Ms Neubert, what is a trilemma? And what can be done about it?

Susanne Neubert demands that climate change, hunger and less nature should be addressed at the same time. The Doctor of Agricultural Economics and Ecologist is co-author of the flagship report "Rethinking Land in the Anthropocene" authored by the German Advisory Council on Global Change.

Women at their market stalls. (c) GIZ / Shilpi Saxena

By Seminar für Ländliche Entwicklung (SLE)

The Seminar für Ländliche Entwicklung (Center for Rural Development) is an institution of the Humboldt University of Berlin. It has four areas of work: study, training, research and consulting.

All contributions

How do the climate crisis, the food crisis and the destruction of biodiversity interlock?

It is a trilemma. We have to address these three crises simultaneously - and not individually. Otherwise, we come to action by solving one at the expense of the other.

 

Has that been the case so far?

Yes, in several cases. The report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), for example, ignores possible destruction of biodiversity in its recommendations on CO2 storage, and on the other hand, there are conservationists who want to put 50 percent of all land under protection - which would not be regionally food secure with a growing population. But one also should not only think about food production and totally forget conservation goals or water scarcity at the same time. This trilemma - climate, biodiversity and food crisis - cannot simply be overcome, otherwise it would not be one. But a relaxation between these competitors is feasible. And necessary.

 

In the report, you suggest multiple benefit strategies in order to reduce the negative consequences of this trilemma. What do they look like?

An example: If there is forest and arable land and it makes sense to preserve both - because of the CO2 storage on the one hand and because of food production on the other - then agroforestry is carried out and different area uses are seen together. Protection and agricultural cultivation of land can also be integrated on most nature reserves.  Sustainable agriculture can preserve genetic resources, and at the same time provide food for the local population. Such approaches are multi-benefit strategies, i.e. they help all dimensions of the trilemma to a greater or lesser extent.

 

The view should therefore be widened and blinkered thinking should be avoided. Do you then see industrial agriculture and subsistence agriculture in a dead end?

We can understand these two forms of agriculture as a contrasting pair. The more industrial agriculture decouples itself from the local nutrient cycle, the less efficient it becomes: For example, soils in affluent societies around the world (North America, Europe, regions of Asia) are over-fertilized and hence become severely degraded. And on the other hand, we have a resource-poor smallholder agriculture, especially in many African countries, but also in some places in India and other countries in South Asia, which uses far too little fertilizer, be it organic manure or inorganic fertilizer. This lack of nutrient management completely depletes the soil and thus also leads to degradation. Hence, it is also very inefficient, has a low productivity and calls for land conversion in order to raise overall production. In this way biodiversity is also destroyed and emissions are also high due to fire clearing etc.

 

Through ecological intensification on the one side, including less fertilizer or slurry in areas with industrial agriculture (e.g. in locations in Europe) and on the other side increased manure and fertilizer use and management in areas with subsistence farming, an increase in efficiency can be achieved for both.

 

What can be done?

If you look at both in a graph, it becomes clear: Through ecological intensification on the one side, including less fertilizer or slurry in areas with industrial agriculture (e.g. in locations in Europe) and on the other side increased manure and fertilizer use and management in areas with subsistence farming, an increase in efficiency can be achieved for both. In addition, the closure of the nutrient cycle by enhancing ecosystem services should be pursued, since they are free of charge.

 

What does this mean for Europe?

That we have to get away from previous subsidies in the common agricultural policy (CAP), such as land subsidies based on hectarage as well as the subsidization for animal husbandry, which is decoupled from the cultivated land area. By promoting green measures and land-based animal husbandry, where only one to one point five livestock units per hectare are allowed - as in the past, by the way - because the soil and our groundwater simply cannot take any more. If someone now says why do we need support for farmers at all, I can only say that in all parts of the world agriculture is subsidised, because without such support it is apparently not worthwhile and leads to the rapid death of farmers. This is a big issue that needs to be brought up again separately. So, let’s not touch this point now, but let’s note that - if society is already paying for it - then we need other subsidies in any case that do not destroy nature. And simple rules: By promoting a diversified, i.e. a species-rich agriculture that goes hand in hand with a healthy, also varied diet for the population.

