Food Systems in the Global Stocktake Submissions: A Summary
Oliver Camp
Food Systems Transformation for Environment and Nutrition (GAIN) | Programmes, Policy & Advocacy | ??@OWC93 | Speaker | Writer | Consultant |
As many of you know, I have a love-hate relationship with the UNFCCC submissions portal. I know that it's an energy-draining vortex of increasingly desperate calls for action from civil society on the one side, and rather lukewarm proclamations of commitment on the Member State side. Just occasionally, though, you see a nugget of encouragement that stops your downward spiral into the pits of despair and gives you some cause for optimism.
So, you'll be pleased to hear that the nuggets came through quite steadily as I delved deep into... errr... about 40 submissions. Just before we get into them, I should probably share what the Global Stocktake is for the uninitiated:
The Global Stocktake (GST) is a crucial part of the Paris Agreement, an international treaty aimed at tackling climate change. Occurring every five years, the GST assesses global progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, adapting to climate impacts, and providing support to developing nations. It involves input from governments, organizations, and stakeholders and reviews information from national reports and other sources. The GST's main goal is to determine if countries' collective efforts are sufficient to meet the Paris Agreement's objectives, such as limiting global warming. If shortcomings are identified, the GST triggers a process for increased ambition and enhanced climate commitments. Ultimately, the GST promotes transparency and accountability in addressing climate change and guides countries toward more ambitious climate action.
Thanks, ChatGPT. Couldn't have put it better myself. The submissions below are the last chance to submit anything before COP28, where the results of the Stocktake are formally published. Although, to be honest, we've already had the synthesis report and we know what to expect. We're well, well off track. All that remains is to see where we'll scale up ambition and increase action.
Here we go, then - a classic I read all these so you don't have to type of article that I hope will be useful. Needless to say, there's a message to this: focus on food systems to unlock progress across mitigation, adaptation, resilience, biodiversity, water, health, and prosperity!
The CGIAR, Bioversity-CIAT, Consumers International, GAIN and WWF submission is a good place to start, as it notes the need for a holistic food systems approach including healthy and sustainable diets alongside food loss and waste and sustainable production. This is a comprehensive submission including hunger, food and nutrition security, climate action, resilience, adaptation, livelihoods, ecosystem restoration, and means of implementation. It's short and to the point. Happy to have been involved.
There's another Joint Submission on Food Systems various partners, including Changing Markets Foundation, EAT, Jeremy Coller Foundation, One Acre Fund, ProVeg, World Animal Protection, and more. This one is worth reading if you don't know what 'taking a food systems approach' means, and probably isn't if you do. It's pretty comprehensive and clear, calling for a food systems approach that addresses FLW and diets. Interestingly, the call on shifting diets recognises differentiated responsibility - important to nutrition: Collectively commit to shifting globally to more sustainable food consumption patterns, inclusive of sustainable healthy diets and reducing food waste, and to supporting this shift with national efforts in line with principles of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. Good stuff!?
The Farmers Constituency led by WFO urges farmer participation, calls for human rights-based approaches, just rural transition, land tenure rights. Notes farmers' role and need for support in scaling sustainable and climate-resilient production. Special emphasis in not threatening food production. Of course, also calls for accessible funding for adaptation, resilience, and Loss and Damage. Nuanced points on balancing adaptation and mitigation, as well as prioritising local leadership.
FAO put in a long one, as you might expect - comprehensive across better production, better nutrition, better life, the 2030 Agenda, Paris Agreement, and Rio Declaration. Phew. They cover mitigation, adaptation, finance, socioeconomic consequences, loss and damage, and much more besides.
It's so comprehensive that I won't try to sum up too much, but rather will focus on some highlights that were new to me or useful numbers.
Various innovations and initiatives shared in links on p8 onwards.
The High-Level Champions do their thing with a wide-ranging report including food and agriculture, largely coming at this from a deforestation angle but also reminding us about the existence of the Sharm El Sheik Adaptation Agenda. Nothing new but quite strong on food, farmers, nature-based solutions and more.
WRI doesn't include too much on food, but they do talk of 'providing signals to transform food systems'. Notes food security, sustainable production, food waste, and dietary shifts. Halting deforestation a priority. Resilience also emphasised.
