Over the summer, I had the opportunity to collaborate with CIMMYT offices in Kenya, Mexico, and Zimbabwe on a plant molecular breeding project aimed at improving soil abiotic stress tolerance and grain quality traits among maize tropical genotypes.
Background: Soil nitrogen deficiency limits maize productivity in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), resulting in high levels of food insecurity and malnutrition. Examining the performance of maize tropical lines under low-N stress conditions is critical for advancing the food and nutrition agenda in SSA. Breeding methods based on molecular genetics can improve our understanding of the genetic processes regulating grain protein, oil, and starch content in nitrogen-deficient soils and be used to develop higher performing cultivars.
Methodology: The study employed Genome-wide association study (GWAS), quantitative trait loci (QTL) mapping and genomic selection (GS) techniques for dissecting the genetic architecture of maize grain quality traits (i.e, protein, starch, and oil content) under optimal and low-nitrogen stress conditions.
The research introduced me to advanced molecular data management and analysis techniques utilized in plant breeding. It also provided me with connections to world-renowned centres, institutions, and scientists in the field of genetics.
Ecuadorian organic coffee plantation on the western slopes of the Andes. Photo Credit:Pesticide Action Network UK
Introduction
The stark inequalities in access to safe and nutritious food, as well as the insecurity of rural livelihoods, are examples of the existing vulnerabilities in the global food systems. According to the Global Report on Food Crises 2020, the number of people suffering from acute food insecurity reached an all-time high in 2019. The current COVID-19 pandemic, which is overwhelmingly impacting the world’s most vulnerable communities, has further demonstrated that new and daunting threats are emerging in the already complex food value chain. The pandemic has intensified pre-existing drivers of food insecurity, mainly due to decreasing economic activity, as reported by the September 2020 update analysis on food security in times of COVID-19. Furthermore, there are several other central concerns, including climate change, political instabilities, infectious diseases, hunger, malnutrition, food losses and waste, which require our immediate attention in order to increase the resilience of the current global food system.
The United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres is scheduled to convene this year’s Food Systems Summit as a bold move to stay on track and achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030. The 2021 UN Food Systems Summit (UNFSS) aims at starting an exciting journey in which we can collectively transform our food systems in line with the set 2030 Agenda. Five action tracks of the UNFSS were released on the 4th of September 2020 by the UN Deputy Secretary-General Amina J. Mohammed and UN Special Envoy Agnes Kalibata. The tracks were established to address synergies and potential trade-offs and identify groundbreaking actions, innovative ideas and methodologies that can deliver broad advantages across all SDGs. The action tracks include:
Ensuring access to safe and nutritious food for all (Action Track 1)
Shifting to sustainable consumption patterns (Action Track 2)
Boosting nature-positive production at scale (Action Track 3)
Building resilience to vulnerabilities, shocks, and stresses (Action Track 5)
On the road to the 2021 UNFSS, Action Track 3 (AT3) possess an enormous potential to foster innovations aimed at scaling food security and environmental sustainability. WWF International‘s Global Leader, Food Practice, Joao Campari, chairs the UNFSS AT3 Leadership Team with the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) as the anchoring agency. AT3 focuses on ramping up nature-friendly food production practices to meet the basic human rights to nutritious and healthy food while operating within the proposed quantitative planetary boundaries.
Nature-Positive Food Production Systems (AT3)
Nature-positive systems of food production (as a form of Nature-based Solutions (NbS)) recognize that biodiversity supports the provision of all ecosystem services that the human society relies on, and that these services are essential to the achievement of the SDGs, the Paris Agreement, and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). NbS leverage ecosystems’ ability to minimize greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions while also assisting us in responding to the adverse effects of climate change and reducing biodiversity loss. The specific contributions of AT3 will be – the achievement of SDG12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), SDG13 (Climate Action), SDG14 (Life Below Water) and SDG15 (Life on Land).
The Green Revolution laid foundations for increased agricultural productivity at the expense of environmental health. According to the WWF’s Living Planet Study 2018, the size of mammalian, bird, fish, reptile, and amphibian populations has declined by 60% on average in just over 40 years. This is a clear testament to the adverse impact of anthropogenic activities on environmental sustainability and biodiversity integrity. It is therefore imperative to establish channels that promote the Nature-Positive Agenda on a global scale. According to a recent World Economic Forum (WEF) report, nature-based economic initiatives such as recycled industrial materials (Circularity), healthy diets, and “smart” building construction, could generate $US 10.1 trillion in economic opportunities and create 395 million jobs by 2030.
