University of Oxford Zoology Department
While the challenge is now on the popular agenda, recognised by government and accepted as a global need, those involved are only just waking up to the detail of the challenge and what it means.
The agenda already includes issues such as the carbon footprint generated by a product or process; but the ecological footprint of each variant of a production process is equally important.
Before we can come up with the right answers, it is important to ensure that we ask the right questions. So FAI is working in partnership with its commercial clients McDonald’s, Tesco, The National Sheep Association and non-governmental organisations to identify the questions for carbon footprint and ecological analysis for farm types and farm processes, rather than simply looking sector averages. In some sectors the differences between one producer and another of the same product could well be substantial.
For example, while the generalised ecological footprint of a cereal-fed beef animal could be seen as poor, the ecological footprint of the same animal finished on grassland, where the land cannot grow an arable protein crop, could be seen as good. We are working on developing the models so that, when action is taken, we can be confident of it will drive effective progress.
We must be decisive, but also be careful that when we commit resource to particular action we can confirm statistically that we are not heading down blind alleys. Failure to achieve our sustainability targets in the future could be disastrous.
The idea of reducing CO2 emissions across society is a new phenomenon and there is limited data available. That must be addressed.
The other important area we must attend to is conservation of water – not just globally but locally, too. It is estimated that 1.4 billion people worldwide lack clean drinking water and nearly 450 million face severe water shortages. But perhaps even more surprising is a European Environment Agency report of 2005 which showed that 10% of EU territory and more than 14% of the EU population have been affected by water scarcity.
FAI is engaging with a variety of projects to tackle these issues as we develop our farming systems. Critically, all players need to ask the right questions at this point – if we don’t we could end up taking actions that appear to be good but which, in hindsight, don’t deliver against the targets of dealing with climate change.
It is too simplistic to just look at greenhouse gas emissions in terms of meat produced. Rather, we must also consider, for example, the protein production potential of any piece of land.
In other words, if you have Grade 2 arable land, is it better to grow feed for animals and convert it into animal protein or to produce protein crops, such as pulses, direct for human consumption? At the other end of the equation, where it is not possible to grow pulses or other protein foods in hill or other poorer soil areas, there may be a strong argument that farmers here should focus on grass-fed meat protein production.
Means to tackle climate change must be addressed both in the market and at government level. The policy-makers will change the economic framework within which we work in the future; while at the operational level we have to be as efficient as possible and search for genuine renewables – remembering that wherever you use energy it can always be used somewhere else.
Over one third of the global land mass is used for agriculture – the rest is mountains, rivers, lakes, forest, oceans ... and, of course, concrete. If everyone goes for renewable packaging, where will all the pulp come from? We will have to cut down more trees ... so we must plant more trees. If governments persist in driving biofuel use, where will the land come from for growing food? In time, land use is the critical factor ... and where we use land for food, we must identify what types of food we are going to produce and the displacement factors involved. If we switched grass-fed beef for chicken, we would have to grow more grain.
Global warming is possibly the biggest crisis the human race has ever had to face. Crisis prevention is difficult to sell ... but it is a more intelligent form of issue management than reacting to a crisis once it has happened – particularly when the outcomes are potentially catastrophic. As the famous quote goes “If you think prevention is expensive, try having an accident”.
We have a little time ... but we need to ensure we use the time effectively to measure baselines, and then run the analysis correctly.
And when I say a little time, I don’t mean 10 years ... I mean by Christmas!