I also found this interesting, from the civil society group called the Independent Global Stocktake. They advise on the GST process, which is good for us food systems folk as there's a strong section on food systems transformation: reducing GHGs by reducing reliance on fossil fuels and agrochemicals, increasing carbon removal activities, and investing in methane-reducing innovations across livestock, rice, and food loss and waste. They're keen on climate-smart agriculture, too, and see potential yield gains from this. But it all needs finance - including money to benefit smallholders.
The Lancet covers a lot on health but recognises that food systems have the dual role of ensuring food security and also delivering major health gains through healthier, plant-forward diets from a decarbonised food system. Health benefits would, it says, be accrued from increased consumption of plant-based products and reduced consumption of red meat. Apparently between 2017-18, deaths from excess red meat consumption rose to 842,000 deaths globally. This, they say, clearly shows the need to decarbonise the food system by reducing red meat, thereby saving lives.
It notes inequality in distribution with some useful stats: perc apita emissions from the consumption of agricultural products are 39% higher in the very high HDI country group than in the high HDI group, and 41% higher than in the low HDI group; differences mostly attributable to the high per-capita consumption of beef products. While the very high HDI country group has made the most progress in reducing per-capita emissions from cattle products (down by 17% from 817kgCO2e per capita in 2000 to 676 kgCO2e per capita in 2018), this group is also the one that contributes the most to gree
Conservation International have shown no regard for my heavy workload - submitting 199 pages, although admittedly they're quite pretty. The focus here is natural climate solutions: the benefits of protecting, managing, and restoring nature. It centres around the Carbon Law for Nature, which dictates that the land sector must reach net zero by 2030, a 5Gt sink by 2040, and a 10Gt sink by 2050 to keep us below 1.5 degrees of warming. This graphic is particularly good:
There's more detail for each of these action tracks throughout the presentation, which is excellent. It includes all the what, who and how.
It's pretty remarkable how much we can do through food systems, although it's no easy thing.
Just a few extra notes:
领英推荐
?This one is obviously spectacular and well worth keeping to hand.
WFP naturally focuses more on averting, minimising and addressing loss and damage - particularly looking at anticipating shocks, restoring degraded ecosystems (to strengthen natural capital to build resilience), and protecting the vulnerable. Interesting greater focus on Loss and Damage.
The Global Alliance for the Future of Food has also put in two submissions with lots worth reading, ranging from the importance of food systems to gender, power, access, mechanisms for change, finance, and good practices in policymaking (notably the NDCs). Some of this is a bit technical for this overview but I do recommend a read if you're interested in agroecology and nature-positive solutions.
?Arguably the countries are the most important bit, and this is what I saw:
The USA submission includes building more climate-resilient food systems by improving food system productivity, output, diversity, and nutrition through climate-smart approaches and advancing responsive adaptation policies and measures in agriculture, livestock, aquaculture, and fisheries management. There's a renewed commitment to reduce deforestation to net zero by 2030 and significantly reduce other GHG emissions from land use through addressing forest degradation, agricultural expansion, and enhancing sequestration. Nature-based solutions indeed.
Latin America and the Caribbean recognise that land and food systems present the greatest potential for actively absorbing CO2 that is already in the atmosphere, while also accounting for the livelihoods of many of the world’s poorest and most vulnerable people, not to mention links to biodiversity. They call for global collaboration to promote carbon sequestration efforts, and better ecosystem stewardship. A lot of the focus is on soils and forests, but livestock and diets are also mentioned.
On behalf of AILAC, Guatemala (alongside Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay and Peru) include a nice paragraph on food systems transformation for food security, resilience, and equitable emissions reduction. Deforestation is the first priority mentioned but climate-smart agriculture is also recognised as a way to boost yields and reduce GHGs. This is later referred to as regenerative agricultural methods and agroecology and agroforestry. Also talks about halving FLW and transitioning to healthier and plant-based diets.
On behalf of the African Group of Negotiators, Zambia writes about the need to improve food security and focus on adaptation to ensure continued food production under climate change. Water-energy-food nexus is emphasised, alongside poverty alleviation and industrialisation. The overall message seems to be that the African continent is in danger and progress is too slow.
