil society, you are invited to recognize for yourselves in the proposals of the Charter of Milan what we believe will become a manifesto for inspiration.

We need clear, immediate, and effective tools to juggle these com-plex issues. For this, I think the Food4 Atlas – Geographies of Food can be a very useful tool for studying the issues relating to food security, from the peak in grain production to the problems of climate change, from overfishing to the impact of livestock raising. An atlas to give an account of the state of the world, and a synopsis to get closer to the heart of the Expo to better understand the challenges that our country, and the entire world, must face in the years ahead.

Climate

Fishing

Lapo PistelliItalian Vice Minister

of Foreign Affairs and International

Cooperation

C E R E A L S

1

© G

iada

Con

nest

ari

10

Gran Bretagna

Kazakhstan

IranTurchia

Australia

Pakistan

Germania

Japan

FilippineBirmania

TailandiaVietnam

Bangladesh

Nigeria

Romania

Russia

Canada

Francia

Indonesia

India

Ukraine

Argentina

China

Stati Uniti Moldavia

Olanda

Turkmenistan

Paraguay

Lettonia

Cile

Uruguay

Grecia

Austria

Slovacchia

Nepal

Belgio

Azerbaijan

Svezia

Sudafrica

Bielorussia

SerbiaCroazia

Lituania

Siria

AlgeriaMessico

Ethiopia

Danimarca

Iraq

R. Ceca Ungheria

Bulgaria

Afganistan

Brasile

Uzbekistan

Marocco

Italia

Spagna

Egitto

Polonia

Bolivia

Sierra Leone

Ecuador

Taiwan

Costa d’AvorioColombia

Venezuela

Guinea

Tanzania

Mali

Malesia

Peru

Laos

Madagascar

Sri Lanka

Corea del Sud

Corea del Nord

Cambogia

Rep. Democratica

del Congo

Angola

Burkina FasoBenin

Mozambico

Camerun

Guatemala

Ghana

Zambia

Uganda Kenya

Malawi

Note: only countries with a productionabove one million ton are represented

356

10050101

SojaMaize

RiceWheat

Cereal productionMillion tonnes, 2013

Cereal yieldsKilograms per hectare

Less than 1 0001 000 - 2 0002 000 - 4 0004 000 - 8 000More than 8 000

Sources: World Bank and FAO statistics

How will we face a world with a population of 9 billion people? Today we see a significant phenomenon: in countries where agriculture is more advanced, farmers apply every technology and know how to increase yields, particularly of grains. Fertilizers, intelligent irrigation, plant se-lection, and so on. All strategies used abundantly. Once the limits of nutrients (elements such as po-tassium, nitrogen, phosphorus that “feeds” plants) and water supply (by optimizing irrigation) have been reached, the last limit is the power of photo-synthesis. And no one today knows anything about a more efficient photosynthesis. Grain pro-duction has hit the roof in many countries, and is at a limit that may not be possible to overcome.

Take Japan, which has reached unimaginable levels of rice production. 17 years ago they had reached peak production. This could have been surpassed by finding a more efficient system for photosynthesis. But, to date, no one has ever found a more efficient system that can overcome the physical limits of chlorophyll photosynthe-sis. Now we see the same phenomena in China with rice, and in France with wheat. In Great Brit-ain as well. Germany also struggles to increase its wheat production. And Italy, which imports much of its wheat from Canada, is completely deadlocked. Now we are even witnessing corn production in the Usa. reach its limit. A state like Iowa produces more wheat than Canada and more soy than China. But now, it can no longer increase its productivity.

To this cap on productivity we must also add the negative effects on crops. Although climate change is one of the enemies of good grain pro-duction, mankind’s bread of life, the more im-

Granariesat risk

minent danger is the water crisis. Let’s take some of the planet’s principal production areas: the United States, China, and India. All regions where cereal production is crippled by water stress. In India there are 26 million wells pumping water without reserves to refill. In 2015 the US has seen a serious water crisis in the West. The aquifers of the Chinese plains, which supply food to hun-

Population growthBillion people

Sources: UN Population Division,from van der Mensbrugghe et al. 2009

Developed Countries

DevelopingCountries

Least Developed Countries

World9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

01950 1970 1990 2010 2030 0502

11

Gran Bretagna

Kazakhstan

IranTurchia

Australia

Pakistan

Germania

Japan

FilippineBirmania

TailandiaVietnam

Bangladesh

Nigeria

Romania

Russia

Canada

Francia

Indonesia

India

Ukraine

Argentina

China

Stati Uniti Moldavia

Olanda

Turkmenistan

Paraguay

Lettonia

Cile

Uruguay

Grecia

Austria

Slovacchia

Nepal

Belgio

Azerbaijan

Svezia

Sudafrica

Bielorussia

SerbiaCroazia

Lituania

Siria

AlgeriaMessico

Ethiopia

Danimarca

Iraq

R. Ceca Ungheria

Bulgaria

Afganistan

Brasile

Uzbekistan

Marocco

Italia

Spagna

Egitto

Polonia

Bolivia

Sierra Leone

Ecuador

Taiwan

Costa d’AvorioColombia

Venezuela

Guinea

Tanzania

Mali

Malesia

Peru

Laos

Madagascar

Sri Lanka

Corea del Sud

Corea del Nord

Cambogia

Rep. Democratica

del Congo

Angola

Burkina FasoBenin

Mozambico

Camerun

Guatemala

Ghana

Zambia

Uganda Kenya

Malawi

Note: only countries with a productionabove one million ton are represented

356

10050101

SojaMaize

RiceWheat

Cereal productionMillion tonnes, 2013

Cereal yieldsKilograms per hectare

Less than 1 0001 000 - 2 0002 000 - 4 0004 000 - 8 000More than 8 000

Sources: World Bank and FAO statistics

dreds of millions of people, are emptying. The true limitation is not the soil; there are still many lands that can be productive, especially in Africa. The element missing is water. In India, around 175 million people are fed with grain produced by excessive water pumping. By 2016, Saudi Arabia will stop farming because their water reserves are at a record low.

Climate change also should certainly not be underestimated. Stanford University analyzed the relationship between grain production and the change in average temperature. The result shows that an average increase of one degree Celsius reduces crops by 17%. Now, let’s remem-ber that if we do not act to cut greenhouse gas emissions, average temperatures could increase in some areas up to 6 °C. Even an increase of just 2-3 degrees could put us in serious trouble, putting millions of people in a situation of food insecurity. Finally, we should consider the food chain. My estimates have shown how over three billion people are, or have already risen in the food chain. They have risen by consuming more food, more grains, or more animal protein – often in excess. Consuming more meat, they consume more grains. In the US, nearly 5-6 kilo-grams of grain is required to produce a pound of meet.

We face unprecedented challenges. The grain economy is a globally integrated system, just like the climate and water cycle. The world must face these challenges with intelligence and speed. Otherwise, before long, feeding the world’s popu-lation will inevitably become impossible. ‹

Global agricultural productionTonnes per hectare

MaizeRice

Wheat

Soja2

0

4

6

8

10

05020302010209910791

Sources: Deepak, K. R., Yield Trends Are Insufficient to Double Global Crop Production by 2050, PLoS ONE, 2013

Increase required to meet future agriculture demand

Lester BrownPresident

of American Think Thank, Earth Policy Institute, and author

of the bookPlan B 4.0

(Edizioni Ambiente).The text

was adaptedfrom an interview

conducted by Emanuele Bompan

Food pillars

Cereals

RiccaRdo PRavettoni 2015

12

Togo

Mali

Liberia

Nicaragua

Siria

Rep. Centrafricana

Palestina

Congo

Paraguay

Rep. Dominicana Uzbekistan

Guinea

Sierra Leone

Tajikistan

Bolivia

Cambogia

Niger

Ecuador

Camerun

Senegal

Malawi

Rwanda

Eritrea

Peru

Chad

Tailandia

Zimbabwe

Costad’Avorio

Burkina Faso

Guatemala

Sri Lanka

Angola

Nepal

Colombia

Haiti

Burundi

ZambiaMadagascar

Yemen

Vietnam

Corea del Nord

Iraq

Mozambico

Uganda Kenya

NigeriaBrasile

Filippine

Tanzania

Indonesia

Bangladesh

Pakistan

Etiopia

Cina

India

Laos

Food adequacyRatio between food availability and food needs

76 - 100100 - 110110 - 122122 - 140140 - 158 (Turchia)

Undernourishment

Obesity

Million of undernourished people, 2013213 (India)

10050101

Country with an adult obesity rategreater than 24%

Hungerand greed

The daily caloric requirement is defined as: the energy intake from food necessary to compensate for the energy expenditure of individuals to main-tain a level of physical activity sufficient to active-ly participate in social and economic life, with a body size and composition compatible with long-term good health. The average daily intake of cal-ories for a woman of 35 years is 2200 calories. In some countries this average is higher, even rising to 5,000 calories, and in others much lower, below the threshold of 1,800.