Figure 1: The diagram (above) provides a concise collection of recommendations for the achievement of net positive environmental outcomes in relation to the baseline. In addition, the intuitive simplicity of the idea of the Four Steps (Renew-Reuse-Restore-Refrain) as well as its expansive applicability to a variety of users and circumstances may promote widespread ownership, making it possible to account for apparently disparate acts across food systems. Source: Conservation Hierarchy
The global expansion of discourses on land tenure security, food justice, and subsidy provisions are all part of a shift to a better, fairer agri-food system. As a result, it is important to make an immediate transition to a modern agricultural system that is both socially just and environmentally sustainable. This is embodied in Agroecology – a sustainable agriculture approach that works with, rather than against, ecosystems (Altieri, 2018; Rosset and Altieri, 2017) and rural land-rights campaigns. Agroecological practices lead to the realization of the SDGs by providing sufficient food for the increasing global population, promoting environmental restoration, minimizing the dependence on non-renewable energy and ensuring the economic viability of low-input agricultural systems.
Agroecological Innovations for Sustainable and Resilient Food Systems
Agroecology as a science employs ecological concepts to regulate species interactions in order to increase crop production and other services such as insect pest control and nutrient retention while minimizing the use of non-renewable agro-inputs (i.e. pesticides) and associated production costs. Gliessman (2021) highlighted that, agroecology moves ‘from a narrow concern of farming practices to the whole universe of interactions among crop plants, soil, soil organisms, insects, insect enemies, environmental conditions, and management activities and beyond that to the effects of farming systems on surrounding natural ecosystem’.
Figure 1: Principles of Agroecology. Source: Nicholls et al. (2016)
Agroecology has supported and fed smallholder farming communities around the world, and according to studies focusing on these sections of the population, agroecological practices are more resilient to the adverse effects of climate change. Agroecology encompasses the recycling of nutrients and energy; the integration of crop and livestock farming (mixed farming); and diversified farming practices that promote the conservation of genetic resources (such as agroforestry and agrisilviculture). Moreover, agroecological systems utilize natural processes for pest management and soil fertility improvement (e.g. through mulching, polycultures, and cover crops).
Crop Diversity is Central to Food and Nutrition Security in Resource-constrained Communities. Source:Pesticide Action Network UK
Transitioning to agroecology has multiple and substantial benefits to farmer communities, nutrition, soils and the environment, but it requires far more than just financial investments and land. Thus, instead of a traditional, monoculture-based systems that rely heavily on external inputs, we need to establish sustainable and restorative agricultural systems that aim to improve the livelihoods of smallholder farmer communities and promote biodiversity conservation under the prevailing climate vulnerabilities. Strategic initiatives that support marginalized local food producers – through a fair market share system with multinational corporations – should be established. In addition, shorter supply chains (the path that food takes from farm to fork) are required in the food system to provide more value to farmers and local, healthier, seasonal, and affordable food to consumers.
Table 1: Leading Institutions Supporting the Adoption of Agroecology as a Nature-Positive Production Model
‘European research project aiming to develop innovative approaches to enhance the understanding of socio-economic and policy drivers and barriers for further development and implementation of agro-ecological practices in EU farming systems.’
A ‘multi-donor fund supporting agroecological practices and policies’ across the globe.
Table 1 presents a summarized list of some prominent projects that are advancing the agroecology agenda across the globe. Biovision and ICIPE are also implementing the Push-Pull project in sub-Saharan Africa’s cereal production systems. Smallholder farmers receive extension services on how to grow crops (primarily maize and sorghum) without using inorganic agro-inputs.
Fathoming the main ideas behind Agroecology can be daunting. The video above presents a summarized guide to the basics of Agroecology. Credit: IPES-Food
Conclusion
A proper response to a deepening food crisis that overwhelmingly affects already vulnerable communities necessitates decisive climate change action. The forthcoming UNFSS, the first of its kind, provides a rare opportunity to bring in stakeholders from across the entire food supply chain to discuss the food crisis and break down barriers to long-term food system transformation. Agroecology is needed to conserve natural resources, ensure food security and improve livelihoods at the grassroots level. It is therefore imperative that pathways be established to incorporate agroecology concepts into the UNFSS dialogue as part of the advancement of AT3.
References
Altieri, M. A. (2018) Agroecology: the science of sustainable agriculture. CRC Press.
Gliessman, S. R. (2021) Package Price Agroecology: The Ecology of Sustainable Food Systems. CRC press.
Nicholls, C. I., Altieri, M. A. and Vazquez, L. (2016) ‘Agroecology: principles for the conversion and redesign of farming systems’, Journal of Ecosystems and Ecography S, 5.