 

A farmer holds a bowl of harvested cassava. (c) GIZ/ Helmut Viertel

This is at the expense of the yield...

...of course we would have to go down a bit. But we would have a sustainable agriculture that would again showcase landscape qualities. Today, more than 70 percent of our agricultural land in Germany is used for animal husbandry and animal feed production. If we reduce livestock farming, we need less land for it and can cultivate more sustainably instead.  

 

Germans are meat eaters. Where should the meat come from?

We can no longer afford so much meat, because many people today are over- and malnourished and are victims of affluent diseases such as diabetes and obesity. Industrial nutrition is not a healthy diet. So, we have to adapt and eat less meat and reduce our consumption of milk and cheese.

 

Eating habits cannot be changed so quickly. Meat, sausage, milk and cheese appear so traditional.

It is not so traditionally anchored at all. We learned it that way, and I always said that in the past. In truth, however, our diet has only changed in the direction of this animal product-heavy load within the last 30 years. It is only now that animal products are advertised as if they were waste - especially cheap meat products that are offered below production prices in supermarkets are to be bought in order to be used as a lure for other things such as e.g. “cotton wool pads”. So here it is possible to act at relatively short notice. In order to get the climate crisis under control, we now have to - after waiting so long, change our diet quickly – take less meat and milk, as it was tradition in Germany and Europe not very long time ago.

 

Globally, we already produce enough calories to feed the world’s population in 2050. But our agriculture is – as we know - too high in emissions and destroys biodiversity.

 

Such reductions in agricultural yields would not be a problem?

Globally, we already produce enough calories to feed the world’s population in 2050. But our agriculture is – as we know - too high in emissions and destroys biodiversity. If we stopped, we could qualitatively upgrade the current kilocalories by also making other crops and the entire agricultural sector more sustainable. The land problem would also disappear, if we used cereal production directly for human consumption and not so much to feed our animals.

 

How would a retrofit to an entire ecological agriculture under market economy conditions go - would that pay off?

The subsidies - which already exist today - would only be redirected towards environmental compatibility and biodiversity. There is a long positive list of measures that can be taken, be it root intensification in arable crops (Sustainable Rice Intensification - SRI), the system of Conservation Agriculture (CA), areas with multiple use benefits as Agro-Photovoltaics, Rice-Fish-Azolla-Cropping, agriculture on rewetted peat soils, the so called Regenerative Agriculture, with the goal of carbon sequestration, agroforestry with multi-purpose trees or Permaculture. The list is really long and I’ve only mentioned a few types of farming here.  

 

What about exports of agricultural products from Europe to Africa?

In African countries, the population is still growing in the medium term. Most African countries are already importing food to a rapidly increasing level. What we are supposed to reduce in terms of yields would, conversely, have to increase there in terms of yields and at the same time their stability (resilience) - through various measures, for example through needs-based fertilization, and through organic agriculture. Overall, agriculture should be pursued according to the principles of agro ecology on the basis of a landscape approach. A relevant increase of current mineral fertilization of soils is also necessary, but of cause not to the extent that we have been doing in Europe so far. Especially in semi-arid regions, it is unrealistic not to use any mineral fertilization at all, because biomass, which is necessary for organic fertilization, is systematically scarce there due to the lack of water. In African countries, on average, only a fifteenth of the nutrient quantities are currently fertilized compared to Europe. That can easily be doubled or tripled if the Europeans and other industrialized countries cut back. But it has the desired impacts only, when combined with organic measures such as tree planting or the systematic use of animal manure.

 

 

If our food exports to African countries are to stabilized in the medium term - should supra-regional supply chains also be weakened?

We can see now with the Corona pandemic that many people in Africa are starving because of broken supply chains. Of course, exports should be provided if Africans need and want to buy them, but a food security strategy based on such imports on the increasing scale is not advisable. African countries need to be able to feed themselves and in fact roughly triple their productivity. But this will be very difficult, because at present almost the entire increase in production is achieved through land conversion. However, land conversion destroys a lot of natural biodiversity and also produces relevant emissions: This brings us back to the trilemma. What is needed, therefore, is a high-yield, sustainable form of agriculture that – especially in semi arid areas - reconnects crop cultivation and animal husbandry, so that herders and farmers can work together again and thus benefit from each other. Crop farming can benefit from the animal manure and animals from the consumption of the crop residues. Joint land use planning with the help of an integrated landscape approach would thus be active peace-making: today's competitors could work together again and no longer have to fight each other. Such a perspective would thus be again a pronounced multiple -benefit strategy, as envisaged by the WBGU.

 

Joint land use planning with the help of an integrated landscape approach would thus be active peace-making: today's competitors could work together again and no longer have to fight each other.

 

Sustainable agriculture in Burkina Faso. (c) GIZ

Let’s go back to Germany: the number of farms is decreasing, the countryside is emptying, social cohesion is crumbling. How do we create life perspectives in rural areas?

That is an important question. We can redirect subsidies so that it is also worthwhile for smaller farms to maintain their work, for example by not paying for the sheer number of hectares, as is currently the case. Among other things, rural areas would also have to be made more attractive in terms of cultural and educational opportunities - i.e. not only through a functioning economy. All sectors could be made fit for the future through greatly improved digitalisation, so that other jobs can be created there in addition to agriculture and a variety of professions can be pursued in a rewarding way.

 

Should the farmers really be told how to manage?

You have to allow freedom, but within a certain corridor - with the incentive to do business ecologically and sustainably. I can imagine that farmers will also have a lot more fulfillment by working in harmony with nature and collaborating with other parts of the population for maintaining attractive landscapes. In the past, farmers actually felt and officially understood themselves as nature and landscape conservationists. Surely it cannot be that today farmers, by using huge quantities of chemicals, are destroying nature with increasing energy and then claiming that they are not the ones doing so. They know that they are doing so! They only do not see the way out of this economic coercion.

 

Today, more than 70 percent of our agricultural land in Germany is used for animal husbandry and animal feed production. If we reduce livestock farming, we need less land for it and can cultivate more sustainably instead.

 

...many farmers are not doing very well.

They are under so much competitive pressure that they think they have no choice but to keep doing what they are doing, otherwise they too will have to close the doors. It would also be a liberation for farmers to admit that agriculture is the main destroyer of biodiversity in Germany and in Europe and that they need the support of the society to continue differently.

 

If you go that way, consumer prices would go up. How do you deal with that?

Prices have to go up. It is not acceptable that a male calf of a single-use dairy cattle costs nine Euros today. That farmers would rather kill their calves than sell them, because they are not worth anything on the market - that is red alert for me. In which farmers can no longer feel comfortable either. I therefore believe that farmers also want to get out of this downward spiral.

 

And who can’t afford that?

If you’re talking about consumers, then parts of the population, who cannot afford higher prices have to get more the Hartz IV, i.e. compensation elsewhere. For example, 100 Euros more per household - then the money would be for more expensive food. Currently, we spend an average of only 14 percent of our income in Germany on food. That is clearly too little. I have no sympathy for this: If you halve your meat consumption, you have enough money for vegetables. Vegetables are cheaper than meat. This means that everyone has the choice to eat much healthier with the same income and at the same time helps to preserve nature.

 

Back to overview

Ähnliche Beiträge

From Space to Seed: Innovation for world nutrition

From crop forecasts out of space to resistant seeds: What ideas and technologies have been developed in recent years to revolutionize the world's nutrition? We present a selection of innovations that could be decisive in the fight against hunger.

Read more

The world needs empowered farmers!

The world needs empowered farmers! But what does that mean and how can it be organized? With the support of the SEWOH partners, journalist Jan Grossarth has gathered guiding thoughts on the topic in an article.

Organised agricultural lobbying is rare in industrialised nations. Is the political influence of certain interest groups that have excellent parliamentary connections and work quietly behind the scenes in aid of meat exports or biomass subsidies excessively large and insufficiently transparent? Such questions are a subject of discussion in Europe and the USA, but also in Brazil or Argentina. And for good reason. With regard to global food security another, to some extent countervailing question arises: how can “good lobbying” for the development interests of the world’s smallholders emerge? Would it not, after all, be widely beneficial, and also necessary in order to ensure a stable global food supply, if the hundreds of millions of local farmers in Africa and Asia were able to represent their income- and development-related interests more effectively in parliaments, the media and international organisations?

Read more

Agroecology at UN level: The FAO's Scaling up Agroecology Initiative

Growing scientific evidence and local experiences demonstrate how agroecology has the potential to offer a holistic response to the multiple and interrelated challenges facing food systems.

Read more

The garden of agroecology: A few real-life examples

The challenges of population growth, dwindling biodiversity and climate change require to rethink our current food systems and call for solution approaches in terms of an agroecological transformation.

Read more

Why the transformation of our food systems is imperative

Current crises highlight the need to transform food systems. Dr Sinclair, team leader of the World Food Security Committee, presents 13 agro-ecological principles that might be effective for change.

Read more

A globally popular export

"One for all, all for one" - this motto became the basis for action of agricultural cooperatives that were founded in the 19th century. They became a success story that will continue to be written well into the 21st century.

Read more

Meet the people: Joseph Ngaah

Joseph Ngaah is chairman of the Kakamega County Farmers Association in Kenya. Through his commitment at national and local level, he gives farmers a voice - both in the media and with political decision-makers. Within the SEWOH, he cooperates with the Andreas Hermes Academy, the Green Innovation Centers and TMG - Sustainable Think Tank.

Read more

Drones for Inclusive Growth in Agriculture

BASF’s project Drones for Smallholder Farmers aims to build an inclusive business model that will facilitate access of smallholders to drones for spraying crop protection products. A report by Dr. Diana Moran.

Read more

The right to nutrition: how we can realise it

Stefan Schmitz is head of the Crop Trust and has been SEWOH Commissioner until 2019. We asked him which aspects of the SEWOH could be groundbreaking in order to achieve global goals such as SDG 2 at a national and a global level.

Read more

A masterplan for nutrition governance

Ending worldwide hunger by 2030 requires effective governance. This masterplan is based on the experience of the GIZ global programme for “Food and Nutrition Security, Enhanced Resilience,” which works on improving nutrition governance in ten countries around the world.

Read more

Creating a political momentum for global food governance

To feed the world's population in 2050, "the fine art of governance" is required, according to Jan Grossarth. With the help of the SEWOH partners, he has shed light on what this art includes and what challenges it encounters.

There has been some modest progress everywhere and in many thousands of local projects. But what if this won’t be enough in view of the global challenge? According to UN forecasts, Africa’s population is set to double by 2050, reaching over two billion people. Yet food imports on the continent are already exceeding exports, so it is not providing enough food for itself. Climate forecasts are predicting that in some African (and Asian) regions average temperatures will rise by 3 degrees or more. Moreover, deserts are spreading, with the prospect that development cooperation will be ineffective if it merely distributes resources under the watering can principle. 

Read more

Global Hunger Index: Political action is the key

The World Hunger Index 2020 indicates that the goal of "Zero Hunger by 2030" will not be met. Miriam Wiemers, leading expert for the World Hunger Index, traces the main challenges and describes how the path to Zero Hunger can be taken.