To measure what we commonly call “hunger”, there is a scale that determines an individual’s degree of food security. To the experts, it is known as Integrated Food Security Phase Clas-sification (IPC), which is an integrated classifi-cation of the degrees of food security. Accord-ing to this scale, a nation can be said to be “food secure”, safe in terms of food, if more than 80% of households meet their caloric requirements. When more than 20% of households have low-er consumption with no economic resources for procurement and malnutrition is above the norm, we are facing an “acute food crisis”. When consumption is further reduced, with high levels of malnutrition and mortality from starvation, it is called a “humanitarian emer-

gency”. The last level, “famine”, is when more than 20% of families face total lack of food, the mortality rate is high (two deaths per 10,000 people a day), and acute malnutrition exceeds 30%. This is the most serious and devastating situation, which can cause as many as hundreds of thousands of deaths.

In 2014, according to the Global Hunger Index (GHI), which is produced annually by the Inter-national Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), 805 million people suffered from hunger. Despite some improvements in sixteen countries, hunger levels are still “alarming” or “extremely alarming”. Another two billion people are not classified as

13

Togo

Mali

Liberia

Nicaragua

Siria

Rep. Centrafricana

Palestina

Congo

Paraguay

Rep. Dominicana Uzbekistan

Guinea

Sierra Leone

Tajikistan

Bolivia

Cambogia

Niger

Ecuador

Camerun

Senegal

Malawi

Rwanda

Eritrea

Peru

Chad

Tailandia

Zimbabwe

Costad’Avorio

Burkina Faso

Guatemala

Sri Lanka

Angola

Nepal

Colombia

Haiti

Burundi

ZambiaMadagascar

Yemen

Vietnam

Corea del Nord

Iraq

Mozambico

Uganda Kenya

NigeriaBrasile

Filippine

Tanzania

Indonesia

Bangladesh

Pakistan

Etiopia

Cina

India

Laos

Food adequacyRatio between food availability and food needs

76 - 100100 - 110110 - 122122 - 140140 - 158 (Turchia)

Undernourishment

Obesity

Million of undernourished people, 2013213 (India)

10050101

Country with an adult obesity rategreater than 24%

“food secure”, in particular because of lack of food rich in vitamins and minerals, which carries grave health consequences.

Yet one does not die only of hunger. The para-dox of the modern world is that countries defined as “food secure” are experiencing an “epidemic” (as defined by the World Health Organization) related to the polar opposite factor: excessive calorie consumption. Better known as obesity. In the world today, 2,1 billion people are overweight or obese. These are people who risk serious ill-ness and whose life expectancy is reduced. On average, an obese person (with a body mass in-dex, BMI, of 35-40) lives on average 7 years less

than a healthy person. In the US, about 35% of men are obese, while 38% are overweight. In Italy three out of ten adults are overweight, and 1 in 10 suffer from obesity. The most alarming data, though, is for youth.

Our country has one of the highest rates of childhood obesity in Western countries, second only to the US: 26.9% of Italian children aged 6 to 17 years are overweight. This percentage increas-es in children between 6 and 10 years old, reach-ing up to 35.7%: this means one in three in this age range, or about a million children total (data from the Ministry of Health). Historically? In 1970, only about 3% of children were overweight. ‹

Emanuele BompanAuthor of theFood4 project

Cereals

Food availability, undernourishmentand obesity in the contemporary world

Sources: FAO statistical databases, 2013 RiccaRdo PRavettoni 2015

Togo

Mali

Liberia

Nicaragua

Siria

Rep. Centrafricana

Palestina

Congo

Paraguay

Rep. Dominicana Uzbekistan

Guinea

Sierra Leone

Tajikistan

Bolivia

Cambogia

Niger

Ecuador

Camerun

Senegal

Malawi

Rwanda

Eritrea

Peru

Chad

Tailandia

Zimbabwe

Costad’Avorio

Burkina Faso

Guatemala

Sri Lanka

Angola

Nepal

Colombia

Haiti

Burundi

ZambiaMadagascar

Yemen

Vietnam

Corea del Nord

Iraq

Mozambico

Uganda Kenya

NigeriaBrasile

Filippine

Tanzania

Indonesia

Bangladesh

Pakistan

Etiopia

Cina

India

Laos

Food adequacyRatio between food availability and food needs

76 - 100100 - 110110 - 122122 - 140140 - 158 (Turchia)

Undernourishment

Obesity

Million of undernourished people, 2013213 (India)

10050101

Country with an adult obesity rategreater than 24%

14

Wall Street Food

During 2008 and 2011, global food prices rapid-ly increased, leading to unrest around the world. These price spikes are part of a general trend of increasing global food prices, which have steadily risen since 2000.

Between 2000 and 2012, the U.N. Food and Agri-culture Organization’s (FAO) Food Price Index, a measure of the prices of international commodity crops, more than doubled. Food price volatility has increased dramatically since 2006, causing rapid price fluctuations. While food prices have since stabilized, they remain high and continue to exacerbate issues of hunger and food insecurity around the world.

Professor Oliver de Schutter, the United Nations Rapporteur for the Right to Food, says the reasons usually cited for high food prices – demand for biofuels, China’s increased appetite for meat, and the growing world population – are minor cata-lysts. Instead, the volatility and increasing prices in the market are largely due to unregulated fi-nancial speculation on food commodities.

According to recent articles in Time Maga-zine and The Atlantic and a report from the In-stitute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, financial speculation has broken the commodities market by undermining its ability to act as a stabiliz-ing force for farmers, buyers and consumers. As commodity trading and speculation has become increasingly divorced from the realities of food production, food prices have come to reflect the sentiments of financial speculators, rather than the laws of supply and demand.

While food commodity speculation affects prices globally, its impacts are more pronounced in the developing world, where 60% or more of a family’s income is spent on food. Even small increases in prices can push middle-class families into hunger. The International Food Policy Research Institute estimates that every 1% increase in food prices pushes 16 million more people into hunger.

Nearly a billion people worldwide are hungry and at the mercy of fluctuating food prices. If the commodities markets continue to drive food

prices, millions more will suffer. This tension is likely to surface in the form of civil unrest. Ac-cording to Dr. Yaneer Bar-Yam, founding presi-dent of the New England Complex Systems In-stitute, there is a direct connection between food prices and civil unrest: “The peaks in food prices coincided with many food riots in 2007-08 and the Arab spring in 2010-11”. Further, his work has demonstrated that the relationship between food prices and unrest can be scientifically modeled. Bar-Yam explains, “there is a specific threshold of about 210 on the FAO index above which unrest becomes likely. Today, the price is just above that threshold, so there is pressure that can be trig-gered at any time by local conditions”.

Although food prices have stabilized, they are expected to continue to increase in the coming decades. Oxfam has warned that prices of staples such as wheat and rice may double in the next 20 years. These pronounced increases in the prices of these staple crops, which are the foundation of the diets of low-income people around the world, can help create the conditions for exacerbated hunger and unrest.

Sophia Murphy of the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy and Timothy Wise of Tufts University found that responsible regulations, such as those introduced in the 2012 Commod-ity Exchange Act, can tackle excessive financial speculation and prevent it from driving food prices higher. According to Dr. Bar-Yam, “the best strategy would be to reduce the U.S. man-date on corn to ethanol conversion, for which bills are currently pending in Congress, and to re-regulate the commodity markets”. The Milan Protocol, an international agreement to solve issues of hunger, sustainable agriculture, and food waste, also recommends the creation of regulatory frameworks for speculation, arguing that food commodity speculation “threatens the human right to food”.

