- Analysts observe numerous loopholes in global climate talks, with a failure to address glaring food security concerns.
- Financial commitments for food systems remain low, affecting implementation, and leaving millions of people hungry.
- Agriculture accounts for a quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions.
For the very first time, food systems were finally discussed at the just-ended COP28 in Dubai late last year, but analysts are up in arms, asking if it’s a ‘too little, too late’ scenario.
“Given the profound impact of agricultural practices and food consumption patterns on our planet’s health, this attention is long overdue,” notes the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) in its review of the COP28 outcome.
Better late than never, so “though the talks’ long overdue focus on food and agriculture ultimately disappointed, it provides a starting point for future action and advocacy.”
COP28 was held in Dubai late last year, and while there were numerous announcements, “for the first time ever, there was a whole day dedicated to food and agriculture,” AFSA analysts comment.
It is ironic that none of the previous global climate change talks ever discussed food systems even though “agriculture accounts for a quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions.”
Agriculture is destroying ecosystems
Agricultural activities are at the center of the destruction of ecosystems around the world. From resource-intensive systems in the developed world to monocultures for food and feed in developing countries, agricultural activities are causing the destruction of forests and land cover.
In Africa alone, the cultivation of mainly soy, maize, palm oil, and also grazing of cattle for export markets accounts for 67 per cent of deforestation.
According to AFSA, “Our current food systems also consume 15 per cent of fossil fuels annually and have hidden costs in terms of environmental, health-related, and social harms totaling 12.7 trillion per year.”
On the flip side of things, climate change also has a huge impact on food systems, affecting the levels of productivity.
“Over the last 30 years, an estimated $3.8 trillion worth of crops and livestock production has been lost due to the kinds of disaster events whose frequency and intensity are increasing with climate change.”
Agriculture failures and gains at COP28
On the positive side of things, 159 leaders signed the Emirates Declaration on Sustainable Agriculture, Resilient Food Systems, and Climate Action, agreeing to integrate agriculture and food systems into their national climate plans ahead of COP30.
Additionally, another 200 research institutes, farmer groups, and foundations signed the Call to Action for Food-Systems Transformation, which calls for action to phase out the use of fossil fuels in food systems.
The Alliance of Champions for Food Systems Transformation was inaugurated with five signatories: Brazil, Cambodia, Norway, Rwanda, and Sierra Leone. These initial five committed to reorienting policies, practices, and investment priorities to deliver better food system outcomes for people, nature, and climate.
Notably, on World Food Day, the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) announced a global roadmap for achieving food security while staying below the 1.5°C limit. Details of the FAO global roadmap are still being developed and will be reviewed in another article as more details are made public.
Subsequently, funding for action became crucial because, without funding, none of the declarations can be put into action.
CGIAR, the world’s largest publicly-funded agricultural research network, secured $890 million to expand its work with smallholder farmers in low- and middle-income countries.
The Bezos Earth Fund announced $57 million in grants for food system reform, and Norway donated $47 million to least-developed countries for adaptation, particularly for smallholder farmers, marking a good start.
However, let’s examine the failures at COP28 concerning food security and agricultural development. “While this attention on food systems is welcome, there were numerous shortcomings and missed opportunities at COP28,” admits AFSA.
For instance, the Emirates Declaration fails to address the links between fossil fuels and agriculture and overlooks deep structural issues. The New Alliance agreement is unclear on what it sees as the necessary transformations in agriculture.
Even the FAO roadmap, so far, doesn’t address structural disparities in food systems, and analysts say it lacks specific targets and appears to ignore small-scale farmers.
Overall, analysts view COP28 as lacking affirmation on key issues, rather it “…skirted around the critical issue of food-related emissions.”
COP28 failed to consider how agriculture contributes to, or rather does not live up to, the requirements of the Global Stocktake (GST), a five-yearly assessment of progress made towards the objectives of the Paris Agreement and how to move forward.
“The GST does cite agriculture and food systems – in Article 55 and Article 63(b) of the Adaptation section – but makes no mention of addressing food-related emissions, which account for one-third of overall greenhouse gases,” notes Million Belay, the General Coordinator of the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA).
Even at COP27, the goal of the Sharm el-Sheikh joint work on climate action on agriculture and food security (SSJW) was to lay the groundwork for future collaboration, but that was not reflected at COP28.
Read also: COP28: unmasking greenwashing in Africa and the challenge for sustainable development
There were three primary components to the SSJW, namely:
- Deciding on a choice of subjects for three mandatory workshops to be held as part of the joint effort.
- Creating an online portal for workshop submissions.
- Deciding how work should be carried out and synthesized. Unfortunately, none of these components were clearly articulated at COP28.
“There was a substantial divergence around how the SSJW should be implemented between the G77 and China—a coalition of 135 developing countries—and developed countries,” writes Belay.
The analyst notes that, “The former want a coordinating organization to be established, but negotiators from the European Union and other industrialized nations objected to this and declined to commit funds to such a body.”
Those discussions ended without an agreement and are scheduled to be reconvened in Bonn in June 2024.
“It is easy to be frustrated by COPs and wonder if they are worthwhile. Additionally, it is understandable to question if they are worth attending as members of civil society,” Belay laments.
However, the analyst contends that, “We must use COPs to fight to improve our food systems and find ways to better prepare, organize, strategize, and build coalitions.”
“Communities affected by the devastating effects of climate change around the world did not get what they needed from COP28, but we can build on its outcomes in a variety of ways,” he writes.
To begin with, we can use new declarations and agreements signed by our governments to hold them accountable for their promises and advocate for stronger action.
Tell our stories clearly and powerfully
“We can also plan better for future COPs. Identifying fellow non-state actors with similar values and strategizing with them can enable us to speak with a louder voice,” Belay advises.
As part of the suggestions on the way forward, it is advised that, “Given the technicalities and geopolitics around negotiations, we could establish a cadre of African activists who grasp these complexities and who can guide our advocacy.”
“More broadly, we need to educate the next generation of activists for the present and the future,” he suggested.
“Finally, we must find better ways to tell our stories clearly and powerfully. We need to give platforms, in-person and online, to our farmers, fisherfolk, and indigenous peoples and weave their stories into a coherent narrative that we can present to COP,” advises the analyst.
