Climate Change Brings New Pest & Disease Pressures Previously Unimaginable — Global Issues

Children stand in a flood water in Borno State, Nigeria. Credit: UNICEF/Vlad Sokhin
  • Opinion by Alexander Muller – Adam Prakash – Elena Lazutkaite (berlin)
  • Inter Press Service

However, climate change is threatening to change the course of history, allowing some native pests to breed more frequently and longer, while invasive insects and pathogens are being spread more widely.

It is no coincidence that agriculture in temperate regions, such as much of Northern Europe and Northern America, is characterised by high productivity.

In temperate zones, agricultural sectors are highly capital intensive with new technologies continuously introduced; weather conditions during growing seasons are often predictably favourable; while harsh winters and cold springs prevent many plant pests and pathogens from overwintering, all leading to crop yields that are approaching their physiological ceilings, and at the same time storage losses being kept to a minimum.

In a nutshell

Pests and diseases can undergo rapid evolutionary changes through natural selection within the timescale of climate change. As the climate warms up, agricultural pests and diseases are advancing northwards and becoming more widespread.

Notwithstanding, the science that links climate change with changes to the behaviour of insect pests and pathogens is complex, given the latter’s multitude of biological responses and their interactions with changing environmental stimuli.

Invasive species, by definition, have succeeded in areas outside of their habitual range and therefore have higher adaptive capacity relative to native species. Evolution and adaptation are therefore the inherent mechanisms that explain why pests and diseases pose a consequential threat (both localised and transboundary) under a changing climate.

Natural selection also explains why an increasing number of insect pests have become resistant to pesticides.

Why should richer economies be worried? What science tell us

Drawing from a recent report on the scientific linkages between climate change and pest and disease outbreaks produced by TMG Think Tank for Sustainability and Climate Prediction and Applications Centre of Intergovernmental Authority on Development, temperature rise in temperate zones is likely to attract new pests that have migrated from areas where heat stress is too severe.

However, with warmer winters in northern latitudes there is strong likelihood of migration resulting in an increase in the build-up of insect pest populations to damaging levels owing to early emergence (shorter dormancy due to accelerated metabolic rates attributable to higher temperatures).

While there is uncertainty on whether invasive species can establish themselves in new environments, much will depend on factors such as the degree of temperature rise, food supply and natural enemies and whether they can maintain or adapt to the synchrony with growth cycles of plants on which they feed.

Warming will also have other detrimental effects, such as bringing about an increased number of generations of native and invasive insect pests through greater intra-year breeding, fostering rising population growth.

Ultimately, with a larger temperature window in temperate zones within which insects and pathogens can flourish combined with rising heat stress to crops, these zones could register rapid increases in pest and disease outbreaks, increased use of pesticides, increased costs to farmers and lower yields.

In fact, the transboundary and transoceanic expansion of invasive species is already heading northwards thanks to climate change including extreme events such as cyclones and storms, and further exacerbated by international trade and travel.

A case in point here is the recent spread of the destructive lanternflies to the United States, which have demonstrated great adaptability to new environments and pose imminent threat to vineyard based economies. Researchers further predict that corn earworm that ravages maize, cotton, soyabeans and vegetables is expanding northwards into the United States’ maize belt.

The UN estimates that at least 20 percent of all food crops grown worldwide are lost annually to plant pests and diseases. With the rich temperate countries becoming increasing vulnerable, total losses would increase.

Consequently, while there is a pressing need for scientific theory to provide further precision on pest-climate dynamics, as affirmed in the latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), action is needed now.

Harnessing technological leaps in the realm of artificial intelligence, will be critical for enhanced plant pest and disease surveillance, diagnostics and outbreak prediction via early warning systems.

As with all pest and disease outbreaks, prevention is far cheaper than dealing with full-blown crises, and what is more, pests and diseases are often impossible to eradicate once they have established themselves.

Alexander Müller is TMG’s Managing Director. He is a former Assistant Director-General of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO) and State Secretary for Consumer Protection, Food and Agriculture, Germany.

Adam Prakash is a TMG research associate, whose work explores the quantitative links between climate change and agriculture and how emerging technologies can de-risk food systems.

Elena Lazutkaite is an animal scientist and interdisciplinary researcher focusing on food and agriculture, transboundary pests and resilience, and environmental sustainability.

TMG Research gGmbH is an international not-for-profit think tank headquartered in Berlin, Germany, with an African regional office in Nairobi. Through action-oriented research with local and international partners, TMG triggers new thinking and “social innovations” to tackle entrenched governance challenges in the transition to a more sustainable future for people and planet.