Without regulatory intervention, food prices are expected to continue to increase. Like the dotcom burst and the subprime mortgage crash, Wall Street speculators are driving a food com-modities bubble to its breaking point. If it bursts, high food prices could become the new norm, im-pacting wallets and bellies everywhere. ‹

Danielle Nierenberg,

Eden Kincaid,FoodTank

15

Money for foodPercent of annual consumer expenditures on food, 2013

Less than 1515 - 2525 - 40More than 40

N.D

Skyrocketing pricesFAO Food Price Index

Nominal prices

Real Prices(deflated)

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

Maize

250

200

150

100

50

0

Wheat

200

150

100

50

0

0

50

100

150

200

250

1961 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

1997 2005 2011

1997 2005 2011

2015

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Billion dollars Index: 1997 = 100

Index: 2002/04 = 100

Index: 1997 = 100

Financial holdings in agricultural commodity derivative markets

Supply and demand of two most consumed cereals in the world

Price

Supply

Demand

SupplyDemand

Price

The U.S. introduce a law that de facto allows stock markets to speculateon food commodities

Cereals

Gambling with food

Sources: FAO statistical databases and ERS-USDA 2014; World Development Movement, Broken Markets, 2011 RiccaRdo PRavettoni 2015

L I V E S T O C K

© G

iada

Con

nest

ari

2

The impacts of meat production on a large scale are well known. And with a global consumption that according to the FAO will increase 73% by 2050, the question is: can sustainability be part of the conversation? If you follow a diet like a Medi-terranean one, the answer is yes. According to “The sustainability of meat in Italy”, research by economic consulting firm, LCE, in Turin, eating a bit of everything has positive effects on sustaina-bility as well as health.

The Italian study explains how the foods with the largest impact on the environment are also those consumed in smaller quantities, and which have greater nutritional value. In a proper food model like the Italian one, explains the researchers, the carbon footprint of meat is equal to 5.9 kg of CO2 equivalent. Such a figure falls in line with that of fruit and vegetables, which comes to 5.6 kg.

With a world population that will increase from 7 to 9 billion people by 2050, the apparent scenario is a general increase in demand for food, which cov-ers both energy intake (grains), and protein (meat, eggs, milk, and vegetable protein). In this context, meat is a candidate, willingly or not, for making a valuable contribution by presenting a variety in food options, which is necessary for a healthy diet.

To cope with this growth in consumption, using environmentally friendly practices is essential. The increase in food production must therefore be based on more efficiently using existing areas and reducing impacts of livestock raising. The first step coincides with a global effort to reduce

Meat productionand consumption,can it be sustainable?

waste, and with systematically using the areas best suited to production, thus affecting the effi-cient use of water, land, and energy.

According to Chatham House and Glasgow Uni-versity Media Group, factory livestock raising causes large soil and water consumption, and is the greatest source of methane gas and nitrous oxide. If current food trends are not changed by 2055, emissions of methane (CH4) and nitrogen (N2) will be more than double their 1995 levels.

While work remains to be done in the environ-mental field in the coming years, livestock sup-ply chains already represent an important re-source on the economic and social level. Suffice it to say that in Italy alone the meat industry employs more than 180 thousand employees, generating an economic value of 30 billion euro per year. When compared to the nearly 180 billion of the entire food industry and to 1,500

Cuba

Gran Bretagna

Kazakhstan

Iran

Turchia

Australia

Nuova Zelanda

Pakistan

Germania

Giappone

FilippineMyanmar

TailandiaVietnam

Bangladesh

Nigeria

Romania

RussiaCanada

Francia

Indonesia

India

Ucraina

Argentina

Cina

Stati Uniti

Olanda

Turkmenistan

Paraguay

Cile

Uruguay

Grecia

Austria

Rep. Ceca

Svizzera

Belgio

Azerbaijan

SveziaNorvegia Finlandia

Sudafrica

Bielorussia

Serbia

Israele

Algeria LibiaMessico

Ethiopia

Danimarca

Siria

Giordania

Ungheria

Afganistan

Brasile

Uzbekistan

MaroccoTunisia

ItaliaSpagna

Irlanda

Portogallo

Egitto

Sudan Yemen

Arabia Saudita

Polonia

Bolivia

Ecuador

Taiwan

Colombia

Venezuela

Tanzania

Mali

Malesia

Peru

Madagascar

Sri Lanka

Corea del Sud

Corea del Nord

Cambogia

Angola

Mozambico

Camerun

GuatemalaSalvador

Panama

Nicaragua

Costarica

HondurasRep.

Dominicana Niger

Zambia

Uganda Kenya

Zimbabwe

Giamaica

53

10510,1

BeefChicken

PorkGoat

Meat productionMillion tonnes, 2013

N.D

Production 2014 compared with 2004-2006

Livestock production index

More than 10%10 - 0%

0 - 20%20 - 50%More than 150%

Decrease

Increase

18

Andrea BertaglioContributor

for La StampaTuttogreen

of the national GDP, this figure is significant.

In developing countries, however, urban small-scale farms can make an important contribution to reducing poverty and gender differences. Ani-mals are a significant source of income for people of many disadvantaged regions, and often the women in developing countries are able to obtain a certain measure of economic independence by raising their own animals.

Facing growth in global meat consumption is one of the main challenges of our century. We therefore need to move beyond ideological battles to find sus-tainable production methods. At the same time, it is important to moderate consumption and to reduce waste. Total meat consumption for Italian families, for example, is estimated at about 2.6 million tons annually – an unacceptable amount, considering the scourge of world hunger and the shortage of re-sources with which humanity is already grappling. ‹

Cuba

Gran Bretagna

Kazakhstan

Iran

Turchia

Australia

Nuova Zelanda

Pakistan

Germania

Giappone

FilippineMyanmar

TailandiaVietnam

Bangladesh

Nigeria

Romania

RussiaCanada

Francia

Indonesia

India

Ucraina

Argentina

Cina

Stati Uniti

Olanda

Turkmenistan

Paraguay

Cile

Uruguay

Grecia

Austria

Rep. Ceca

Svizzera

Belgio

Azerbaijan

SveziaNorvegia Finlandia

Sudafrica

Bielorussia

Serbia

Israele

Algeria LibiaMessico

Ethiopia

Danimarca

Siria

Giordania

Ungheria

Afganistan

Brasile

Uzbekistan

MaroccoTunisia

ItaliaSpagna

Irlanda

Portogallo

Egitto

Sudan Yemen

Arabia Saudita

Polonia

Bolivia

Ecuador

Taiwan

Colombia

Venezuela

Tanzania

Mali

Malesia

Peru

Madagascar

Sri Lanka

Corea del Sud

Corea del Nord

Cambogia

Angola

Mozambico

Camerun

GuatemalaSalvador

Panama

Nicaragua

Costarica

HondurasRep.

Dominicana Niger

Zambia

Uganda Kenya

Zimbabwe

Giamaica

53

10510,1

BeefChicken

PorkGoat

Meat productionMillion tonnes, 2013

N.D

Production 2014 compared with 2004-2006

Livestock production index

More than 10%10 - 0%

0 - 20%20 - 50%More than 150%

Decrease

Increase

19

Livestock

World's livestock

RiccaRdo PRavettoni 2015Sources: statistics World Bank and FAO

Million tonnes

1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

2020

Beef

Chicken

Pork

Goat

Sources: FAO statistical databases, accessed in April 2015

Globalmeatproduction

Sources: World Bank and FAO statistical databases

Annual rate, 2013Population growth

-1,1 to -0,25-0,25 to 0,250,25 to 11 to 22 to 3More than 3

N.D0

3

6

9

12

15

Chicken slaughteredMillion

2000

2013

Africa Meridionale

Tailandia

Colombia

Messico

IranAfricaSettentrionale

IndiaAmerica Centrale

Russia

Indonesia

AsiaOccidentale

AsiaMeridionale

Brasile

Sud Est Asiatico

Stati UnitiNord America

Sud America

Europa

Cina Asia OrientaleEverywhere you turn, someone is talking about the vegetarian diet. In the corners of every city, more vegan restaurants and small markets with vegan and vegetarian products are opening. It would seem that the food trend is to abandon animal protein altogether and to confidently embrace this new diet, considered healthier and “green”. Perhaps this is true for a niche of “aware” consumers, but the reality of food consumption is quite different.On a global level, the supply and demand of meat is increasing: according to the FAO in 2013, pro-duction was 308.5 million tons, rising to 311.8 mil-lion tons in 2014.The growth rate varies from region to region. While in Europe and in the United States, the main meat producers of the 20th century, con-sumption growth is very slow, if not stagnant, emerging markets – particularly in Asia – will grow to gain 80% of the meat market by 2020.The countries involved in this incredible increase in consumption are China and India, where a strong demand for meat has been established – and is continuously growing – by the new mem-bers of the middle class.The evolution of the production system follows ever the same route: switching from a system of expansive, non-industrial livestock raising, in which the animals are left at pasture and meat processing takes place in the vicinity of the company, to intensive livestock raising where animals live in confinement and meat is pro-cessed and distributed at great distances from the place of origin. Southeast Asia is going through the same transformation that indus-trialized nations have already seen, most prom-inently the United States at the end of the 19th Century. At the same time, technologies and investments that characterize industrial meat production are invading emerging countries, which are rapidly becoming heavy players in the global market.