Rosset, P. M. and Altieri, M. A. (2017) Agroecology: science and politics. Practical Action Publishing.
Circular Economy and Environmental Sustainability. Source:LITE A/S
Background
The current global trends are characterized by a complex matrix of constraints that include economic uncertainties, food insecurities, COVID-19 pandemic and tightened net-zero emission targets (for addressing the climate crisis). This calls for the development and adoption of evidence-based and policy-oriented interventions that foster sustainable and inclusive economic transitions in the Industrial 4.0 era.
The adverse impacts of the 4th Industrial Revolution on environmental and livelihood sustainability is increasingly gaining traction amongst researchers, policy-makers and other industry stakeholders. The International Resources Panel estimates that resource usage has tripled since 1970 and could double by 2050. This can be attributed to the linearity of our economic models which are centred on a ‘take-make-use-dispose’ protocol. In total, 100 billion tons of raw materials in the form of metals, fossil fuels, minerals, plant, and animal matter are used annually by the global economy. However, recent studies have shown that only 8.6% of these materials are recycled.
The incorporation of the Circularity Agenda in the National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) is an urgent need since 50% of GHG emissions are associated with material flows between mining and manufacturing processes. In the words of Dr Martin Luther King, Jr. ‘the time is always right to do what is right’. It is, therefore, imperative to establish platforms that advocate for transitions – in the direction of circularity – in the wake of climate change and its associated adverse effects. Furthermore, a shift towards a comprehensive circular economic model is necessary for minimizing environmental degradation and biodiversity loss in a way that guarantees the sustainability of future businesses. Circular Economy (CE) is the most feasible and sustainable alternative to the conventional linear economic model (Geissdoerfer et al., 2017; Ranta et al., 2018).
Circular Economy
Circularity, as defined by the European Union Commission, is a “model of production and consumption, which involves sharing, leasing, reusing, repairing, refurbishing and recycling existing materials and products as long as possible.” The CE model sought to scale-up economic transitions through innovations in production, resource consumption, transformation and value recovery waste. Ellen MacArthur Foundation described CE as “one that is restorative by design and which aims to keep products, components, and materials at their highest utility and value at all times.”
The adoption of CE on a global scale should be prioritized and promoted in order to ensure sustainability of our economic and environmental systems. Moreover, studies have reported that, CE can assist us in tackling 45% of global GHG emissions and present an economic opportunity of US$4.5 trillion. The EU Parliament coined and adopted the Circular Economy Action Plan as a policy reorientation for creating a sustainable, carbon-neutral, toxic-free and entirely circular economy by 2050.
Figure 3: Waste Management Hierarchy Vs Circularity
Platform for Accelerating the Circular Economy
The Platform for Accelerating the Circular Economy (PACE) which is hosted by the World Resources Institute is a global partnership that was formed to drive action towards the adoption of the CE model. PACE’s Circular Economy Action Agenda sheds light on how we can pivot away from linearity and move towards circularity. The agenda contains five articles: food, plastics, textiles, electronics and equipment. PACE is currently promoting the circularity agenda through various initiatives that cover the five articles in detail. In this context, PACE convened a webinar on the 4th of February 2021 under the caption ‘Time to Act: The Circular Economy Action Agenda’. The virtual session encompassed keynote presentations, interactive dialogues, and panel discussions covering evidence-based and sustainable pathways of integrating circular economy into the climate action agenda.
Circular Economy for Electronics
The United Nations (UN) reports that over US$10 billion worth of metals are disposed of annually as e-waste. Circularity for electronics prioritizes solutions that close the loop on our current ‘take-make-use-dispose’ linear model and recover value for e-waste.
Accelerating just and fair transitions in the circular economy for electronics is dependent on the adoption of novel technological innovations and business models. Such interventions include:
a. Electronic products made from recyclable materials (for instance the Project Ara and Fairphone.
c. Reverse business models that recover value from second-hand products by retrieving, servicing, and resale, such as the mobile phone take-back programmes – AT&T Trade-in Program and Swappie.
Conclusion
Circularity is a restorative and decentralized concept which encourages the growth of economies that are socially and environmentally sustainable. Forging such an economic course – that is truly cyclical involves multi-stakeholder and global cooperation.
References
Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N. M. and Hultink, E. J. (2017) ‘The Circular Economy–A new sustainability paradigm?’, Journal of cleaner production, 143, pp. 757-768.
Ranta, V., Aarikka-Stenroos, L., Ritala, P. and Mäkinen, S. J. (2018) ‘Exploring institutional drivers and barriers of the circular economy: A cross-regional comparison of China, the US, and Europe’, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 135, pp. 70-82.