Read more

How the Green Innovation Centre in Mali backs women in the San lowlands

Proper nutrition. An adequate diet. Higher incomes and more employment in rural areas. These are the goals of the 15 Green Innovation Centres established in Africa and Asia on behalf of the BMZ. But how are these goals put into practice in Bamako, Mali?

Read more

Why successful transformation needs strong governance?

The special initiative One World no hunger (SEWOH) is one donor nation's attempt to decisively push forward the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 2 (SDG 2). Observations and conclusions from the accompanying discourse.

In the summer of 2019, António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations (UN), raised the alarm on the growing number of people going hungry. A “World Food Systems Summit” (UNFSS) in the autumn of 2021 intends to draw the necessary public attention to the issue of combatting hunger and increasing sustainability and provide fresh impetus for transforming the entire food system. In 2014, Germany’s Federal Minister of Economic Cooperation and Development, Gerd Müller, launched a remarkable experiment: SEWOH, the Special Initiative ONEWORLD No Hunger. The idea was to drastically advance UN Sustainable Development Goal 2 (SDG 2) with a sector approach initially driven by a single donor nation. Germany has invested around 1.5 billion euros annually towards achieving the UN goal, becoming the world’s second-largest donor in the fields of food security, rural development and agriculture. The initiative has explored new possibilities, yet it also had to face its limits. Vastly exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic, it had to realise the vulnerabilities of global food security.  

Read more

Climate change affects everyone, but not equally

Claudia Ringler, Deputy Division Director of EPTD at IFPRI, describes the adverse impacts of climate change and its related risks on populations in poor countries. What can be done to reduce the impact of climate change on food and nutrition security?

Read more

Climate crises

Population growth, lawlessness and dwindling resources, accelerated by climate change, are leading to conflicts that leave thousands dead across the Sahel every year. "Many will leave their homelands or perish from hunger, disease or wars. Only rapid socioeconomic development [...] would be able to prevent this disaster."

Read more

Genetic engineering, fertilisers and agricultural chemicals - conflicting perspectives

Is modern genetic engineering an innovative answer for ensuring global food supply? And what about fertilisers and agricultural chemicals? Felix Prinz zu Löwenstein believes all three are part of the problem. Matthias Berninger thinks rejecting these new technologies is a risky ideological proposition. A debate.

Read more

Labels, customs tariffs and supply chain legislation: Do they benefit or harm smallholders?

In the discussion about sustainability in supply chains, European states focus on labels, customs tariffs and government regulations. With the support of the SEWOH partners, Jan Grossarth questions these measures.

After the eight-storey Rana Plaza factory collapsed in Bangladesh in April 2013, killing over a thousand textile workers under the rubble, the issue of human rights in sewing factories dominated global news for a few days. The initial shock turned into shame. After all, wasn’t everyone who bought cheap T-shirts and jeans somehow responsible? This was followed by a political debate: Hadn’t the disaster happened in a domain where the state, i.e. Bangladesh, should have ensured compliance with its laws? Or, on the other hand, do we not have a say in the regulations determining how the products we consume are manufactured? Not only through consumption, but through our government and companies?

Read more

Deforestation and ecosystem conversion: a strict EU legal framework is imperative

Christine Scholl, Senior Advisor at WWF Germany, explains why a binding and comprehensive EU regulation is crucial in avoiding deforestation and conversion of valuable ecosystems and what such legislation must take into account.

Read more

Preserving and Restoring Natural Resources

Through a series of projects, SEWOH is working to promote the rehabilitation of degraded soils, stop deforestation and restore forests and other wooded landscapes to create the basic conditions for intact and sustainable agriculture.

Read more

The hope of development cooperation lays in innovation

Policy makers wish for innovation. But what is an innovation that truly takes Africa a step forward? With the support of the SEWOH partners, journalist Jan Grossarth took a critical look at the demand for innovation.

Is innovation a cure? A meaningless filler? Even problematic? And: In what way? Taking a critical post-colonial look at the past, the “innovation history” of Africa appears to be a double-edged sword, in any case. Historian Clapperton Chakanetsa Mavhunga, who teaches at MIT in the USA, deplores the failure and even largely destructive effect of “western” technology and knowledge exports to Africa. In his works about innovation in Africa, “capitalistic entrepreneurship” appears as “imperialism” in modified form and downright “parasitical” in its nature. A problematic definition of innovation, he says, has been transferred to Africa particularly from Europe. A definition that is limited to technical aspects, industrial scaling and commercial use.

Read more

Agroecology: a global political guiding perspective?

Agroecology is a popular buzzword in food policy worldwide. It is based on a complex concept that journalist Jan Grossarth, with the support of the SEWOH partners, has examined and called into question.

Agroecology cannot be defined in one phrase. It would take some pages. As a political guiding perspective – perhaps because of its variety – it is suitable to pleasing everyone. The European Commission is relying on this approach as part of the Green Deal as its 10-year transformation plan, and the term is also mentioned in the Farm to Fork food strategy of the EU Commission. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has commissioned its leading experts from the Committee on World Food Security (CFS) to shed light on the approach in a 163-page report (the HLPE Report, 2019). The summary alone uses eleven key points in its definition. An agroecological approach, it says, “favours the use of natural processes, limits the use of external inputs, promotes closed cycles with minimal negative externalities and stresses the importance of local knowledge and participatory processes” – while also being designed to reduce social inequalities and to help the sciences to gain in importance. 

Read more

Beyond your own field

An exchange program between the German Farmers' Association and the Andreas Hermes Academy for young German and Ugandan farmers shows: North-South cooperation works best at eye level. Four graduates report on what is possible when farmers learn from each other.

Read more

Farmers in revolt-their movement brings unity and hope

Since 2014, a law has guaranteed all Indians sufficient healthy food at affordable prices. Now one of the biggest waves of protest in history is rocking the subcontinent. Farmers are fighting back against laws that abolish guaranteed minimum prices and put nutrition programmes in jeopardy.  

 

Read more

The path from the greenhouse into practice

Innovative ideas like apps are popular showcases. But for the successful implementation of an innovation, thinking beyond the boundaries of projects is necessary. Lennart Woltering explains in an interview how to move from the greenhouse into practice.

Read more

Banking on innovation and sustainability in the cocoa value chain

Juliette Kouassi founded the cocoa cooperative ABOUd'CAO in Côte d'Ivoire, which dismantles traditional role definitions. The aim is to promote women producers and "throw anything away in the cocoa value chain, by rendering value to everything."

Read more

We begins with you: Three propositions for consumer communication

Generation Z (1995-2010) is forcing manufacturers of consumer goods to rethink their production values. The “Greta effect” not only compels companies to act. It also promises great potential for development cooperation to reach its goals.  

Read more

Supply chains: “The EU’s general principle is to support, not to punish”

Aside from the German Federal government, EU institutions are also encouraging the introduction of a supply chain law. What would be the consequences? Questions for Bettina Rudloff of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP).

Read more

In the land of conflicts 

Land is the foundation of life for most Ugandans. In central Uganda, an ancient land tenure system has caused an impasse for both landlords and tenants hence causing conflicts for decades. An innovative approach to conflict solving, and awareness-raising is about to create change.

Read more

Babban Gona's holistic financing approach

What are innovative financing mechanisms and how can financing help to scale innovations? Kola Masha, Managing Director of Babban Gona explains his holistic business model, which he built up in Nigeria with financial help and support from the German KfW.

Read more

Even innovations take their time

Some good ideas never become reality. It takes patience, long-term thinking and the courage to learn from mistakes. Based on a conversation with software developer Simon Riedel, journalist Jan Rübel focused on the challenges of innovation in an international development context.

Read more