More meatfor all?

The increase in demand has led to a new supply structure – at least in Western countries. Factory livestock raising took shape in Europe and the United States, when feed, energy, and land had low costs. Today in the West, all three of these pro-duction factors are scarce, and the cost has great-ly increased. Consequently, total beef production has slowed its rate of growth. The market is grow-ing only for pork and poultry, as both of these species optimize feed intake and can be bred in confined spaces. Making them de facto the only way possible to satisfy the insatiable demand for meat at low costs. Unsurprisingly, by 2022 nearly half of the additional consumption of meat will be chicken meat – the majority low quality.

Even Africa is slowly climbing the food chain. Consumption rises although both supply and demand are not at the level of Asia and South America: meat production across the continent is about 10.5 million tons, and meat consumption per capita is still very low (approximately 20 kg of meat/year). However, the national per capita, not that of consumption, is the one to measure: the population in countries such as South Africa, Egypt, Nigeria, Morocco and Ethiopia is growing at a rate unparalleled across the globe. ‹

20

Chicken for the many

Sources: World Bank and FAO statistical databases

Annual rate, 2013Population growth

-1,1 to -0,25-0,25 to 0,250,25 to 11 to 22 to 3More than 3

N.D0

3

6

9

12

15

Chicken slaughteredMillion

2000

2013

Africa Meridionale

Tailandia

Colombia

Messico

IranAfricaSettentrionale

IndiaAmerica Centrale

Russia

Indonesia

AsiaOccidentale

AsiaMeridionale

Brasile

Sud Est Asiatico

Stati UnitiNord America

Sud America

Europa

Cina Asia Orientale

Linda FioritiAgrarian economist

21

Livestock

200

300

100

1961 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2013

400

500

600

700

800

900

1 000

Beef

World population

Chicken

Pork

Goat

Index 1961=100

Global meet demand grows quicker than the population

RiccaRdo PRavettoni 2015

Sources: FAO statistical databases, accessed in April 2015

Every time we bite into a piece of steak, it’s like we are swallowing a small piece of the planet. Livestock raising provides a significant portion of our protein needs and often requires, especially where extensive, just as extensive portions of land to feed billions of cattle.

Although more and more are trying to produce and consume meat sustainably, some issues re-main unresolved. For example, when we cut a for-est down to make room for livestock – still wide-spread in South America and Africa, whether for cattle, goats, or even Andean llama – we first and foremost reduce the forest resources needed to absorb CO2, thus increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Even if this problem is known, what is often not considered is the impact of farming on plant and animal biodiversity. Regarding the flora, the collateral damage includes destroying many ecological niches, where plant species – even rare ones – become at risk. Apart from the direct devastation of deforestation, what also often occurs is known as fragmentation of habi-tats. Trees are often chopped to make way for pastures without regard for the biological areas, leaving the forest with patchy distribution. This fragmentation drains the strength of a habitat,

Biodiversityon the plate

weakening and often killing species spared from deforestation.

The same applies to animal biodiversity. Habi-tat fragmentation is often detrimental to the re-production of animals that find themselves con-fined to limited natural areas. This “segregation” makes it difficult to meet their food needs and have the ability to reproduce.

The consequences are not insignificant. More than 4 thousand species of plants and animals are threatened by farming and extensive agriculture. This means losing species that play an important role in defending the ecosystem from potential pests or invasive species, increasing exposure to potential threats. It means erosion of important wild species, often medicinal plants which have taken millions of years to find a balance and cre-ate stable and healthy ecological niches.

The impacts of livestock raising do not end here. To the loss of animal and vegetable biodiversity must also be added the effects of climate change (transformation of the climatic conditions of a bi-ome) and the weight of water consumption linked to the production of meat and dairy products. Live-stock raising actually contributes 14% of greenhouse gas emissions, and about half of the water consumed is used for food production. The consequences are often dire in numerous natural environments.

22

Agriculture (mainly Soja)Livestocks (Cattle)

Brazilian Amazonia limits

Sources: IBGE, online maps, accessed in August 2014

BRASILEBOLIVIA

PERU

COLOMBIA

VENEZUELA

SURINAME

GUYANA GUIANAFRANCESE

Forest converted to

Sources: FAO; Heinrich Böll Foundation, The Meat Atlas, 2014

Countries where the specie Holstein Friesian is used for dairy production

Emanuele BompanAuthor of theFood4 project

Cows, goats, pigs, and rabbits: they too are vic-tims of the lack of biodiversity. Increasingly the maximization of animal production is pushing for a loss of biodiversity of these bred animals. Over 30% of mammals and birds raised (about 1,500 breeds of cattle, sheep, goats, and poultry) are at risk. In Italy over 130 breeds are threatened with extinction, including some 38 breeds of sheep, 24 cattle, 22 goats, 19 horses, 10 pigs, 10 of poultry,

and 7 of donkeys. From the Romagnola donkey to the Mora Romagnola pig, from the Chianina to Garfagnina cows. Of the latter, only 145 remain. To make room for the more common and widespread types. And when animal biodiversity decreases, the few remaining races are heavily exposed to diseases and epidemics. Animal biodiversity, as a matter of fact, also serves as an antibody to safe-guard all species. ‹

23

Livestock

Monoculture and cattle threatens biodiversity

Holstein-Friesian cows... Everywhere!

RiccaRdo PRavettoni 2015

F I S H I N G

© E

man

uele

Bom

pan

3

Peru

Gran Bretagna

Islanda

Iran

Turchia

Australia

Nuova Zelanda

Pakistan

Germania

Giappone

Filippine

Papua Nuova Guinea

Birmania

Tailandia

Singapore

Vietnam

Bangladesh

Nigeria

Russia

Canada

Francia

Indonesia

India

Maldive

Ucraina

Argentina

Cina

Stati Uniti

Olanda

Lettonia

Cile

Irlanda

SveziaFinlandia

Sudafrica

Senegal

Guinea

Messico

Danimarca

Norvegia

Groenlandia

Isole Farøer

Brasile

Marocco

ItaliaSpagna

Portogallo

Polonia

Sierra Leone

Ecuador

Taiwan

Colombia

Venezuela

Mauritania

MalesiaSri Lanka

Corea del Sud

Corea del Nord

Cambogia

Angola

Namibia

Oman

Yemen

Mozambico

Ghana

Nort EastPacific

Central EastPacific

Central EastAtlantic

Mediterranean and Black Sea

South East Atlantic

Central WestAtlantic

South WesternAtlantic

South WesternPacific

North WesternPacific

Central Western Pacific

WesternIndian Ocean

EasternIndianOcean

South EastPacific

Nort EastAtlantic

Note: only countries with an annual catch above 0,1are represented. Catches are only related to marine fish

1

10

0,50,1

Fishing

International fishing areas defined by FAOIncrease or decrease of fish catches between 2002 and 2012

Aquaculture

Sea fish catchMillion tonnes, 2013

Sources: FAO statistical database, accessed in April 2015

-13.8-21.1

-17,4

-5,5

-21,4

-10,0

-1,0

-17,7

-13,3

14.3

25.4

8.0

11.5

0.0

9.7

1.9

38,7

Arctic and Antarctic Oceans

An ocean without life? It seems almost impos-sible to even imagine. Yet the exponential in-crease in fishing and use of unsustainable prac-tices (trawling, monster boats, using explosives, disregarding quotas) has substantially decreased the number of many aquatic species in both riv-ers and seas. Our consumption has increased.

Today we eat an average of seventeen pounds of fish per capita per year. Four times what they ate in 1950. Climate change and pollution have done the rest. In the seas today there are areas without oxygen because of excessive fertilizer use. The highest average temperatures (1-2 °C), accord-ing to a study published in the journal, Global Change Biology, would contribute to reducing the body size of some fish by about 23%. Water pollution, on the other hand, (think of the Deep-water Horizon platform incident or to the tons of

Where areall the fish?

waste thrown into the ocean or rivers) remains a threat to many aquatic species, causing diseases or mass epidemics.

