1. Food security research in the context of Global Environmental Change Diana Liverman Chair, GECAFS

2. Food security…... exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life. (World Food Summit 1996) Much more than just agricultural production…. Food security is underpinned by food systems

3. Simulated maize yields: baseline and changes by 2055 (from Jones & Thornton, 2001) present2055 ™

4. Climate and livelihoods in the Mexican countryside What determines crop yields? –climate, water and soils –access to labour and inputs (finance, seeds, fertilisers) –crop choice (environment, food and feed preference, markets) ‘Double Exposure’ Based on work by Liverman and Appendini and H.Eakin

5. Food security in the Mexican countryside Food security depends on what can be grown, sold or purchased If selling for market food security also depends on –prices obtained for commercial crops –access to markets –debts Storage and processing of food (e.g. refrigeration, cooking fuel) Food security implies a diverse diet, some of which may need to be purchased Culture influences food security (e.g. maize preferences, advertising) Ability to purchase adequate food may also depend on funds needed for other household activities (education, health) Importance of government support programmes (e.g. crop and food subsidies, agricultural extension)

6. 7 12 Multiple Exposure: Food insecurity arises from overlapping and interacting stressors Misselhorn 2005 Global Environmental Change

7. Food Security FOOD UTILISATION FOOD ACCESS Affordability Allocation Preference Nutritional Value Social Value Food Safety FOOD AVAILABILITY Production Distribution Exchange Environmental Security / Natural Capital Land use Ecosystems stocks, flows and services Access to natural capital Social Welfare Income Employment Wealth Social & political capital Human capital Infrastructure Peace Insurance Food System OUTCOMES Contributing to: Food System ACTIVITIES Producing food: natural resources, inputs, technology Processing & packaging food: raw materials, standards, consumer demand Distributing & retailing food: marketing, advertising, trade Consuming food: preparation, consumption Food Systems comprise Activities and Outcomes Ericksen, P. 2006. Submitted to Global Environmental Change

8. Value of a Food Systems approach for Global Environmental Change research (I) Identifies interactions of global change with the social system –multiple vulnerabilities within the food system –feedbacks to the Earth System from the food system –cross cutting issues such as embodied water and carbon in food Allows analysis of multiple food system outcomes –food security –ecosystem services –social welfare

9. Identifies possible intervention points for improving any desired outcome –Irrigation, crop improvements –Improve distribution, diversify incomes –reduce GHG emissions Analyses tradeoffs between outcomes of different management options for achieving desired outcome –Fairtrade food consumption vs. embodied carbon –Fisheries biodiversity vs. runoff from intensive agriculture –Land for food vs land for biodiversity or biofuels Value of a Food Systems approach for Global Environmental Change research (II)

10. Engages new stakeholders with global change –Development agencies and non-governmental organizations –International institutions focusing on food and agriculture (FAO, CGIAR, WB) –Regional inter-governmental agencies (SADC, CARICOM) Value of a Food Systems approach for Global Environmental Change research (III)

11. Food System approach identifies key actors Example from flood-prone Bangladesh Environmental Issue Food System Implication Vulnerable Actors Actors responsible for reducing vulnerability Increased monsoon river flows Flooding of rivers and croplands lead to loss of crops and lives Small, marginal farmers; women and children Local government agencies; community; NGO workers Increased urbanization Increase in peri-urban intensive agriculture Small, marginal farmers National government bureaucrats and technicians

12. Vulnerability of the food system to GEC is mediated by coping capacity Source: Multi-authored analysis of IGP food system vulnerability to GEC. GECAFS Report. In prep. Example: Nutritional diversity (milk) in the Indo-Gangetic Plain Milk production is sensitive to drought (it decreases) Rural areas: Urban areas: Weak coping capacity weak markets poor infrastructure low income poor storage or processing HIGH vulnerability access to milk decreases nutritional value decreases Strong coping capacity robust markets sufficient infrastructure higher income good storage and processing LOW vulnerability access to milk maintained nutritional value maintained Food security outcome

13. Identify Adaptation Analyse Feedbacks Build Scenarios Assess Vulnerability Adapted Food Systems Current Food Systems Support Decision- Making GECAFS integrates research to support decision-making Establish Agenda

14. Key Policy Goals Increasing food self- sufficiency Improving trade policies & competitiveness GEC examples Increasing extreme events Changes in sea currents & level GEC examples Reduced glacier and snow melt Increasing GHG emissions Key Policy Goals Increasing and diversifying ag production Reducing seasonal ag. labour migration GEC Examples Increased climate variability & ENSO Veld degradation and biodiversity loss Key Policy Goals Enhanced rural infrastructure & market access Better disaster response & “safety nets” CaribbeanIndo-Gangetic Plain Southern Africa Example Stakeholders National agriculture & environment ministries Regional Intergovernmental Organisations (CARICOM, IICA) Regional research bodies (FAO, MACC, CIMH, UWI, CARDI) Example Stakeholders State & National agriculture & environment ministries NARES & CGIAR, NGOs (NWCF, BUP) GEC Research Institutes (GCISC, APN) Example Stakeholders National agriculture & environment ministries Regional universities Regional IGOs & NGOs (SADC, NEPAD, FANRPAN) International agencies (e.g. WFP, USAID, FewsNet)

15. Science Agencies Development Agendas Policy Makers Resource Managers Natural Science Social Science e.g. NRF & UK-ESRC vulnerability research e.g. CGIAR, FAO, DFID/IDRC e.g. farmers, water managers, range conservation NGOs e.g. national agriculture & environment ministries; district administrators. e.g. technology development to reduce GEC impact on maize productivity e.g. comparative studies of land tenure and crop insurance schemes How can Southern African food systems be adapted to reduce vulnerability to GEC? GECAFS Science Plan GECAFS Southern Africa Science Plan / FANRPAN Collaboration

16. Food System interactions with GEC and socioeconomic contexts Source: Zurek, M. & Ericksen, P. (2006) A Conceptual Framework Describing Food System – GEC Interactions. In prep. Food System ACTIVITIES Producing Processing & Packaging Distributing & Retailing Consuming Food System OUTCOMES Contributing to: Food Security, Environmental Security, and other Societal Interests Food Availability Food Utilisation Food Access Environ Capital Social Welfare Socioeconomic DRIVERS Changes in: Demographics, Economics, Socio-political context, Cultural context Science & Technology DRIVERS’ Interactions GEC DRIVERS Changes in: Land cover & soils, Atmospheric Comp., Climate variability & means, Water availability & quality, Nutrient availability & cycling, Biodiversity, Sea currents & salinity, Sea level ‘Natural’ DRIVERS e.g. Volcanoes Solar cycles Environmental feedbacks e.g. water quality, GHGs Socioeconomic feedbacks e.g. livelihoods, social cohesion

17. Source: GECAFS (2006) Prototype Scenarios for the Caribbean. GECAFS Rpt 2. Using scenarios to investigate plausible futures for food security Step 1:Convene diverse group of researchers and stakeholders Step 2:Identify uncertainties (key questions) Step 3:Identify global environmenmental changes and socioeconomic drivers Step 4:Describe assumptions in scenarios (story lines) Step 5:Assess qualitatively the implications for food system outcomes

18. Production Distribution Inter-Regional Exchange Intra-Caribbean Exchange Affordability Allocation Preference Food Safety Increase Decrease Nutritional Value Social Value Global Caribbean Caribbean Order From Strength Caribbean TechnoGarden Caribbean Adapting Mosaic per scenario Source: GECAFS (2006) Prototype Scenarios for the Caribbean. GECAFS Rpt 2. ++ + 0 _ _ Scenario-based Food Security outcomes for the Caribbean

19. High-priority research issues on the 5-10 year horizon for GECAFS Stronger partnerships with key stakeholders (FAO, CGIAR etc.) Improved understanding of how Global Environmental Change (GEC) will additionally affect food security across different regions and among different socioeconomic groups Additional Partner Projects in other regions. Better assessments of how adaptation strategies designed to cope with GEC and changing demands for food will affect the environment, societies and economies. Enhanced communication methods to strengthen science-policy dialogue aimed at improving regional policy formulation capacity for food security and environmental governance. Contributions to innovative ESSP agendas