Vertical Farms Can Out-Produce ‘Flat Farms’

Article by John Koetsier Forbes:

“According to Nate Storey, the future of farms is vertical. It’s also indoors, can be placed anywhere on the planet, is heavily integrated with robots and AI, and produces better fruits and vegetables while using 95% less water and 99% less land.

‘Plenty’ in the USA takes the flat farm and performs an Inception transformation on it: ripping up horizontal rows of plants and hanging them vertically from the ceilings. Sunlight from above is replaced by full-spectrum LED lights from all sides. Huge robots grab large hanging racks of growing vegetables and moves them where they’re needed. Artificial intelligence manages all the variables of heat and light and water, continually optimizing and learning how to grow faster, bigger, better crops. Water lost by transpiration is recaptured and reused. And all of it happens not 1,000 miles away from a city, but inside or right next to the place where the food is actually needed. https://youtu.be/0uXdnjXIGjI Read more>>>

Bioeconomy and the Sustainability Problem

“High levels of consumption in industrialised countries have far-reaching impacts on ecosystems, food security and human rights both within and beyond their borders. Low- and middle-income countries are directly affected by the policies and practices of the global North, and ordinary citizens have limited influence. Demand in the United States and the United Kingdom for beef directly drives deforestation in the Amazon; while the number of everyday products that contain unsustainable palm oil continues to increase.

…The ‘bioeconomy’ is a sophisticated sounding term, but essentially it means the things we make, use and sell that have their origins in nature; and the aim is to transition the economy from fossil resources towards renewable ones. Farming and forestry are part of the bioeconomy, as is energy produced from biomass, and services like tourism that are rooted in nature and outdoor experiences. The bioeconomy is central to what we do every day, and is an essential part of the global economy. In Europe alone the bioeconomy has an annual value of €2.4 trillion. It holds the key to a greener, more sustainable and healthy future for all — if the right practices, regulations and incentives are in place.

At the same time, the bioeconomy has the potential to drive further environmental destruction and degradation. Irresponsible pursuit of profit and unsustainable exploitation of natural resources are making climate change, biodiversity loss, infectious diseases, hunger and inequality much worse. A recent report from the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) found that unless we dramatically reduce our impact on the natural world, future pandemics will become more frequent, spread more quickly and kill more people.

An unsustainable bioeconomy also threatens the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) — a global sustainability framework adopted by the United Nations in 2015. A recent report by the German Federal Environment Agency found that in order for the bioeconomy to work for, rather than against, the SDGs, the global agenda and national strategies need to focus much more on restoration of ecosystems, sustainable land-use, climate protection and food sovereignty.”

Read More – by Patrick Schröder – a senior research fellow in Chatham House’s energy, environment and resources programme>>>

Climate Neutral Food and Wood: Webinars

The land-use sector is key for reaching a climate-neutral economy. Both the LIFE programme and the Horizon 2020 programme provide financial support to projects in the areas of agriculture and forestry. Thanks to this support and the work of many passionate researchers and practitioners, these projects contribute to avoiding greenhouse gas emissions, increasing carbon sequestration, improving resilience to the negative impacts of climate change, and protecting our ecosystems. In addition, the agriculture and forestry sectors provide the basic input to well-functioning food and wood value chains: LIFE and Horizon 2020 have supported climate action across these value chains by identifying and consolidating innovative solutions for sustainable food systems and a thriving bio-economy.

The European Commission’s Directorate-General for Climate Action (DG CLIMA) and EASME have released for download a series of webinars to showcase successful LIFE and Horizon 2020 projects in the areas of agriculture, food systems, forestry, and the bio-economy. These online events have featured project representatives, experts from the EU Institutions and agencies as well as other key stakeholders. They have discussed best practices, lessons learned, and future policy initiatives.

Webinar Download page >>>

 

Covid: Another Way – Focused Protection

Three eminent epidemiologists – Prof. Sunetra Gupta, Prof. Jay Bhattacharya and Prof. Martin Kulldorff met in Massachusetts to plan a better response to the pandemic.

They have now issued a joint declaration proposing the way forward is to focus on protecting the vulnerable and allow the rest of the community to develop ‘herd immunity’ based on science and common sense – ‘Focused Protection’.

“As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists, we have grave concerns about the damaging physical, and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection.

Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice.

Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.

Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza.

As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e.  the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity.

The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection.

Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent PCR testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals.

Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.