As a result of these effects, the global popula-tion of some fish has been reduced by up to 80%, as is the case for some types of tuna, or sturgeon (now a protected species). For some mammals, passing this threshold would mean condemna-tion to extinction. Fortunately for us, fish have high reproductive capacities and, although deci-mated, any species can return to repopulate the seas. But rules must be put in place to stop the pollution of the oceans and to contain unlimited fishing, known to experts as overfishing.

From a commercial perspective, overfishing and the “shrinkage” of some pelagic species have seriously damaged the fishing industry’s economy. Despite continuous technological improvements of fishing fleets, catch levels

26

Peru

Gran Bretagna

Islanda

Iran

Turchia

Australia

Nuova Zelanda

Pakistan

Germania

Giappone

Filippine

Papua Nuova Guinea

Birmania

Tailandia

Singapore

Vietnam

Bangladesh

Nigeria

Russia

Canada

Francia

Indonesia

India

Maldive

Ucraina

Argentina

Cina

Stati Uniti

Olanda

Lettonia

Cile

Irlanda

SveziaFinlandia

Sudafrica

Senegal

Guinea

Messico

Danimarca

Norvegia

Groenlandia

Isole Farøer

Brasile

Marocco

ItaliaSpagna

Portogallo

Polonia

Sierra Leone

Ecuador

Taiwan

Colombia

Venezuela

Mauritania

MalesiaSri Lanka

Corea del Sud

Corea del Nord

Cambogia

Angola

Namibia

Oman

Yemen

Mozambico

Ghana

Nort EastPacific

Central EastPacific

Central EastAtlantic

Mediterranean and Black Sea

South East Atlantic

Central WestAtlantic

South WesternAtlantic

South WesternPacific

North WesternPacific

Central Western Pacific

WesternIndian Ocean

EasternIndianOcean

South EastPacific

Nort EastAtlantic

Note: only countries with an annual catch above 0,1are represented. Catches are only related to marine fish

1

10

0,50,1

Fishing

International fishing areas defined by FAOIncrease or decrease of fish catches between 2002 and 2012

Aquaculture

Sea fish catchMillion tonnes, 2013

Sources: FAO statistical database, accessed in April 2015

-13.8-21.1

-17,4

-5,5

-21,4

-10,0

-1,0

-17,7

-13,3

14.3

25.4

8.0

11.5

0.0

9.7

1.9

38,7

Arctic and Antarctic Oceans

Emanuele BompanAuthor of theFood4 project

are likely to remain stagnant for the next 10-20 years, says a report commissioned by the World Economic Forum. Such a rate will lead to a global economic loss estimated at about fifty billion dollars – per year.

To compensate for such wastefulness, we must look to aquaculture, contained fish farming. To-day this growing market covers 43% of the fish consumed for food. Dominating the market at the moment are the Asian countries, led by China. This, however, could have two negative effects in the long run. On the one hand, financially speak-ing, the market will be exposed to greater price volatility, which negative consequences on the economies of developing countries. On the other hand, the increase in aquaculture could produce significant environmental impacts. The list is long: pollution from animal waste, excessive use of fresh water (in water-scarce areas), excessive use of antibiotics and their related biological im-

pacts, the escape of invasive species that damage the balance of ecosystems, and so on.

Solutions are not lacking. For one, common controls are needed to stop overfishing and to adopt measures for sustainable fisheries (see the next section on bycatch). Fishermen also must be trained so that they understand the import-ance of respecting the quotas, so that severely endangered species have the time and opportun-ity to reproduce.

For aquaculture as well, there are procedures to limit the impact. According to the FAO, aqua-culture done sustainably will be a fundamen-tal opportunity to provide food resources to the global population, above all for a greater divers-ification of the diet. Such measures will not only benefit the poorest countries, but will also sustain consumption in Western countries, given the ever-shrinking natural fish stocks. ‹

27

Fishing

Big catches, weakened fishing grounds

RiccaRdo PRavettoni 2015

Aquatic fishing is an important source of food for many people around the world. According to FAO data, seas and rivers sustain over 180 million people and their families. They also sustain em-ployees of aquaculture, river fishermen with small boats, sailors, and workers on board the large “monster” fishing boats.

Ninety percent of these people are employed in small fishing activities, often at the household level, where women make up a significant part. To a considerable number, fishing is a direct source of food, and only secondarily a source of income. A safe and economical source of essential protein, especially in less developed countries such as So-malia or Burma.

The fishing industry quadrupled from the 1950s to 1990, then has remained stable until today. The increase in the last twenty years, at an average annual rate of about 9%, has been aquaculture.

Yet, small-scale fishermen are now in constant competition for fish resources with the large, in-dustrial fishing vessels, also known as Factory Ships, giants that have fishing equipment on board as well as systems for processing and freez-ing fish. Like Annelies Ilena, a good 144 meters long, with the ability to process 350 tons of fish

Emanuele BompanAuthor of theFood4 project

Big fishing boateats little fishing boat

a day and to stock about 7 thousand. Remaining at sea for weeks thanks to a tank of 3 thousand tons of fuel. Competition is impossible for small fishermen, armed with simply equipped boats of 3-4 meters, who often see fish stocks decimated by the monster boats.

“Here in Dakar we no longer find fish out there. More often, the big boats come into our areas to fish and take everything they find”, says Ramatullah Diouf, a Senegalese fisherman of 33 years old. A common situation in many coun-tries. According to Greenpeace Italy, “a few in-dustrial fishing barons are recklessly enriching themselves by exploiting the seas, with no re-spect for the environment or for the people who depend on these resources”.

Small-scale fishing, however, should not always be seen as a sustainable alternative to the fish-ing industry. Often small fishermen in develop-ing countries lack the equipment to control fish stocks, equipment to fish in the high seas, and strategies for limiting the bycatch. Forced by conditions, in many cases they resort to trawling, using explosives, and other unsustainable prac-tices, often without monitoring by the maritime authorities and no real control by the commun-ity. Numerous international cooperation efforts work on reinforcing the monitoring and training of small-scale fishermen to withstand the great fishing operations. ‹

28

29

Fishing

Small fishermen and Sea titansIn a single fishing trip, the world's biggest trawlers (144 metres and 14 thousands tonnes)produces as much as around 7 thousands traditional fishing boats in one year

Sources: www.atlantic-dawn.com; The Guardian, press review

= 10 crew members

= 10 traditional fishing boats, with 5 to 10 fishermen

RiccaRdo PRavettoni 2015

In the fishing sector, the term bycatch means fish or other marine species caught unintention-ally during the “hunt” to target valuable species. Small fish, undersized animals, crabs or juveniles of the target species end up in the trawl or in other types fishing nets without being the fish-ermen’s true prey. These, after dying in the net, are thrown back to the sea. A massacre of ani-mals in recent years has contributed to the rapid-ly declining fish stocks (with serious economic and food security consequences in many African countries), and to depleting marine environ-ments once rich in biodiversity.

According to the environmental organization WWF, to get a pound of shrimp in the net you take ten, sometimes even twenty pounds of “un-wanted” fish: water snakes, turtles, or other fish that live in the seas, unfit for commerce or con-sumption. Even catching flying fish with nets for sole causes high quantities of bycatch. For 400 grams of sole destined for the sales counters, up to 2,400 grams of other marine animals die and are then thrown back into the sea as bycatch. Sometimes they are still alive, but often they are already dead. Nets often impact flying creatures as well, such as albatrosses. The birds are caught when the nets are lowered into the sea with bait attached to the strings of the trawl, which become lethal traps for the birds.

Emanuele BompanAuthor of theFood4 project

Inside the netThe main victims of bycatch are particular-ly cetaceans, such as dolphins and whales, who are dying in ever increasing numbers from the mega-nets of trawling. Each year, according to Greenpeace UK, around 300 thousand dolphins die. Their deaths are often linked to tuna fishing with nets that do not comply with the Agreement on the International Dolphin Conservation Pro-gram, an international agreement in 1999 that prohibits tuna fishing enterprises from harming the odontoceti. In many countries, corruption and lack of resources and personnel make fishing controls a mere chimera.

