The war in Ukraine showed that modern agricultural production is too vulnerable and too dependent on fossil fuels and fertilizers.
The war in Ukraine revived the discussion on global food security. The unprecedented military aggression in Ukraine brought by Russia has caused the systematic destruction of farms and crops, blockade of sea freight from Ukraine and theft of Ukrainian grain by the Russian army. All of it significantly reduced the supply of grain to global markets. Additionally Russian tactics of weaponising its gas and oil supply by blackmailing the customers caused shortages and a sharp price increase not only for oil and gas but also for electricity, fuel, petrochemical products and logistics.
All this has led to a sharp rise in the food prices, animal feed, pesticides, and fertilizers all over the world and forced many governments to undertake emergency measures to increase food security. The European Commission, in the adopted communication on “Protecting food security and strengthening the resilience of food systems”, stated that the food security crisis is the result of russian invasion, market speculation, as well as the pandemic and climate change.
Basically the war in Ukraine revealed the systemic vulnerability of modern industrial agriculture, its heavy dependence on fossil fuels and fertilizers (both are the main items of russian exports).
In general, the war in Ukraine has made the internal contradictions, fragility and injustice of the globalized agri-food sector more obvious. The debates about ensuring food security in the context of the war in Ukraine has revived the long-standing discussion on how to feed the world, especially in times of crisis. The outcome of this discussion will affect the lives and well-being of billions of people around the world and shape the state of our natural and social environment for many years to come.
Proponents of the globalized neoliberal agri-food model (such as the World Bank) argue that only large-scale industrial agriculture can feed the world’s growing population. That is, food security must be achieved by increasing the volume of industrial agricultural production with the use of more land, more mineral fertilizers, more fuel, and more pesticides. But such an approach will only increase the crisis of overexploitation of planet’s natural resources, biodiversity loss and climate crises.
Opponents of this concept see the solution in building localized sustainable food systems and food sovereignty: development of small local farms, agricultural cooperatives, direct cooperation between producers and consumers, short logistics chains and change of business models for food production and consumption to more sustainable ones.
So, for example, under the current climate crisis, exacerbated by the war in Ukraine, the production and cost of alternative proteins turned out to be more stable than traditional meat products. Meat has always been a product that requires a huge amount of raw materials. Production of one kilogram of meat requires up to ten kilograms of grain. Basically over a half of the world’s grain production is currently not used for human consumption, but as animal feed or for biofuel production.
Now, during the grain shortage caused by Russia’s war in Ukraine, this is becoming very noticeable. For example, in the EU industrial animal husbandry largely depends on the import of grain and oil crops.
Two studies in February and June this year were jointly conducted by ProVeg and Questionmark. By systematically evaluating the price difference between animal products and their plant substitutes, the researchers showed an interesting dynamic in the price ratio, caused by the current food crisis and the increase in energy prices, which was caused by Russia’s large-scale aggression in Ukraine.
The researchers compared the cheapest animal-based meat products with the cheapest corresponding plant-based meat alternatives with the same number of servings, comparing a total of 36 different products.
The results showed, that plant-based burgers in February had an average price of 56 cents per kilogram higher than animal-based burgers, and already in June it turned out that plant-based burgers became 78 cents per kilogram cheaper. Plant-based chicken nuggets in February cost an average of 1.16 euros per kilogram more than chicken nuggets, but in June became cheaper by 37 cents per kilogram.
Plant-based minced meat in February cost an average of 29 cents per kilogram more, in June became 1.36 euros per kilogram cheaper than animal minced meat. And average meat prices rose by 21% between February and June, while plant-based alternatives rose by just 2%. The results revealed that the heavy use of raw materials and fossil fuels makes meat production much more sensitive to global market disruptions than plant-based protein alternatives.
On the other hand, meat and milk production takes up 83% of agricultural land and accounts for 60% of agricultural greenhouse gas emissions, but provides only 18% of calories and 37% of protein.