Great Barrington, Massachusetts, 4th October 2020

Read More and See who has also signed the Declaration

More Sustainable Agriculture

Jonathan Scott suggests: “The challenges posed by agriculture are becoming more pressing as the world struggles to meet its ever-growing need for food. By 2050, over nine billion people will need to be fed – two billion more than the current population.

Additionally, the spread of prosperity and a longer-living populace, especially in China and India, is now producing increased demand for meat, eggs and dairy products that intensifies pressure to grow more corn and soybeans for a rising number of cattle, pigs and chickens. Indeed, some estimates claim that we may have to expand food production by 70%, including doubling the number of crops grown, within the next 30 years.

Meanwhile, the agriculture industry is among the greatest contributors to climate change, emitting more greenhouse gases than all cars, trucks, trains and airplanes combined (largely from methane released by cattle and rice farms, nitrous oxide from fertilised fields and the clearing of rain forests to grow crops or raise livestock).

Farming is also the single greatest consumer of water supplies and a major water polluter in the form of run-off from fertilisers. And agriculture continuously accelerates our planet’s loss of biodiversity as areas of grassland and forest are cleared to enlarge the size of farms.
The overall result is a miasma of crop stress, job loss and even human displacement. For example, Homeland Security officials in the US have reported that a puzzling increase in the number of families showing up at the US border seeking asylum appear to be fleeing a hunger crisis in Guatemala’s western highlands.

Years of meagre harvests, drought and the devastating effects of “coffee rust” fungus on an industry that employs large numbers of rural Guatemalans is speeding up an exodus of families from villages now bereft of jobs and food.”

More>>>

Californian Wildfires 2020

Sustainable land management is an important part of living with nature. Very often past generations knew more about this than current generations.

Californian Wildfire: Photo Credit - NY Times
Californian Wildfire: Photo Credit – NY Times

Media articles are carrying the story of mega Californian wildfires caused by climate change. But are they? Could there be other factors? Cal Fire statistics show us that 17 (85%) of the top 20 recorded largest wildfires have occurred over the last 20 years. It is accepted that ‘climate change’, in terms of recent warmer weather, will have dried out the fire-load (brush and deadwood) quicker and increased frequency of adverse wind conditions are all obviously a factor, but is the change in habitat management a significant factor as well?

Many of the ecosystems, from the chaparral of Southern California to the northern pine forests have evolved to burn frequently. Such habitats are naturally prone to wildfires and the flora and fauna are adapted to such environmental norms. The problem is that humans are not so good living with such wildfires.

The Cal Fire data on how these wildfires started shows: 25% were human factors; 20% were lightning strikes; 15% were powerlines; and, 40% are still unknown.

Academics believe that in prehistoric California between 4.4 million and 11.8 million acres burned each year due to natural wildfires. Native Americans and settlers understood how to live with nature rather than to fight it, and have often used controlled burning to manage their lands. Between 1982 and 1998, California’s agency land managers burned, on average, about 30,000 acres a year. These controlled fires reduced the naturally accumulated ‘fire load’ of brush and deadwood to protect neighbourhoods and forestry. Between 1999 and 2017, that number dropped to an annual 13,000 acres. So if 85% of the top 20 recorded largest wildfires have occurred over the last 20 years – could the change in land management during this same period be a significant factor?

It is always important that we do not think about such issues with a ‘silo-mentality’ and assume that climate change is the only possible factor. It is highly likely that it is a combination of land management and climate changes and perhaps even other factors, that have resulted in worsening wildfires.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/earth/story/20160722-why-we-should-let-raging-wildfires-burn

https://www.propublica.org/article/they-know-how-to-prevent-megafires-why-wont-anybody-listen

https://www.fire.ca.gov/media/11416/top20_acres.pdf

James Lovelock: Father of Gaia Theory – Observer Interview at Age 101

“James Lovelock is best known as the father of Gaia Theory, the revolutionary idea that life on Earth is a self-regulating community of organisms interacting with each other and their surroundings. An independent scientist who eschews the academic establishment, he has variously been described as a maverick, prophet of doom, environmental philosopher and Gandalf. This month, he turns 101, but shows little sign of slowing his intellectual output. A paperback version of his latest book, Novacene, will shortly be released and he is working on a follow-up.”

More>>>

How Do You Measure Innovation in Sustainable Development?

Article from State of the Planet:

“In 2015, the United Nations established 17 Sustainable Development Goals as “a blueprint to achieve a better and more sustainable future for all.” The goals range from eliminating poverty and hunger to reducing inequality and tackling climate change. To solve these complex and systemic challenges, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) is establishing country support platforms (CSPs), or sets of policies, programming, and partnerships tailored to a country’s specific social, economic, and sustainable development needs. CSPs vary depending on the country.