Today trawl nets larger than 2.5 km have been banned worldwide by a United Nations resolu-tion, while the European Union has forbidden any type of trawl or drifting net. When you buy tuna you can verify that it was caught in com-pliance with the rules to limit the bycatch of dolphins.

In countries where control policies on bycatch have been strictly implemented, such as the US, the results have been extraordinary. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis-tration (NOAA), in 2014 bycatch has reached his-toric lows. “Scientific management of fishing and judicious use of nets can make a big difference”, says Eileen Sobeck, assistant NOAA adminis-trator for fisheries. A signal that bycatch can be stopped permanently. ‹

30

Industrial fishing,Europe

Traditional fishing,Developing countries

Used

Discarded

Fish catch

Sources: UNEP, Food wasted, food lost, 2015

= 1%

31

Fishing

Fish thrown away

RiccaRdo PRavettoni 2015

C L I M A T E

© G

iada

Con

nest

ari

4

A double cord binds food and climate. There are extreme events (such as droughts, heat waves, and floods) that can cause phenomena that harm cultivated areas and are environmentally disas-trous. There is an increasing temperature and decreasing rainfall (particularly in the summer) that for some species results in a greater demand for irrigation, and thus a higher water require-ment. There is the increase in CO2 concentration, which for certain crops may have a fertilizing ef-fect. Then there is a different quality of the soil and a different range of diseases and pests that attack plants. These are a brief example of the im-pacts that, produced and exacerbated by climate change, will either mildly or severely challenge the food industry, depending on how we will lim-it greenhouse gas emissions and how we will put adaptation strategies in place. And then there are the greenhouse gases that we put into the atmos-phere to produce what we eat. To sum it all up in a number: around 10% of the anthropogenic pro-duction of these gases comes from agriculture.

This double bond is right in front of our noses. We need not wait decades to understand how and where these effects may occur. In many regions wheat and corn yields are already adversely af-fected by climate change, while rice and soybeans have been more moderately impacted. If we look to the future and what might happen, some con-vincing signs tell us that we can expect a general decline in production capacity. This will also be closely linked to a decrease in the quality of prod-ucts, with negative consequences in the quality of production as we see growing areas shift to

Donatella SpanoPresident,

Italian Societyfor Climate Science

Mauro BuonocoreCMCC, Office

of Communications

If the climatechanges

higher altitudes and latitudes. Even if some lim-ited areas might benefit from better conditions, in other areas the impacts of climate change will be stringent within the context of growing demand for agricultural products, with consequences on price fluctuations and food security.

Some examples can help to translate all of this more concretely, and can be drawn from observa-tions about some grains and crops valued highly both economically and environmentally value, for which decreases in quality and quantity of pro-duction are expected to continue to drop as the growing areas move northward.

The vine is a case in point, for which a warmer client could reduce the risk of damage from frost. At the same time, warmer temperatures would increase the demand for irrigation. This is espe-cially true for areas such as the Mediterranean, characterized by reduced water resources and consequent impacts on the quantity and quality of the grapes produced. New potential areas for viticulture could emerge in Western and Central Europe, even perhaps with improvements in the quality of the wine.

Grains are certainly one of the major focal points of the studies on the relationship between climate change and food, because although some regions might benefit from an increase in temperature, without adaptation the yields of major grains (wheat, rice, and corn) will already decrease by 2050 in tropical and temperate regions, with even more intense reductions scheduled for the end of the century, along with a gradual increase of the inter-annual variability in production. ‹

34

IPCC scenarios for 2080

UnitedStates

Canada Mean climate change

Extreme temperatures around crop anthesis

Direct CO2 fertilization effects

Turkey

China

China

India

Argentina

Brazil

China

Australia

United States

United States

Mexico

Argentina

Brazil Maize

Wheat

Soja

Increase

Reduction

Percentage

50

100

0

-50

-100

How does maize, wheat and soja production change? Variations due to climate change are shown as predictive models. The first scenario consider a mean climate change impact related to temperature increase. The second includes extreme temperatures around crop anthesis, while the third consider also the impact of increased presenceof CO2 as fertilizer (at times positive, at times negative)

Sources: Deryng, D., et al., Global crop yield response to extreme heat stress under multiple climate change futures, 2014

35

Climate

Climate change affects agricultural productionIncrease or reduction in agricultural production on year 2000, for the top five producers

RiccaRdo PRavettoni 2015

Sources: FAO and World Bank statistical databases, accessed in April 2015

Water withdrawal for agriculture

Irrigated land

Cubic kilometres per year*

* Data for the last year available

Less than 100100 - 500500 - 2 0002 000 - 5 000More than 5 000

N.D

70101

100%

Percentage of irrigated land on total agriculture land*

Iran

Turchia

Armenia

Azerbaijan

PakistanEmirati Arabi

Giappone

FilippineBirmania

Australia

RussiaCanada

India

Afganistan Cina

Cile

Svezia Finlandia

Messico

Norvegia

Brasile

Uruguay

Marocco

Ecuador

Brunei

Corea del Nord

Sudan

Ghana

Niger

Algeria

Tunisia

Cipro

IsraeleGiordania

SiriaLibano

Etiopia

Leshoto

Kenya

Malawi

Mauritius

Madagascar

Germania

Francia

Ucraina

MoldaviaUngheria

SlovacchiaRep. Ceca

Romania

Belgio

Lettonia

Italia

Grecia

Svizzera

SloveniaCroazia

Serbia

MacedoniaSpagna

Portogallo

Polonia Bielorussia

Tajikistan

Kyrgyzistan

Every inhabitant of the planet consumes water daily, even multiple times a day, from the moment of birth until death. Whether human, animal, or vegetable, water is a fundamental element for life in all of its possible forms.

Each human’s minimum biological need for water is estimated at 5 liters per day. This, ac-cording to the United Nations, rises to twenty factoring in sanitary uses. Not surprisingly, the right to water is linked to the right to health servi-ces. The International Convention on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (Convenzione inter-nazionale sui diritti economici, sociali e culturali, 1996) considers so-called blue gold in terms of supply, but also as a part of daily activities. It is used to wash, to work, to play, and for cultural and religious purposes.

Worldwide, the consumption of water resources per capita varies based on local availability and accessibility. In Italy, estimated consumption is 200 liters per day. Clearly, none of us use so much directly. The calculation factors in consumption connected to industry and, above all, the agricul-ture and livestock necessary to feed us (around 80% of the total). In the United States, consump-tion per capita rises to 450 liters per day, the high-est in the world, an indicator that suggests waste and over-consumption. Meanwhile, in the least developed countries, especially in the Sahel re-gion, availability and poverty limit consumption

The comingwater crisis

to less than 10 liters, well under the minimum threshold established by the ONU (20 liters).

These figures are known, but are often not connect-ed to the fact that water is a finite good. Although extremely widespread throughout the planet (of which two thirds is covered in ocean), not all regions have aquifer deposits sufficient to satisfy growing consumption. Tropical areas are often those where water is most abundant. The Amazon River flows through the greatest water basins in the world. But it is not sufficient. Tropical regions are particularly culpable for “over-pumping”: in Brazil, India, and Indonesia, in spite of the abundance, water basins are over used to sustain livestock and “water pump” plantations like those of palms used for oil.

In Europe and North America, water has always been considered abundant and easily accessible. In the past few years, however, the entire West Coast of the United States and Canada is increas-

36

Sources: FAO and World Bank statistical databases, accessed in April 2015

Water withdrawal for agriculture

Irrigated land

Cubic kilometres per year*

* Data for the last year available

Less than 100100 - 500500 - 2 0002 000 - 5 000More than 5 000

N.D

70101

100%

Percentage of irrigated land on total agriculture land*

Iran

Turchia

Armenia

Azerbaijan

PakistanEmirati Arabi

Giappone

FilippineBirmania

Australia

RussiaCanada

India

Afganistan Cina

Cile

Svezia Finlandia

Messico

Norvegia

Brasile

Uruguay

Marocco

Ecuador

Brunei

Corea del Nord

Sudan

Ghana

Niger

Algeria

Tunisia

Cipro

IsraeleGiordania

SiriaLibano

Etiopia

Leshoto

Kenya

Malawi

Mauritius

Madagascar

Germania

Francia

Ucraina

MoldaviaUngheria

SlovacchiaRep. Ceca

Romania

Belgio

Lettonia

Italia

Grecia

Svizzera

SloveniaCroazia

Serbia

MacedoniaSpagna

Portogallo

Polonia Bielorussia

Tajikistan

Kyrgyzistan

Source: Hoekstra, A. Y., Virtual Water Trade, IHE Delft, 2003.

WheatSoja

Rice

PotatoesMaize

Beef100 litres

1 Kg

Giovanni VenegoniResearch Associate,

Food Lab,University of Parma

ingly arid, and the same has been found for other areas of the Pacific, Australia in particular. More and more regions that are unable to satisfy water demand head towards a food, economic, social, and cultural shock. The reduction in water resour-ces, especially where consumption has never sud-denly dropped, brings a general need to recon-sider the modern lifestyle from every angle: large cities built in the desert, like Las Vegas or Dubai, must revise their water use and consumption, no matter how much they invest.

Man has seemingly managed to overcome the effects of the food and energy crisis, which histor-ically have always threatened development. The solution found was often connected to an expo-nential increase in water consumption (for agri-culture or for energy production). Now, however, in a world of seven billion people, water availabil-ity per capita is reduced, and endangers the de-velopment of humanity itself. ‹

37

Climate

Need for water in agriculture

Water for food

RiccaRdo PRavettoni 2015

Volume of water required to:

Every day, a third of worldwide food production reaches our stomachs. In the homes of billions of people, in restaurants, and in supermarkets, huge amounts of food are thrown away.

Such waste signals that many countries have lost the true value of food, which has become a prod-uct to consume and throw away thoughtlessly, possibly even when it is still edible.

According to Andrea Segré, president of Last Minute Market, a spin-off of the University of Bol-ogna, “we do not value food anymore: we need to strive to combat the loss of this value even more than the waste itself. It is a struggle that will lead us to return value to food, as well as to relationships”.

This is not only a commitment that concerns those who do not have enough food. But this is also a concrete aid for the environment. From an energy point of view, food waste alone contrib-utes each year to the emission of 3.3 million tons of CO2. This incredible figure comes from the re-port, Food wastage footprint. Impacts on natural resources, from the FAO’s Department of Environ-mental and Natural Resources Management. The carbon footprint from carbon dioxide, the main gas responsible for climate change caused by wasted food, is the third largest in the world. This is surpassed only by the global emissions of China and the United States. It is a volume 10 times higher than that of Italy.

Emanuele BompanAuthor of theFood4 project

What a waste!And in terms of water, the impact is frighten-ing. Worldwide, it is estimated that around 250 cubic km of water are throw away – the equiva-lent of the entire annual flow of the river Volga. We are talking about 1.4 million hectares of land that need to be irrigated, in many cases using irrigation pumps. We are talking about land ex-ploited to produce something that will never be used. We are even talking about deforestation, resettling native populations, and depleting the soil of nutrients.

The Belpaese does its part as well. Every year, 1.19 million tons of food are thrown out. At the supermarket, our receipts for wasted food would total over 8 billion euro. That’s 6.5 euro per family. Every week.

How much energy could we keep if we found more workable ways to consume food without throwing it away?

The solutions are there. First, always make sure that foods that have passed the expiration date are truly spoiled. At the restaurant, always ask to be able to take home the leftovers. Today there is an app for smartphones to show the food that you cannot consume, such as BringtheFood, or sites like www.lastminutesottocasa.it, where shops that do not want to throw away expired food can send highly discounted offers to users who can then buy the food at heavily discounted prices. Last of all, the most important rule: do not buy more than you can eat! ‹

38

Total production

Food lost or wasted

2 404

798

551

1 644

264

49

146

46

767

116

707

346

97

664

6 574

Dairy products

Roots and tubers

Fruits andvegetables

Total production

Oil crops and pulses

CerealsFish

Meat

Million tonnes

Production to retail

Consumption

North Americaand Oceania Europe

IndustrializedAsia

North Africa, West and

Central Asia

Per capita food loss and waste Kilogrammes per year

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

South and Southern

AsiaLatinAmerica Sub-Saharan

Africa

39

Climate

RiccaRdo PRavettoni 2015

Food produced and food wasted

Sources: FAO, Global Food Losses and Food Waste, 2011

Million tonnes

Vietnam

Russia

Repubblica Democratica

del Congo

Papua Nuova Guinea

TailandiaCosta Rica Malaysia

Filippine

Australia

Bolivia

Argentina

Peru

India

Tanzania

Madagascar

StatiUniti

Ecuador

Venezuela

Sudafrica

Messico

Indonesia

Cina

Colombia

Brasile

Sources: Mongabay.com; IUCN Red List 2013

On the brink of extinction

Less than 100100 - 300300 - 1 000More than 1 000

60 000

25 00010 000

Number of species*Biodiversity

Number of species

* Total number of amphibian, bird, mammal, reptile, and vascular plant species.Only values above 10 000 are shown

From antibodies that our body activates to fight inflammation, to the rose plant that raises her arms against the hottest days, the universe is an extremely expressive living system with a unique tool to survive change: adapt.

Darwin said: the one that survives is the best at adapting to the surrounding environment. The environment, in turn, is in a continuous process of adaptation. This is more than evo-lution; in fact, is it is more correct to speak of coevolution.

We are a unique tangle in the web of life, where the fate of durum wheat is intertwined with the behavior of polar bears, and the amount of meat we consume determines the fate of the bees.

Biodiversity,a common goodto feed the world

This biological need and universal change that makes every part of the system flexible enough to interact with the others requires reserves, the “tanks of change” from which to draw, time and again, the solution to the problem. For this, main-taining and protecting biodiversity is critical to ensure the possibility of change.

Uniform systems stiffen and die, but not with-out an often very long agony causing irreversible damage. In fact, they (monocultures, or the mas-sive productions always like them) require exter-nal inputs that defend them from what they do not know how to fight, or with what they cannot learn to live with – drought or pests, weeds, or dis-eases from overcrowding from livestock raising. External inputs that, in one way or another, insist on natural resources: the fertility of the land, air, water…and so on.

40

Vietnam

Russia

Repubblica Democratica

del Congo

Papua Nuova Guinea

TailandiaCosta Rica Malaysia

Filippine

Australia

Bolivia

Argentina

Peru

India

Tanzania

Madagascar

StatiUniti

Ecuador

Venezuela

Sudafrica

Messico

Indonesia

Cina

Colombia

Brasile

Sources: Mongabay.com; IUCN Red List 2013

On the brink of extinction

Less than 100100 - 300300 - 1 000More than 1 000

60 000

25 00010 000

Number of species*Biodiversity

Number of species

* Total number of amphibian, bird, mammal, reptile, and vascular plant species.Only values above 10 000 are shown

Cinzia ScaffidiVice President,Slow Food Italia

Biodiversity – essential to life – falls into the category of common goods to which all are en-titled access. This access for use cannot be separ-ated from responsibility and awareness that one holds this right in tandem with all the other in-habitants of the planet: human and non, present and future. If we disrupt the equilibrium that maintains agricultural and wildlife biodiversity – two parts of the great living system with a close and tight bond – we injure a common property over which we have no exclusive rights. Or rath-er, we have already injured, since in the last 100 years we have managed to eliminate 75% of all cul-tivated vegetable diversity.

But we will not be the only ones to pay the con-sequences of our mistakes. Indeed, our latitudes our debts to pay are much lower than the ones that will affect less fortunate countries. And we

have not the faintest idea how all this will im-pact the generations to come. Violating a law usually brings other violations and other rights denied. By denying the right of others to the patrimony of world biodiversity, we create the conditions to deny those people the most basic of rights: the right to food. For example, the cli-mate change that we cause with our way of life creates the conditions for entire societies, which today live perched on the brink, on islands at risk of flooding, that will compel some to move to the slums, the bidonville, of some large cit-ies because the sea level will soon cover their lives, their habits, and their securities, including those relating to culturally appropriate, healthy, and adequate food supplies. Food security is a right guaranteed by a common right called bio-diversity, the protection of which is not only a duty, but a strategy. ‹

41

Climate

To preserve the species

RiccaRdo PRavettoni 2015

When we talk about cooperation in Italy, we often talk about food and nutrition security. Not only because the main international agencies of the United Nations for food are in Rome – FAO, IFAD, and the World Food Program – but also and most of all because for our country this is one of the pillars of development cooperation.

As a confirmation of the Italian agenda, in 2014 we allocated 120 million euro for projects in sectors related to sustainable agriculture, food security, and nutrition. The Italian intervention strategy does not just promote a mere increase in production, but it is increasingly focused on sustainable food systems. These systems take into account the entire value of the food chain and involve a greater commitment to nutrition, public health, community development, and cultural issues in order to achieve broader and more lasting results.