Therefore switching to non-animal proteins can play a crucial role in overcoming the climate crisis. A recently released thematic report by the Boston Consulting Group – one of the world’s largest consulting firms – claims that investments in plant-based alternatives to meat and dairy produce far greater reductions in greenhouse gas emissions than any other environmental investment.
The company’s report on the global market for alternative proteins, published in early July, talks about the potential for investment in this sector. Every dollar invested in improving and expanding the production of meat and dairy alternatives results in three times higher reduction of greenhouse gas emissions compared to investments in decarbonization of cement production, seven times higher reduction than investments in green building technologies and 11 times more than investments in zero emissions transport.
This significant impact on the level of greenhouse gas emissions is explained by the difference between the amount of greenhouse gas emissions during the production of traditional meat and dairy products and when growing plants. Beef production, for example, causes up to 30 times more greenhouse gas emissions than tofu production. About a quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions come from food production, land use and agriculture, and more than half of that comes from beef alone.
Also shifting the human diet from meat to plants will mean less deforestation for grazing and forage, and less methane emissions from cattle and sheep.
Project Drawdown, a group that evaluates climate solutions, places plant-based diets in the top three of nearly 100 options. This year’s Boston Consulting Group report also included a survey of more than 3,700 people in the UK, US, China, France, Germany, Spain and the United Arab Emirates. It found that 30% of consumers would switch to alternative protein products if they had a positive impact on the climate. About 90% of people said they liked at least some of the alternative protein foods they tried. But the survey also found that consumers expect new products to cost no more than the ones they replace.
Investments in alternative proteins, including fermented foods and cellular meats, jumped from $1 billion in 2019 to $5 billion in 2021. Plant-based alternatives account for up to 2% of meat, eggs and dairy products sold, but will rise to 11% in 2035 if growth trends continue, according to the report.
This will lead to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to the amount of emissions from the use of air transport in the world. However, the market for alternative proteins can grow much faster due to technological advances, improved and cheaper technology and product taste, scaled-up production and regulatory changes that will facilitate marketing and sales.
It is time to transform the European agro-food model into a more autonomous and sustainable agro-ecological system, to adapt national policies and market regulation to prioritize the provision of local food systems, as well as changes in food consumption patterns.
Avoiding or significantly reducing the consumption of meat and traditional dairy products is the best way to reduce our negative impact the planet’s natural environment.
First and foremost, a significant reduction in meat consumption in rich countries is essential to ending the climate crisis. In addition, widespread adoption of alternative proteins can play a critical role in enhancing food security. And the transition to alternative proteins consumptions is cheaper, economically beneficial and less painful for investors and consumers than reducing the use of air transport or adapting all buildings to new green standards.
Sadly, production of alternative proteins is currently underutilized for climate investment: investment in this sector is not the largest, especially compared to electric vehicles and alternative energy.
When discussing the plans for the post-war reconstruction of Ukraine, in particular, the agricultural sector, we should be directed from the principle of building better future, and not just rebuilding the past.
Therefore, it is necessary to consider the possibilities of establishing the production and consumption of alternative plant-based proteins in Ukraine and supporting local food systems. This may be, first of all, cheaper, more cost-effective and environmentally sound than the complete restoration of industrial animal farms, which suffered greatly from russian aggression, and it will correspond to modern trends in global food and climate policy.
Olga Ignatenko, Information Center “Green Dossier”
Resources:
- https://www.resilience.org/stories/2022-07-13/food-security-versus-sustainability-in-europe-during-the-war-in-ukraine/
- https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jul/18/humanity-faces-collective-suicide-over-climate-crisis-warns-un-chief
- https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jul/08/climate-crisis-biodiversity-decline-overexploited-planet-change-to-survive-aoe
- https://vegconomist.com/market-and-trends/plant-based-meat-cheaper-netherlands
- https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jul/07/plant-based-meat-by-far-the-best-climate-investment-report-finds
- The Untapped Climate Opportunity in Alternative Proteins.Food for Thought. Boston Consulting Group, July 2022. https://www.bcg.com/ja-jp/publications/2022/combating-climate-crisis-with-alternative-protein