The Environment, Peace, and Sustainability (EPS) program at AC4, in partnership with the Agirre Lehendakaria Center (ALC) in the Basque Country, has been helping UNDP to learn about the merits and challenges associated with more experimental country support platforms. AC4 and the ALC analyzed how four early adopters — Paraguay, Pakistan, Somalia, and Macedonia — are interconnecting organizations and efforts in the broader development system. The research delved into the types of strategies different country offices are implementing, as well as the narratives around social innovation toward desired changes.

woman sits and desk, men stand in an office

Researchers from the ALC interviewed members of the UNDP country office in Pakistan on sustainable development challenges of urbanization. (Photo: Itziar Moreno and Gorka Espiau of the ALC)

Through this evaluation research, AC4 and the ALC have found that CSPs have enabled increasingly systems-based approaches to development challenges. Across the four case-study countries, there have been more pushes overall for collaborative and platform-based work toward achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), though the exact configurations have been very context-specific.

Sophia Rhee, an EPS research associate at AC4, conducted 14 interviews with members of the UNDP country office in Somalia and several partner civil society organizations. “Because Somalia has a more fragile state and is currently developing its public and private sectors, state-building and civil society is an important focus when thinking about how to achieve the SDGs through CSPs,” said Rhee. “There is also a big movement towards holding tech summits and connecting people throughout the diaspora which was very exciting to hear about.”

The promise of this type of development and technological connection is not without challenges, however. In her interviews with UNDP staff in Somalia, there were certainly concerns around what these types of projects would mean for people in some parts of the country without mobile phones, highlighting some of the difficulties UNDP has faced when it comes to grappling with development inequalities in digital tools. Yet, many interviewees do believe that technology can indeed play an important role in increasing the voices of Somali people within UNDP’s work.

two people sitting at a table

Researchers from the ALC interviewed members of the UNDP country office in Paraguay about value chains. (Photo: Itziar Moreno and Gorka Espiau of the ALC)

Gorka Espiau and Itziar Moreno at the ALC conducted similar interviews in Paraguay, Pakistan and Macedonia. In Paraguay, the biggest focus was around soy and beef value chains. One CSP, the Sustainable Commodities Platform, emphasizes the need to incorporate more cultural and participatory dynamics into value chain discussions. While interviewees have seen CSPs as a roadmap or strategic plan to alleviating problems around these value chains, they also conveyed that much of this work is similar to work that the public sector had already been doing before the SDGs were developed. Other interviewees in Paraguay shared that the platforms were a real opportunity to give voice to Indigenous communities around food production and value chains. A senior member of the UNDP country office in Paraguay explained the additional efforts they put into making sure everyone was represented. “Knowing the physical distance problem for platform events for Indigenous communities, we always invited them with enough time. We set the date assuming three months in advance, they already knew, they already set the agenda and costs were covered, so that they could manage the logistics to come to the meeting.”

flyer about caring for forests

In Paraguay, food value chains are the biggest focus for UNDP’s country support platforms. (Photo: Itziar Moreno and Gorka Espiau of the ALC)

This support for participation proved indeed to be effective. An Indigenous leader from the Aché ethnicity highlighted the value for his community. “We usually didn’t participate in these kinds of UNDP initiatives, at least not actively and not really being heard. The platform is helping us to get to know other realities. We all want a change in production and we can achieve things together. Puerto Barro not only produces, but also creates and preserves.”

In Pakistan, CSPs have focused around the sustainable development challenges of urbanization, for instance through the Islamabad Urban Platform. Here, systems-level thinking around urban challenges spurred the co-creation of a platform enabling civil society, public institutions, and the private sector to work together. Interviewees conveyed that the culture of CSPs is quite positive and includes very few outsiders. The links created with the public and private sectors have been one of the strongest outcomes from this new way of working. “It’s been two and a half years, but within this time period we’ve seen UNDP evolve quite quickly. There’s an eagerness to do new things, adapt to new ideas and experimentation is seen as a value now,” said a private tech company partner from Islamabad.

Similarly, Macedonia’s CSP sees an integrative urban emphasis to mobilize around the redesign of urban public services for certain challenges such as waste and climate change. The platform, called Skopje Lab, focuses on public sector partners and citizens’ inputs to co-create solutions. “These prototypes might fail but it’s better to have spent a small amount of money and time on designing a bad solution than to rush into a full pledge and end up with a disaster,” one Skopje country office member stated.