The projects are principally based on a terri-torial approach, emphasizing attention on en-vironmental and socio-economic aspects with full involvement of the recipient populations and civil society.

The objectives of the projects for sustainable agricultural cooperation are guaranteed by gov-ernance and access to land, water, and phytogen-etic and natural resources by families of farmers

Cooperationto feed the world

and small producers. The emphasis is on: recog-nizing the role of women and fully respecting the constraints imposed by nature (“planetary boundaries”); to sustain traditional techniques of adaptation, and the capacity to cope with natural disasters; to promote development of agricultur-al, environmental, and social policies favorable to family farming and artisanal fishing; and en-hancing the market competition of products in accordance with principles for sustainable diets.

We should not forget that the Aquila Food Sec-urity Initiative (AFSI) was launched at the 2009 G-8 Summit in Italy, as an initiative for inter-national food security that recognizes agricul-ture and food security’s key role in the develop-ment and stability of the planet. Concerned by the steady increase in malnutrition and inad-equate levels of investment in agriculture, the leaders of 40 countries and the heads of inter-national organizations have agreed to the Aquila to join forces in establishing a strategic plan and multi-year financial commitments.

The audit carried out in 2013 on the implemen-tation of those commitments has shown that 67% of the Italian Cooperation’s programs adhere to the strategies of AFSI partner countries, and that 88% of the programs are aimed at achieving long-term goals through development projects related to food security. The particular attention to family agriculture and to strengthening the capacity of local and national partners should

42

Nicaragua

GuatemalaFilippine

Corea del Nord

UgandaBenin

Vietnam

Bosnia

India

Kenya

Sierra Leone

El Salvador

Zambia

LibanoPeru

Tanzania

Ucraina

Ecuador

Marocco

Brasile

Rep. Democratica del Congo

Sud Sudan

Sri Lanka

Iraq

Birmania

Senegal NigerBolivia

Burkina Faso

Mali

Mozambico

Mauritania

Siria

Somalia

Tunisia Palestina

Cuba

Afganistan

Etiopia

Albania

Sources: OCSE; Ministero Italiano degli Affari Esteri; World Bank statistical database, accessed in April 2015

Official development assistance (ODA)Aid received by country from OECD*Percentage on GDP

* Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

Less than 5

Donor countries

5 - 1010 - 25More than 25

N.D

Italian bilateral aidMillion Euro

Agriculture, fishing and forestry

Rural development

Food aid

Sectors

1050

10,1

Only countries with a total aid above 100 000 Euros are shown

500 100 10Dollar per capita, 2013

Sources: World Bank statistical database, accessed in May 2015

Giampaolo CantiniGeneral Director

for the Italian Development Cooperation,

Minister of ExternalAffairs and

International Cooperation

also be emphasized. In fact, over 70% of the funding is to help small farmers and ranchers, and a similar percentage is donated to support institutional actions. Additionally, about half of the projects include specific objectives in favor of women.

This is a commitment that, in light of the Rome Declaration adopted last November by the second International Conference on Nutri-

tion, is likely to continue for years to come to and also to remain a point of reference for the new Agency of Cooperation created by recent reforms. Italy has vast knowledge on food and agricultural sustainability, exploitation of terri-tories, and resilience. This wealth of knowledge in our country and in our Development Cooper-ation, which is already involved in numerous successes around the world, will be further de-veloped and deepened. ‹

43

Climate

Italian aids for food security

Per capita aid from OECD countries

RiccaRdo PRavettoni 2015

AA:VV., Food wastage footprint. Impacts on natural resources, FAO Studies. (1): pp. 163-169.

AA:VV, (2015), Status of Stocks 2014. NOAA Publishing.

AA:VV. (2014). Meat Atlas – Facts and figures about the animals we eat. HBS.

M. Allsopp, P. Johnston and D. Santillo (2008), Challenging the Aquaculture Industry Standards, Greenpeace Research Laboratories Technical Note 01/2008.

R. Bailey, A. Froggatt and L. Wellesley (2014), Livestock – Climate Change’s Forgotten Sector. Global Public Opinion on Meat and Dairy Consumption. Energy, Environment and Resources, Chatham House publishing.

A.R. Baudron, C.L. Needle, A. D. Rijnsdorp, T Marshall (2014), Warming temperatures and smaller body sizes:synchronous changes in growth of North Sea fishes, Global Change Biology. 20 (4): pp. 1023–1031. 2014.

W. Bello (2009), Le guerre del cibo. Come l’Occidente ha creato una crisi alimentare globale, Nuovi Mondi.

L.R. Brown (2009), Piano B 4.0: Mobilitarsi per salvare la civiltà. Edizioni Ambiente.

L.B. Brown (2012), 9 miliardi di posti a tavola. La nuova geopolitica della scarsità di cibo. Edizioni Ambiente.

M. Buiatti (2004), Il benevolo disordine della vita. La diversità dei viventi fra scienza e società, Utet Libreria.

M. Buiatti (2007), La Biodiversità. Series “Farsi una idea”, Il Mulino.

C. Chemnitz, S. Becheva (2014), Meat atlas: facts and figures about the animals we eat. Heinrich Böll Foundation.

U. Colombo (1978), Beyond the Age of Waste, Pergamon Press.

R.K. Deepak K, M.D. Nathaniel, P.C. West, Paul C and J.A. Foley (2013), Yields Trends Are Insufficient to Double Global Crop Production, PloS one. 8 (6): 66428.

D. Deryng et al. (2014), Global crop yield response to extreme heat stress under multiple climate change futures. Environmental Research Letters 9 (3): 34011.

FAO (2013). Food Outlook June 2013.

FAO (2013), Tackling Climate Change Through Livestock. A global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities. FAO Rome.

C.B. Field, V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White (2014), Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. A Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press.

J. Gustavsson (2011), Global Food Losses and Food Waste, FAO Rome.

Sources

International Food Policy Research Institute (2015), 2014–2015 Global Food Policy Report. Washington, DC – International Food Policy Research Institute.

M. Jacobson, (2006), More and Cleaner Water, in Six Arguments for a Greener Diet: How a More Plant-based Diet Could save Your Health and the Environment. Center for Science in the Public Interest Edition.

T.R. Malthus (1868), Saggio sul principio della popolazione. Utet.

D. Meadows, D.H. Meadows, J. Randers, and W. Behrens III (1972), The Limits to Growth: A Report to The Club of Rome. New York, Universe Books.

A. McLeod et al. (2011), World livestock 2011-livestock in food security. FAO Studies.

A. van der Mensbrugghe, I. Osorio Rodarte, A. Burns, J. Baffles (2009), How to Feed the World in 2050. The World Bank.

OECD-FAO (2013), Agricultural Outlook 2013, OECD Publishing.

A.J. Read, P. Drinker and S. Northridge (2006). Bycatch of marine mammals in the U.S. and Global Fisheries. Conservation Biology.

J. Safran Foer (2009), Eating animals, Penguin Group. London.

C. Scaffidi (2014), Mangia come parli. Come è cambiato il vocabolario del cibo. Slow Food Editore.

H. Steinfeld et al. (2007), Livestock’s Long Shadow, FAO Studies.

A. Tipping, C Bellmann, U. Rashid Sumaila (2014), Fishing for the Future: Trends and Issues in Global Fisheries Trade, ICTSD.

DATABASE

FAOSTAT http://faostat3.fao.orgWORLD BANK http://data.worldbank.org/italianOPENAID http://openaid.esteri.itUN DATA https://data.un.orgIUCN RED LIST http://www.iucnredlist.org

CAPTIONS

pag. 09 Laborers during the quinoa harvest. FAO project for the integration of quinoa-camelidi, Salinas de Garci Mendoza, Bolivia. 2015, Giada Connestari.

pag. 17 A Peul shepherd travels 10 kilometers every day in search of pasture and water for herds. Ndiaël, Senegal. 2014, Giada Connestari.

pag. 25 Freshwater fishermen in the Irrewaddy River delta, Myanmar. 2015, Emanuele Bompan.

pag. 33 The agriculture industry is gaining ground on the ecosystem of the Ndaiël reserve reserve, Senegal. Ndiaël Nature Reserve, Senegal. 2014, Giada Connestari.

SUPPORTED THE CHARTER OF MILANhttp://carta.milano.it/it