The evidence is overwhelming. We cannot tackle the climate or nature crises without changing the food and farming system, and we need to address them together, not in isolation. 

This presents a triple challenge to policy makers.  

1)  Climate change is already having a significant and devastating impact on food systems; particularly in the global south, with degraded food systems leading to food poverty and destabilised communities.  

2) The food system - from the inputs into farms - to the food waste from consumers, this is a significant source of greenhouse gases (GHGs). Globally 23% of total global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are from agriculture, forestry, and other land use and new research suggests global food systems use a shocking 15% of all fossil fuels.  

3) The food system can be a great solution and carbon ‘sink’, sucking in greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, and delivering climate adaptation such as water management, if it is allowed to.  

So as world leaders prepare to meet for COP28, it is welcome that there is a sharp focus on how the land-based sectors and natural systems can be mobilised to help. With 70% of the UK land farmed, and 40% of our food also imported, this should compel the UK to show leadership at the meeting and act on these triple challenges in the food and farming system. 

Much talk, too little action, and a distraction? 

I can recall the first climate change Conference of the Parties (COP1) back in 1995 and have since seen food and farming ‘days’ at numerous COPs and UN Food Summits. COP26 in Glasgow in 2021 agreed on the need to continue working on agriculture and related forest issues. COP27 had the first dedicated Agriculture Day, with food and agriculture text in the final cover decision document¹.

But so far, it is too much talk, countless reports, and far too little real action.  

This year, land-based emissions and solutions are at the heart of the proceedings. Countries are signing the first-ever Leaders Declaration on Food Systems, Agriculture and Climate Action, which will invite national governments to align their food systems and agriculture strategies with their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), and National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs)². This should (and must) lead to fundamental change to current farm and food systems. 

Critically though it must not distract from the other, urgent actions needed in the fossil fuel and energy sectors at the COP28. Especially given the personal stake the host nation and chair have in this industry. Phasing out fossil fuels, decarbonising energy with renewables, and ensuring the COP27 new loss and damage support for nations are all essential actions which must be accelerated. Fossil fuel driven climate-related extremes have affected food productivity in all agricultural and fishery sectors, with negative consequences for food security and livelihoods in many regions.

Why action on food systems matters 

All parts of the food system have an environmental footprint, but some elements have a disproportionate impact. Chemical- and monoculture-based farming of crops and livestock is one of them, releasing 10% of UK emissions and as a leading cause, alongside climate change, of wildlife depletion in the UK. 

We know there are better approaches including organic, regenerative, mixed farming and agroforestry and we should prioritise restoring wetlands, woodlands, and peatland. We also waste 30% of the food produced, use too much for biofuels and animal feed, and overconsume unhealthy foods, wasting crops and our wellbeing. All these can change. Those who argue that increased nature friendly farming, or agroecological farming will mean reduced yields, lower food security and more offshoring of food production are making assumptions: about the current food system (massively offshored, heavily commoditised and 30% is wasted); about what we need to eat healthily; and may have a vested interest in the status quo. Research shows agroecological farming, in tandem with other changes in the food system, can deliver well for farmers, nature, climate and food security.  

So, action cannot just be about farming but about all the drivers of emissions throughout the sector – such as global trade, food marketing that leads to poor consumption patterns, commodity trading, regulatory and governance mechanisms, and the values and behaviours of industry and society. Any COP28 outcomes related to food will fail if they do not address these drivers. 

We want to see three clear outcomes from COP28 related to food and agriculture: 

• Commitments to nature-based solutions (NBS) as these can act as a major carbon sink including food plants, trees, and wetlands. But without falling into the trap of mitigating fossil fuel emissions via false and often unjust solutions like plantations, soil carbon markets and similar. Agroecological farming should also feature in commitments, promoting more diverse, natural systems to support production³, and modelling shows it can feed us well. 

• Action on prioritising land-based climate adaptation – using natural systems to reduce harm from climate extremes such as: water retention and slowing through trees, soil, agroforestry and peatland protection; agroecological farming to de-risk and diversify cropping; flood plain restoration and introducing ecosystem engineers (such as beavers). 

• Action on the industry and demand side drivers of harm. Most politically challenging will be how to shift supply chains, finance, consumption, and food waste drivers at the global scale needed. It is vital we do. As a fair and just transition towards nature friendly farming means more mixed, diverse farming - it means different crops so different diets and a fair supply chain. It is no longer just industrial meat under the spotlight as highly processed foods are now under scrutiny given their significant role in industrialising cropping, land use change as well as making us ill. Delegates will need to acknowledge that western diets are hugely over-consuming which will make for understandably difficult negotiations. 

Will the COP overcome the cultural and political issues, resist the greenwash and lobbying by some big agri-food and chemical companies, who favours the status quo? And could the potentially muddied motivation of the COP28 presidency in pushing the food agenda - because they don’t really want a fossil fuel phase out – seriously undermine progress?  

Negotiations will be hard. But it has been a long time coming, and the UK and other countries must read the science and find the political will to lead on the deep action needed in the whole global food system.