IPS UN Bureau

© Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Where is the Global Response? — Global Issues

A child eating WFP high-energy biscuits as part of WFP’s nutrition assistance in Batangafo town, northern Central African Republic. Credit: WFP/Bruno Djoyo
  • Opinion by Alexander Muller – Adam Prakash – Elena Lazutkaite (berlin / terni, italy)
  • Inter Press Service

As most recently highlighted at the recent UN High-Level Political Forum on the Sustainable Development Goals (HLPF), the intersection of poverty, climate vulnerability and geopolitical dynamics could unleash the worst humanitarian crisis in recent memory.

Why is this crisis different?

All food crises are intrinsically linked to spikes in fossil fuel prices. Recent episodes (such as the food price crises of 2007-2009 and 2012) display several common characteristics: increased demand for biofuels as an alternative energy source; and the diversion of massive amounts of food grains to intensive, and unsustainable livestock sectors in countries with an already high and unhealthy consumption of animal protein.

However, until now, severe impacts on food availability have been avoided thanks to favourable weather conditions that have helped to quickly restore market equilibria.
Not this time.

While the root of the current crisis is strongly linked to incessant pressure on food systems to deliver energy and meat, high fertilizer prices mean that production costs are outpacing farmgate prices of food, discouraging farmers from maintaining or increasing production.

This adds yet another layer of complexity to the “perfect storm” that has already been gathering. Covid-19 looms large over the ability of supply chains to deliver food. Conflict (Russia’s invasion of Ukraine) has siphoned-off enormous amounts of food destined for international markets as well as driving up the price of crude oil, which is highly influential in determining prices of fertilizer – the critical input in global agri-food value chains.

(Note: On July 22, The United Nations, Turkey, Russia, and Ukraine signed an agreement in Istanbul aimed at delivering Ukrainian grain to world markets. The deal was the result of months of negotiations as world food prices skyrocketed amid increasing grain shortages connected to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres heralded the agreement as a major diplomatic breakthrough. “Today there is a beacon on the Black Sea. A beacon of hope—a beacon of possibility, a beacon of relief—in a world that needs it more than ever.”)

Due to our energy-hungry and inefficient food systems, over seven units of fossil fuel energy are required to produce one unit of food – from farm to retail.

Adding to the complexity of these developments is the accelerated impact of the climate crisis on global agriculture. The upshot is that the world is facing record food costs in 2022.

These “Four Cs” are instigating a scenario that could be more severe than anything we’ve seen in the past five decades, mirroring the hunger crisis of the 1970s in which millions perished from hunger.

Moreover, overall prospects for a global bumper grain crop are increasingly dim. Recent satellite surveillance shows that excessive dryness and heat stress could lead to a five million tonne shortfall in the EU wheat harvest and a combined eight million tonne contraction of wheat output in the US and India.

This adds to uncertainty about continued blockage of wheat supplies from Ukraine, which had a pre-conflict capacity of storing 60 million tonnes of grains and oilseeds.

One hopeful sign is that Ukraine has begun shipping small but increasing quantities of food via land routes, with significant volumes also passing through the Danube River. Several international initiatives are also underway to unblock supply chains and compensate for storage infrastructure destroyed by Russia.

These include US support for new silos along the border with Romania and Poland, and Turkey’s offer to help reinstate Ukraine’s exports from the Black Sea. However, any delays to these initiatives could force many Ukrainian farmers into bankruptcy, jeopardizing global food security for years to come.

Can we crisis-proof our food systems?

The war in Ukraine has thrown into sharp focus – yet again – to just how vulnerable our energy and food systems are to shocks, including geopolitical tensions. Dependence on a few countries for energy and fertilizer needs, poses exceptional and unacceptable risks.

Faced with severe food shortages, many countries will undoubtedly turn to Russia, which is set for an excellent food harvest this season, raising prospects of “weaponizing grain” in retaliation against sanctions.

Behind the geopolitics of blockades on Ukrainian grain is an untold story of a fragile, overly-centralized global food system, constructed and promoted by the richer nations and their corporations, that was already vulnerable to shocks long before the tanks rolled in.

Added to these continuing uncertainties, is the increasing impact of climate extremes to global food production. Once largely associated with the African region, drought is wreaking havoc to food systems around the world. A record-breaking drought reordered plantings in the United States, heat stress in India has led to a reported 10-35 percent decline in crop yields with more heatwaves predicted prompting a ban on the country’s wheat exports, with restrictions on food shipments instigated by another 34 countries.

Devastating heatwaves and the worst drought in 70 years are also being felt in northern regions of Italy driving up prices by as much as 50% , while the Horn of Africa is being ravaged by the worst drought in four decades. With only one percent of arable land equipped for irrigation in the region, the longer-term prognosis for strengthening climate resilience is disturbing, to say the least.

Unfortunately, the global response so far has largely taken the same laissez faire approach that was proposed in the wake of previous crises. In Einstein’s words, it is tantamount to “doing the same thing(s) over and over again and expecting different results.”

To achieve the fundamental reform needed, our food systems need to be set on a transformative pathway, necessitating the redesign around intertwined action.

Restoring sanity

It would be wishful thinking to expect that the world will ever be free of multiple crises. The question, therefore, is how to construct a more resilient global food system to shocks from wherever they might arise.

In the short-term, emergency measures are needed to safeguard access to food for those who are hardest hit from high food prices. Moratoriums on the biofuel and livestock feed sectors would free up sufficient quantities of grain to avoid a hunger crisis. Food stocks, where abundant, should also be released to ensure that the most at risk have affordable and open access to food.

A communiqué issued at the close of the recent G7 Summit in Germany unveiled plans to boost fertilizer production and promote the supply of organic fertilizers. G7 leaders also encouraged the release of food from stockpiles and agreed not to introduce any new public subsidies for fossil fuel sectors, even as they called for additional temporary investment in the natural gas industry to mitigate current supply shortages.

In parallel to these emergency measures, we urgently need to embark a more resilient pathway in the medium- to long-term. Even were the war in Ukraine to end tomorrow and supply chains to return to “normal” we must shift the current paradigm of dependency on climate-destroying mineral fertilizers. We must make hard choices to wean ourselves off conventional monocultural agriculture towards more diverse, localized and ecosystem-sensitive food systems.

Science tells us that nitrogen-based fertilizers derived from fossil fuels, can contribute to 40 percent of cereal yields. Continuing to depend on fertilizer supplies from a few countries is therefore tantamount to holding nearly 8 billion people to ransom.

It is increasingly clear that to avert the impact of such geopolitics, policy makers must make serious attempts to delink world food security from fossil fuel-based and climate-destroying inputs. Incentivizing inexpensive and readily available and proven technologies – such as agroforestry and other agroecological practices – boosts soil health, improves the availability of nutritious food, and strengthens climate resilience.

Repurposing a mere fraction of current perverse subsidises for the fossil fuel sector, which amount to an astounding US$ 7 trillion per year, is a critical step towards enabling such a transformation.

Ultimately, however, we need to value our food systems differently by including their total footprint on human health and the environment. Ignoring the “true cost” of food production has led to a focus on cheap and non-nutritious food that is linked to the global obesity pandemic and a greater risk of zoonotic disease spillovers.

The benefits of such a True Cost Accounting (TCA) approach would be manifold: a reduction in food waste, a far more productive and sustainable agricultural sector that respects our natural capital, and a sense of realism in achieving greenhouse gas targets under the Paris Agreement.

Dismantling the 4 Cs

Decoupling the world’s food systems from fossil fuel-based inputs would be a major step forward in solving long-term global hunger. A necessary first step towards such transformation is to design pathways in which the global north shares its food stockpiles instead of diverting grains to fuel cars and promoting unsustainable livestock production.

Such repurposing requires immediate investment in renewable energy and the manufacture of bio-fertilizers. Organic fertilizers are integral to the circular economy, which is an increasingly important model for planetary sustainability.

Equally, the overuse of mineral fertilizers needs to be addressed, especially given their role in creating additional input demand, which in turn leads to higher prices, while compounding environmental degradation.

While the G7 Leaders’ communiqué is a refreshing breakaway from tradition, the world still has much to learn from history. The world was ill-prepared in the 1970s, the 2000s as well as today. Arguably, solutions to fix increasingly complex and intertwined food systems are difficult.

Vested interests, a lack of governance and a system of economic accounting that undervalues our natural and societal capital are challenges under which transformation of our food systems needs to happen. This task is by no means underestimated, but bold action is needed to ensure food systems become more crisis-proof.

As an emergency step, prioritizing food for people “over all else” would build up trust especially between developing regions in need and the G7. And trust is also a very scarce resource in the world of today.

Alexander Müller is Managing Director (based in Berlin), Adam Prakash is Research Associate (based in the UK), Elena Lazutkaite is Research Associate (based in Berlin)

Töpfer Müller Gaßner, a Think Tank for Sustainability, based in Berlin.

About TMGTMG Research gGmbH is a Berlin-based research organization with an African regional hub in Nairobi and projects across several countries in Africa. Together with partners at the local, national and international levels, TMG explores transformative solutions for entrenched sustainability challenges, with a focus on four thematic clusters: Food Systems, Land Governance, Nature-Based Solutions and Urban Futures.

IPS UN Bureau


Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

© Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Exit mobile version