05.11.2024

Productivity protects biodiversity

Dear readers,

The world gathered in Colombia over the past two weeks. The sixteenth meeting of the UN Biodiversity Conference took place in Cali. Among the topics being discussed are the mobilization of money for protecting biodiversity, and a monitoring framework for assessing the extent to which the world’s countries have implemented the measures that were decided upon two years ago.

Biodiversity is important. That much is clear. However, even basic figures related to biodiversity are questionable, as the «NZZ am Sonntag» reported. But if solutions for preserving biodiversity are based on false assumptions, then efforts to preserve biodiversity will lead to a dead end. Or they will simply be unsustainable.

To prevent that from happening, a clear target based on facts is necessary. As is a clear understanding of what a reliable study entails – one that serves as the basis for making decisions. That is the only way to overcome the confirmation bias. After all, we tend to always think in the same direction.

This happens to the EU as well, with its Green Claims Directive. The goal of the new legislation is to fight against «greenwashing.» And to protect consumers by preventing them from being misled into purchasing products that appear to be more environmentally friendly than they really are. If something is labeled as eco-friendly, then it should actually be eco-friendly. Seems reasonable, right? But there’s a catch – the Green Claims Directive excludes organic farming. Unequal conditions ensure the desired result. Critics call this the «ultimate irony».

The positive environmental impacts of the organic sector are, in fact, quite controversial. Because organic farming requires much more land and natural resources to produce the same amount of food as conventional agricultural systems.

On top of that, more extensive agriculture in industrialized countries increases pressure on ecosystems in the global South, especially in South America. According to the journal Nature and other studies, Europe would have to import even more agricultural products if the Farm to Fork strategy were to be implemented. That’s a bad «Green Deal.» The environmental footprint is simply shifted to other countries.

When it comes to agriculture, false beliefs are often repeated like a mantra. Not even federal agencies are immune to this. Against their better judgment, when it comes to organic farming, they engage in greenwashing with naivete. For instance, the Federal Office for the Environment writes: «To the extent possible, organic farming produces in closed cycles using sustainable methods. Synthetic fertilizers and herbicides are prohibited. Therefore, an increase in organic farming benefits biodiversity.» The fact is: Organic farming does use synthetic crop protection products. For example, the copper that organic farmers spray is industrially synthesized, and various synthetic chemical additives are used in organic products. Overall, when you consider lower yields and increased importation, organic farming harms global biodiversity. To put it another way, more organic farming doesn’t mean more biodiversity.

Taking a cue from Bill Clinton’s campaign strategy, one could say: «It's the area that counts, stupid!» Habitat loss is the greatest driver of the decline in species diversity. Even the environmental organizations have noticed this. «Globally, the loss of habitats is the greatest threat to nature.» Successful protection of biodiversity must address habitat loss. What matters is the area of land used. Because extensive cultivation requires more land, extensive agriculture is the wrong strategy for fighting biodiversity loss.

The need for land presents the world with a great challenge, even with productive agriculture. «Assuming that agricultural productivity increases at historical rates, the world would need an additional 593 million hectares of agricultural land by 2050.» That is more than three times the size of the EU. The quote comes from a study done by the World Resource Institute, which asks the crucial question: Can we feed the world without destroying the planet?

The report in fact shows that there is no simple answer to this question. The report offers five strategic approaches with sub-points to be able to feed ten billion people by 2050 without increasing emissions, promoting deforestation, or exacerbating poverty. Sustainability has a twin, resource efficiency. Resource efficiency compares the yield of a particular product with the resources used, such as capital, labor, raw materials or land.

Sustainable agriculture must be resource efficient. With the same or decreased use of resources such as arable land, labor, direct payments/financing, energy, water, plant protection products and fertilizers, it must produce higher harvest yields, while also protecting natural resources and the climate.

The main challenge for global agriculture in the future will be to increase agricultural crop yields – despite global warming, water scarcity, limited space and a lack of labor – in order to feed the growing world population sufficiently and healthily.

To achieve this, it requires intensive research without blinders, and an innovative industry that develops new solutions for agriculture, can overcome all the regulatory obstacles, and then offer these solutions at market prices. This is the only way that enough healthy foods can be made available for the world’s growing population in the future, while also protecting the climate and the environment.

In theory, the FOEN also knows what resource efficiency is. However, when it comes to protecting biodiversity, people tend to stick to inefficient ways of doing things that, from a global perspective, are inevitably destined to fail. Humans are creatures of habit. But just because something is repeated like a mantra doesn’t mean it’s correct.

The Head of Sustainable Crop Protection at the Swiss Federal Office for Agriculture, Olivier Félix, summed it up when speaking with «Migros Magazine»: «If we want to ensure a sufficient quantity of high-quality domestic products, we have to protect plants as efficiently as possible against disease, pests and weeds. If there are insect larvae on the produce, it may be impossible to sell an entire harvest. That is not sustainable, if you consider how many resources – land, water, fertilizers – were already used.»

A lot of things are interconnected; simple claims and repeating incorrect cliches will not solve the problems.

Your swiss-food editorial team