New Zealand is a breath of fresh air, looking at both reducing emissions from agriculture and building climate resilience in food systems. It's strong on the role of forests and biodiversity, the need for more finance in climate-smart agriculture, the role of subsidies and trade, and the need for investment in research and investment.
The UK identifies food and land use as key systems and recognises the need for further attention to achieve healthy diets, economies, and planet. Both resilience and sustainable agriculture are covered. But not diets.
The Environmental Integrity Group puts in quite a strong submission including a section on resilient, sustainable agriculture that increases yields, as well as agroforestry, expanding sustainable production systems, ensuring food security, halving food loss and waste, and reducing ag GHGs by 20%. It recognises agroecology, conservation agriculture, integrated production systems, and organic farming - and their role in sequestering soil carbon while reducing emissions. There's also a piece on land management and lower nutrient inputs (fertilisers). Most of this seems to echo IPCC research. Further interventions for adaptation include cultivation improvements, community-based approaches, diversification, and urban agriculture. It is so comprehensive that it almost reads like a list. I'm not sure how helpful this is, but it's definitely wide-ranging.
On behalf of the LDCs, Senegal only really talks about the need for water for agriculture - and then defers the rest to the SSJW processes.
Australia calls for Parties to identify practices, including nature-based solutions and transformed agriculture, to achieve adaptation and mitigation. After you, Oz!
Nepal only really talks about water for agriculture.
There's a submission on oceans from Chile, Colombia, Honduras, Monaco, Perú, the Republic of Korea, and the UK. Slightly unexpectedly. And it notes the role of the ocean for food security, depending on resilient and sustainable blue food production. Nice.
China talks about food loss and waste. Reductions here are welcomed as a mitigation option that is technically viable. That's all.
The Alliance of Small Island States, represented by Samoa, is strong on climate action for agriculture and food security, including halting and reversing deforestation and degradation. Interesting wording: demand-side measures in agriculture and intensification of sustainable agriculture, without further land expansion, are essential and catalyse widespread sustainable development benefits. I'm not sure what it means by demand-side measures in agriculture, and I am intrigued.
Norway, friends of the food system, talk about ramping up efforts to reduce emissions from food value chains as being a demand-side mitigation action. Interesting. Is this about shifting diets?
India notes the lack of access to technologies for climate adaptation in agriculture. There are subsequent references to climate-smart and resilient agricultural practices, including in terms of water use. These are also multiple mentions of the priority of ensuring food security.
The EU talks about food security and the need for demand-side measures (raising awareness of customers and businesses for climate-conscious decisions). Moreover, they talk about sustainable agriculture, mitigation and adaptation in food systems, and name agroecology, agroforestry, organic agriculture, reduction of food loss and waste, and promotion of healthy and sustainable diets - not to mention blue foods from sustainable fisheries that are low-emission, climate-resilient and climate-adaptive! Clearly the EU is another #FriendoftheFoodSystem. That was enjoyable.
Overall we had the following countries mentioning / not mentioning food systems:
For anyone wondering, I didn't see any mentions of nutrition (specifically) except from Norway.
Obviously, there are lots of mentions of protecting natural ecosystems and stopping deforestation - both clearly related to food, but not always explicitly called out as such.
If you do want to read all these, I'd say two things:
1) No, you really don't
2) You can find them at this link by searching 'stocktake' and scrolling right down to the latest submissions.
That's it. I'm going to go and lie down.
Global Policy Director at One Acre Fund; social enterprise evangelist.
1 年Super helpful, thx! love it when you do these kinds of analyses, keep em coming.
Public Health and Climate Policy
1 年Thanks. Great work!
I came to LinkedIn to find a few contacts and stayed on your page for 30 min. I love this post!
Senior Mediator and Program Manager at Meridian Institute
1 年Anna Locke Melissa Pinfield Rebecca Brooks Holly Anne Foster
Deputy CEO - Food, Farming and Countryside Commission (FFCC)
1 年Thanks Oliver Camp, great to have this overview. Clement Metivier FYI