Causes Of Climate Change: Natural And Human-induced Climate Change, Its Implication On The Future World Food Security

Climate change is happening at an unprecedented rate and while it exacerbates the other already existing world problems, it also proves to be a real threat to world food security. Climate change is an overarching problem to world food security as it presses all the four pillars of food security – ‘availability’, ‘utilization’, ‘access’, and ‘stability’. This essay looks at the causes of climate change – natural as well as human-induced climate change, and its implication on the future world food security based on current global as well as certain country-specific examples. We come to know that climate change affects different economies, markets and ecosystems which is why it becomes difficult despite having technological and management improvements. Lastly, the conclusion alludes to the possible solutions for the drawn problems in the essay and discusses the dire need of effective adaptation and mitigation at the same time.

Climate change is much more than weather changes. It considers the long-term events of the weather patterns, changes in oceans, ice sheets, and land surfaces. Climate change refers to both, naturally as well as anthropogenic warming(Bedford & Cook,2016). Climate changes due to changes in energy balance of earth in the form of ‘climate forcing’. Natural climate change has always existed as a result of Milankovitch cycles bringing about glacial-interglacial conditions. Simultaneous increases and decreases of carbon dioxide levels were proportional to the changes in temperatures depending on the phase, which explains its effect on ‘warming’. The current panic arises because of human-induced climate change largely due to burning fossil fuels and human impact on climate can be termed as a ‘climate forcing’(Bedford & Cook,2016). The burning of fossil fuels release greenhouse gases which trap the heat from the sun as well as heat re-radiated from the Earth which increases the average temperature on Earth(Bedford & Cook,2016). The Fifth Assessment Report from Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports that carbon dioxide is the largest contributor of climate forcing with a concentration of 49 Gt CO2-eq as per 2010. Sectors that burn fossil fuels contribute significant amount of CO2 emissions, like: Electricity and heat production (25%), agriculture and land use (24%) and industry (21%). Even though carbon dioxide is a large contributor, it is important to consider non-CO2 emissions as they too cause an impactful climate forcing. Methane, a greenhouse gas, makes up 44% of total livestock sector emissions, which as a whole sector releases 14.5% of all anthropogenic emissions(Ripple, 2014). This industry is resource intensive as it requires lands to raise animals and animal feed, both of which release carbon emissions during deforestation and growing crops. This also brings up a moral question of whether the food grown could instead be directly supplied for human consumption.

Food availability is under pressure as food production is largely affected by climate change. Poor countries like Africa are most likely to suffer as IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report states that the country will face reduced yields of up to 10-12%. With already at-risk population and poverty, the low productivity along with high demand will drive up food prices impacting the food accessibility across the region(Campanhola & Pandey,2018). Although the temperate zones would slightly benefit from 1-3°C warming as some areas become arable, the tropical areas will face severe high temperatures with droughts in the mid-latitude belt which would be a bigger disadvantage overall for food production(Campanhola & Pandey,2018). Not only the underdeveloped countries, but also developed countries will be encompassed by climate change impacts with one of them being on natural resources(Hughes & Steffen,2015). Water will be one resource that will challenge future agriculture in Australia the most, according to the Fifth Assessment Report from IPCC. In a situation where no mitigation plan is devised, it is estimated that Australia’s Murray Darling Basin will drop irrigated agricultural production by 92% by 2100, with all major exports of wheat, beef and dairy estimated to fall(Hughes & Steffen,2015). This would negatively affect the world food market and distribution as they’ll be limited by the stock. Furthermore, rural areas with poor infrastructure and poor technological advancements(Firdaus & Gunaratne,2019) will face a hard time in food supply with existing hunger problems and coping up would require financial aid in restocking as well as building up enough supply chains.

After food availability, food accessibility is next in target. Food prices are linked with the food availability(Firdaus & Gunaratne,2019) and when climate affects income sources of people, and rises food prices, some basic food items will be unaffordable by many aiding to world hunger. This unsold food becomes a waste later. Underdeveloped countries in Sub-Saharan Africa that lack defense against new pests and economy to provide financial aid for small household farmers send them into high risk of hunger(Firdaus & Gunaratne,2019). This is because farmers lose their incomes as a result of poor yield and their purchasing power is affected as a result. Low income households then tend to limit their consumption and identify who gets to eat food from the family(Firdaus & Gunaratne,2019). Most of the times, the women and children of the family are left out in these groups leading to them being most affected by hunger related diseases (Pinstrup-Andersen & Cheng,2007). Hence access to food depends on cultural, socio-political, and market structure of society which also set boundaries for resource capacity and availabilities for individuals. Food preference as a part of accessibility also changes with climate change as people must settle for alternatives when food is unavailable(Firdaus & Gunaratne,2019). However, most groups are reluctant to change their regular diet if their disposable income is affected or cultural food habits restrain them from changing their diet, causing food riots.