“While there are many amazing projects happening in these countries that directly support the SDGs, a big finding in our interviews across all of these countries was that the label of country-support platforms hasn’t quite permeated into the everyday work that people are doing,” said Rhee when reflecting on their findings. “People would share some of their work around various sustainable development projects, but they didn’t necessarily say that the project was under the country-based platform.” However, the findings also show that CSPs have been actively expanding the number and nature of actors with which UNDP usually works.

This research conducted by AC4 and ALC also identified significant opportunities for improvement. This included how key performance indicators need to adapt to different contexts, as the interviews highlighted the myriad ways CSPs are experienced in different country contexts.

These lessons from the case studies in CSP “early adopter” countries will inform UNDP to better encourage both positive changes and awareness of the challenges associated with systemic approaches to sustainable development. This research will help UNDP in its mid-year review for the future role of CSPs in achieving the SDGs. These platforms have allowed UNDP to work to respond to the specific needs and priorities of each country to make the SDGs relevant and attainable in different contexts. The evaluation research conducted by AC4 and the ALC will allow the UNDP to do this even more effectively.

The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2020

António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations, in his forward to the latest Sustainable Development Goals Report, calls for action:

“The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development was launched in 2015 to end poverty and set the world on a path of peace, prosperity and opportunity for all on a healthy planet. The 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) demand nothing short of a transformation of the financial, economic and political systems that govern our societies today to guarantee the human rights of all. They require immense political will and ambitious action by all stakeholders. But, as
Member States recognized at the SDG Summit held last September, global efforts to date have been insufficient to deliver the change we need, jeopardizing the Agenda’s promise to current and future generations.

The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2020 brings together the latest data to show us that, before the COVID-19 pandemic, progress remained uneven and we were not on track to meet the Goals by 2030. Some gains were visible: the share of children and youth out of school had fallen; the incidence of many communicable diseases was in decline; access to safely managed drinking water had improved;
and women’s representation in leadership roles was increasing. At the same time, the number of people suffering from food insecurity was on the rise, the natural environment continued to deteriorate at an alarming rate, and dramatic levels of inequality persisted in all regions.

Change was still not happening at the speed or scale required.
Now, due to COVID-19, an unprecedented health, economic and social crisis is threatening lives and livelihoods, making the achievement of Goals even more challenging. As of the beginning of June, the death toll had surpassed 400,000 and was continuing to climb, with almost no country spared. Health systems in many countries have been driven to the brink of collapse. The livelihood of half the global workforce has been severely affected. More than 1.6 billion students are out of school, and tens of millions of people are being pushed back
into extreme poverty and hunger, erasing the modest progress made in recent years.

Although the novel coronavirus affects every person and community, it does not do so equally. Instead, it has exposed and exacerbated existing inequalities and injustices. In advanced economies, fatality rates have been highest among marginalized groups. In developing countries, the most vulnerable – including those employed in the informal economy, older people, children, persons with disabilities,
indigenous people, migrants and refugees – risk being hit even harder.

Across the globe, young people are being disproportionately affected, particularly in the world of work. Women and girls are facing new barriers and new threats, ranging from a shadow pandemic of violence to additional burdens of unpaid care work.

Far from undermining the case for the SDGs, the root causes and uneven impacts of COVID-19 demonstrate precisely why we need the 2030 Agenda, the Paris Agreement on climate change and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, and underscore the urgency of their implementation. I have therefore consistently called for a coordinated and comprehensive international response and recovery effort, based on sound data and science and guided by the Sustainable Development Goals.

Health systems must be urgently strengthened in countries that are at greatest risk, with increased capacity for testing, tracing and treatment. Universal access to treatments and vaccines, when they become available, is essential. A large-scale multilateral response is needed to ensure that developing countries have the resources they need to protect households and businesses. Recovery packages must facilitate the shift to a low-carbon, climate-resilient economy and support universal access to quality public services. And leadership and support are needed to ensure statistical organizations have the tools and resources to facilitate timely and smart decision-making.

To guide and support these actions, the United Nations system has mobilized at all levels, leveraging the recent reforms of the United Nations development system.

At the start of this Decade of Action to deliver the SDGs, I call for renewed ambition, mobilization, leadership and collective action, not just to beat COVID-19 but to recover better, together – winning the race against climate change, decisively tackling poverty and inequality, truly empowering all women and girls and creating more inclusive and equitable societies everywhere.”

See Report at>>>