The Food Systems Approach: Sustainable Solutions for a Sufficient Supply of Healthy Food

Climate change will ultimately be a decisive factor in the future security of our food. Research shows that the food system is responsible for 19-29% of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. 

Agricultural production, including indirect effects through changes in land use, accounts for the bulk of this: 80-86%. Conversely, the food system is largely dependent on climate conditions. Studies show that climate change will have a significant impact on food production, trade flows, food prices, and farmer incomes, with parts of the globe possibly becoming unsuitable for agricultural production if there is a rise in global average temperature. 

Feedback mechanisms between production activities and impacts on natural conditions (e.g. greenhouse gas emissions or erosion) and on resources (such as soil, water) are vital when analyzing the relationship between the food system and the environment, but they are also complicated and difficult to decipher. Many forms of agriculture involve greenhouse gas emissions, but the relationships differ for plant and animal production in terms of cause-effect pathways, intensity, and the natural resources involved. Climate changes resulting from these emissions are in turn reflected in the workings of the food system. Climate changes lead to higher temperatures, greater extremes and more frequent drought, and in certain areas more rain. 

To illustrate the relationships and possible intervention pathways in a way that can be clearly understood, we have confined ourselves in Figure 8 (see below) to showing interventions aimed at changes in agricultural production designed to remain within the environmental limits of the system. 

There are different methods for coming to grips with the feedback mechanisms that play such a key role in the interaction between the food production system and the climate. One of the ways to reduce the impact of agricultural activities on the environment (mitigation) is the sustainable intensification of agriculture. Encouraging higher productivity on a smaller area of land can prevent the additional greenhouse gas emissions that would result from expanding the agricultural area. However, emissions per unit of output can still increase, partly due to the growing dependence on fossil fuels that agricultural intensification can entail. The way in which this higher production per hectare is achieved therefore needs to be climate-smart. This can be done, for example, by applying smarter methods of crop rotation, or by using precision agriculture to better match the application of inputs (such as water and artificial fertilizer) to the local natural soil or temperature conditions (see www.ag4impact.org for practical applications in Africa). Adaptation measures can in turn cushion climate impacts, for example, by using better water management or drought-resistant seeds to also enable sufficient production under drier conditions or by switching to other crops. Investments in better weather forecasting can also make a major contribution to farmer resilience to changing climate conditions. The choice of technical solution should always be made in the light of socio-economic conditions and possibilities. The question is: how can the measure most efficiently achieve the biggest possible impact (a trade-off between financial costs and earnings)? This points once again to the contribution that systems thinking can make in terms of effective, sustainable solutions and in the societal consideration of trade-offs (governance, financial aspects). 

Figure 8 Food systems thinking around climate change: the sustainable intensification of agricultural production 

Alongside agricultural production, there are of course other activities in the food production chain that have an environmental impact. Storage, transport, processing, and retail also consume considerable energy, thereby contributing to greenhouse gas emissions. Energy saving, the recycling of food remains as biogas, or using less packaging material are a few options for reducing the environmental harm of these activities. New technology to save energy or create biodegradable packaging materials can be enforced by means of environmental and other legislation and by regulation, and/or through economic incentives (taxes and subsidies). Also, a dietary change from meat to plant products can make a major contribution to reducing the food system's greenhouse gas emissions: looking at an American diet, the production of plant-based beef substitutes would produce only 4% of the greenhouse gas associated with the production of beef (Eshel et al., 2016; see Springman et al., 2016 for examples from other parts of the world).