Climate change puts food utilization at risk with changes in food nutritional value, water and sanitization. New pests and pathogens that can develop in warm temperatures are likely to multiply(Hughes & Steffen,2015) challenging the safety of growth of crops and bio-contaminating them. 70% of 1.5 million diarrhea patients identified in an annual survey worldwide were infected by bio-contaminated food(Firdaus & Gunaratne,2019). Using pesticides worsens the situation by chemically contaminating the food crops and livestock. Moreover, rise in CO2 in atmosphere reduces protein content and important minerals during plant growth depriving them of nutritional value(Hughes & Steffen,2015).

The solutions to these implications can be looked through two facets – namely adaptation and mitigation. Farmers could ‘diversify’ the risks by engaging into different income-generating activities (including non-agricultural), to increase the sources of income as a precaution if one them fails due to climate risk. The same can be done with crops where different variety of crops is grown to avoid risk of all crops failing(Campanhola & Pandey,2018). Sustainable intensification is another option that targets food stability, production and accessibility at once. The efficient use of resources, in the case of water scarcity, can be done by using water harvesting techniques, better infrastructure of drainage networks and good technology to maintain it. However, this would require energy to build new technology before the benefits show in the long run. Sustainable intensification can improve production yield and prevent crop failure leading to assured profits and improved disposable income for farmers while maintaining food availability for the world. At the same time, government policies should address ‘barriers to adoption of new techniques’ and help farmers understand the importance of changes like land management and soil restoration for better results. This could include financial aid, credit, and training. Lastly, the need for simultaneous efforts of mitigation is crucial. Carbon sequestration in the form of afforestation and reducing deforestation is one way forward. Afforestation alone accounts for 20-35% of forest-related mitigation potential(Campanhola & Pandey,2018). Existing additions of ruminants and cattle on Earth is also a worrying sign as they contribute 14.5% of all anthropogenic GHG emissions. If policies aim to reduce operations of these sectors, then it could be beneficial as methane only has an atmospheric lifespan of 9 years, as compared to CO2’s endless lifespan, and holds potential for quick reductions in climate forcing. Taxes could be implemented on these products, or emission trading scheme could be applied to push the consumer prices and consumption patterns. The need to aware people on what to eat based on the effect it has on climate is now urgent more than ever. Livestock sector emissions will obviously have to be reduced along with the grand scale of fossil fuel burning emissions which would include switching to renewables(Ripple, 2014).

In conclusion, the world food security’s alarm bell is ringing faster than ever. Current climate change is pushed by human activities of burning fossil fuels for its energy. The future climatic projections express how the world food security will take a hit and extreme weather events will disrupt the supply chains, world food and financial markets. Natural resources like water and land are being quickly drawn up, and climate change is worsening the situation. Poor household families and underdeveloped countries are going to be affected the most as they lack crucial advancements of infrastructure, technology and finance to tackle the damage. World leaders need to build policies to adapt as well as mitigate further climate change as soon as possible. Climate change is the whole world’s problem and it is only possible to make a global change if that change begins locally.

References

1. Bedford, D., & Cook, J. (2016). Climate change: Examining the facts. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com
2. Campanhola, C., & Pandey, S. (Eds.). (2018). Sustainable food and agriculture: An integrated approach. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com
3. Firdaus, R. B., Gunaratne, M. S., Rahmat, S. R., & Kamsi, N. S. (2019). Does climate change only affect food availability? What else matters?. Cogent Food and Agriculture, 5(1). doi:10.1080/23311932.2019.1707607
4. Hughes, L., Steffen, W., Rice, M., & Pearce, A. (2015). Feeding a hungry nation: climate change, food and farming in Australia. Sydney: Climate Council of Australia.
5. Pinstrup-Andersen, P., & Cheng, F. (2007). ‘STILL HUNGRY’. Scientific American, 297(3), 96-103. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/26069504
6. Ripple, W., Smith, P., Haberl, H., Montzka, S., McAlpine, C., & Boucher, D. (2014). Ruminants, climate change and climate policy. Nature Climate Change, 4, 2-5. doi:10.1038/nclimate2081
7. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2014). Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report. Retrieved from https://archive.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr/