INTRODUCTION
Agriculture shapes the human habitat - in the UK it creates what estate agents might call 'a view'. From the rolling hills covered in drifts of white sheep to the network of drystone walls on the dales and the patchwork of different coloured crops in the lowlands, it's not actually nature we are admiring; it's a landscape shaped by humans in the pursuit of food. However, in 1987, Jared Diamond, an American polymath, described agriculture as 'The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race'. While that sounds dramatic, agriculture has irreversibly changed both our environment and our lives - both for the better and for the worse.
In its broadest sense, agriculture encompasses food, fuel and natural fibres; it includes forestry, aquaculture, fisheries, livestock, arable (wheat, barley, oats, oilseed rape) and horticultural (fruit, nut and vegetable) crops. It is a huge global industry and the consideration of its current and future status is the work of entire universities and research institutes. This book has much narrower scope, but while I have concentrated on land-based food production in the UK, there is much in common with practices in northern Europe and I have included examples from further afield to illustrate more widespread issues.
I am an agricultural botanist by training, completing research projects in fungal diseases of arable and horticultural plants, but I have been working outside the field for many years and returning to it has given me a perspective which I was previously lacking. In the last twenty years, food systems (by which I mean the way food is grown and reaches our plates) have become much more complex, with ingredients being shipped around the world for our pleasure. Today, just four companies control 90 per cent of the global grain trade, one animal carcass might be butchered and sent to multiple countries, and agriculture has intensified to maximise profit - though not necessarily for the farmer who raised the produce.
Agriculture and climate
Climate change is already impacting all areas of the Earth. Glaciers are accumulating less ice and melting more in summer, ocean temperatures are rising, as are sea levels. We are seeing more frequent and intense extreme weather events, which cause damage to property and infrastructure and costs millions of pounds to repair each year. According to the US-based National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 2023 had the highest global temperature since records began in 1850 and the ten warmest years since 1850 have all happened in the last decade.
How will agriculture survive in these conditions? Our first thoughts are around how we can respond to produce crops in a changing climate, but we also need to consider that agriculture is partly to blame for the change.
A landmark study, published in 2021, demonstrated that over a third (34 per cent) of total greenhouse gas emissions came from agriculture. Just take a moment to think about that. One third of all emissions. It genuinely shocked me when I first read it. It is a huge impact but it doesn't tell the whole story - we also need to consider habitat loss, soil degradation and the damage to water supplies caused by over-extraction and pollution from agricultural run-off.
The work was done by Monica Crippa and colleagues from the Institute for Environmental Protection and Research (ISPRA) and the statistics division at the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), both based in Rome. The database uses an existing emissions database (EDGAR) combined with land-use emissions data from the FAOSTAT database. This land-use data includes the things we do to the land to obtain our crops, from the tilling of the soil to applying fertilisers and pesticides and the systems created for distribution.
When you look at individual country data, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) says that just 10 per cent of their total greenhouse gas emissions come from agriculture, but these are only the direct emissions. The paper considered the whole system from production to consumption, including processing, packaging, transport, retail and waste management. They suggest that direct emissions from agriculture plus the emissions from land use and land-use change (for example, ploughing up grassland for cropping) are responsible for 71 per cent, with the remainder from supply chain processes. Around a quarter of emissions come from energy production for everything from pre-planting to the actual farming, processing and distribution. (UN FAO)
Greenhouse gas emissions are compared using carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalent or CO2e values. These are based on the global warming potential (GWP) of the gases as quantified by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Carbon dioxide is set at 1, but methane has 28 times the global warming effect, so its GWP is 28. Other gases have higher values but are less common; nitrous oxide, released from artificial fertilisers and manure, is 265 and hydrofluorocarbons have a value of 12,400. However, these are rare in agriculture, being manufactured for use in cooling, heating and cleaning. The CO2e value is produced by multiplying the amount of gas by its GWP value and is measured in tonnes.
Around half of the emissions are carbon dioxide, and 35 per cent CO2e is methane from livestock production, farming and waste treatment. The remaining greenhouse gases include nitrous oxide (N2O) and various fluorinated gases. Interestingly, it was discovered that food transport contributes less to emissions than packaging which helps to protect produce and give it more 'shelf appeal'. I was surprised to learn that around 96 per cent of food transport emissions were from local or regional transport by road and rail towards the end of the journey rather than through international freighting. It occurs as food is broken down into smaller units for distribution.
The Conference of the Parties (COP)
I found a lot of surprises while writing this book, chief of which was the lobbying power of large agricultural companies, particularly at the United Nations Climate Change 'Conference of the Parties' (COP). These annual meetings are attended by governmental representatives, regional organisations and what are described by the UN as 'non-governmental actors'. They centre on the Paris Agreement, which was adopted at COP21, held in France in 2015: this aims to limit global warming to below 2 °C, preferably 1.5 °C, compared to pre-industrial levels.
In 2023, the Climate COP28 took place in the United Arab Emirates and was notable for the agreement to move 'away from fossil fuels in energy systems in a just, orderly and equitable manner, accelerating action in this critical decade, so as to achieve net zero by 2050 in keeping with the science'. While that took careful wording to achieve international agreement, you might have noticed there was no actual requirement to reduce the use of fossil fuels and different signatories will inevitably interpret the deal in different ways.
From an agricultural perspective, COP28 was a big one: it devoted a whole day to the impact of food and agriculture on climate - which, despite its huge contribution towards greenhouse gases, had largely escaped attention since the first Climate COP back in 1995.
By the end of the meeting, a 'Declaration on Sustainable Agriculture, Resilient Food Systems, and Climate Action' had been signed by more than 150 countries. It recognised both the threat to agriculture, water and food security caused by climate change and how agriculture and food systems have the potential 'to drive powerful and innovative responses to climate change and to unlock shared prosperity for all'. It noted that 'any path to fully achieving the long-term goals of the Paris Agreement must include agriculture and food systems', but with a combination of ambiguous language and its non-legally binding status, it can only really be considered a step in the right direction.
The key recognition was that 'the fundamental principles of food security and nutrition emerge as intrinsic human rights'. According to the global Hunger Index, in 2024, 733 million people lacked access to sufficient calories and around 2.8 billion people did not access a healthy diet. Some of these people could be helped with education and by making cheaper, nutritious food available, but others have been subjected to misinformation about the balance they need in their diet. We have an opportunity to shift the narrative on food and dietary patterns to reduce overconsumption for some and improve the nutrition of others.
Currently, around 4 per cent of climate financing goes to food systems, and remember, this sector is responsible for around a third of all greenhouse gas emissions. If we truly are to reach our climate goals, we need to concentrate our efforts and dedicate some finance to this sector. This was the topic for COP 29 in November 2024, where poorer countries were asking for £1 trillion a year by 2035 to help the world stay within the 1.5 °C limit agreed in the Paris Agreement. Despite discussions continuing until 3am, nobody left happy, with richer governments and public financiers such as the World Bank offering approximately £240 billion. It was a hugely disappointing result, leading António Guterres, the UN secretary-general, to comment, 'The world must pay up, or humanity will pay the price. Climate finance is not charity, it's an investment.'
I referred earlier to my surprise at COP, because international agreements are definitely the way forward, even when we...
