News

Although the global number of child deaths remains high, the world has made tremendous progress in reducing child mortality over the past few decades. The total number of under-five deaths dropped to 5.3 million in 2018, down from 12.5 million in 1990. This is the main message of a report published today by UN organisations led by UNICEF and the World Health Organization (WHO). According to the “Levels and trends in child mortality: Report 2019”, more women and their children are surviving today than ever before. Since 2000, child deaths have reduced by nearly half and maternal deaths by over one-third, mostly due to improved access to affordable, quality health services. However, in 2018 alone, 15,000 children died per day before reaching their fifth birthday. “It is especially unacceptable that these children and young adolescents died largely of preventable or treatable causes like infectious diseases and injuries when we have the means to prevent these deaths,” the authors write in the introduction to the report. The global under-five mortality rate fell to 39 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2018, down from 76 in 2000 – a 49% decline.

“Despite advances in fighting childhood illnesses, infectious diseases remain a leading cause of death for children under the age of 5, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa and Southern Asia,” says the report. Pneumonia remains the leading cause of death globally among children under the age of 5, accounting for 15% of deaths. Diarrhoea (8%) and malaria (5%), together with pneumonia, accounted for almost a third of global under-five deaths in 2018. “Malnourished children, particularly those with severe acute malnutrition, have a higher risk of death from these common childhood illnesses. Nutrition-related factors contribute to about 45 per cent of deaths in children under 5 years of age,” warns the report. The estimates also show vast inequalities worldwide, with women and children in sub-Saharan Africa facing a higher risk of death than in all other regions. Level of maternal deaths are nearly 50 times higher for women in sub-Saharan Africa compared to high-income countries. In 2018, 1 in 13 children in sub-Saharan Africa died before their fifth birthday – this is 15 times higher than the risk a child faces in Europe, where just 1 in 196 children aged less than 5 die.

In 2015, the 193 UN Member States adopted the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The third SDG calls for an end to preventable deaths of newborns and children under age 5, with all countries aiming to reduce under-five mortality to at least as low as 25 deaths per 1,000 live births by 2030. The global target for ending preventable maternal mortality is to reduce the mortality ratio to less than 70 per 100 000 live births by 2030. The world will fall short of this target by more than 1 million lives if the current pace of progress continues. “A skilled pair of hands to help mothers and newborns around the time of birth, along with clean water, adequate nutrition, basic medicines and vaccines, can make the difference between life and death. We must do all it takes to invest in universal health coverage to save these precious lives,” said Henrietta Fore, UNICEF Executive Director. (ab)

The global area planted with genetically modified crops reached 191.7 million hectares in 2018, according to the annual report of the GMO-friendly organisation “International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications (ISAAA)”. The global hectarage only increased by 1% from 189.8 million hectares in 2017. The figures published in August show that 91% of the cultivation of GM crops is still concentrated in just five countries. The United States top the list with 75 million hectares or 39 per cent of the global area. Brazil ranks second with 51.3 million hectares (27%), followed by Argentina (23.9 million hectares or 12%), Canada (12.7 million hectares) and India (11.6 million hectares). Other GM producing countries with an area of over one million hectares include Paraguay, China, Pakistan, South Africa, Uruguay and Bolivia.

In Brazil, the area planted with GM crops increased by 2% or one million hectares while the area in Argentina grew by 1.3% to 309,540 hectares. In Canada, however, the area planted with GM crops saw a 3% decrease from 13.11 million hectares in 2017. In Asia, increases were registered in India and China, with a growth of 2% and 4% respectively. In Pakistan, the GM crop area decreased even by 7% as compared to 2017. In the European Union, where Spain and Portugal remain the only countries planting the insect-resistant maize MON810, the area decreased to 120,990 hectares, down 8% from 131,535 hectares in 2017. Almost 95% of the total area planted with GM maize was in Spain. ISAAA, which is sponsored by CropLife International, an association of agrochemical companies such as Bayer, BASF and Syngenta, is disappointed that “the acceptance of biotech crops in the EU is still far from improving”. The organization writes that “there was less motivation to plant biotech maize in the EU since the market calls for non-biotech raw materials.”

Across the globe, soybean remained the most adopted GM crop, covering 95.9 million hectares or 50% of the total GM crop area. Genetically modified maize occupied 58.9 million hectares in 2018, down 1.3% from the previous year, followed by cotton (24.21 million hectares) and rapeseed (10.2 million hectares). Based on the global crop area for individual crops, 78% of soybeans, 76% of cotton, 30% of maize and 29% of canola were genetically modified crops in 2018. The good news is that the share of GM cotton, maize and canola decreased as compared to 2017, when 80% of cotton, 32% of maize and 30% of canola were still genetically modified. Insect resistance and herbicide tolerance are the only two traits that have been developed and cultivated on a large scale. 46% of GM crops grown in 2018 were herbicide tolerant, 12% were insect resistant and 42% had a combination of both traits (stacked traits). The area planted to GM crops with stacked traits increased by 4% as compared to 2017.

As every year, the report praises the alleged benefits of GM crops to the skies. ISAAA claims that the adoption of GM crops made important contributions to food security, sustainability and climate change solutions. According to the report, GM crops helped to decrease herbicide and insecticide use by 8.4% in the period 1996 to 2016. The organization also claims that, since their commercial introduction in 1996, GM crops conserved biodiversity by saving 183 million hectares of land from plowing and cultivation. Additionally, in developing countries, planting GM crops is reported to have helped alleviate hunger by improving the economic situation of 16-17 million small farmers and their families, totaling more than 65 million people. At least this is what ISAAA says. However, the good news is that the 191.7 million hectares planted with GM crops in 2018 only made up roughly 3.9% of the total agricultural area and 13.7% of arable land while the rest still remains GMO-free. (ab)

Climate change will threaten the future of farming in Europe and crop production may even have to be abandoned in parts of southern Europe, the European Environment Agency (EEA) has warned. According to a report published this week, a cascade of impacts from climate change on agro ecosystems and crop production will have negative effects on the price, quantity and quality of products, thus affecting agricultural incomes and farmland prices in Europe. “New records are being set around the world due to climate change, and the adverse effects of this change are already affecting agricultural production in Europe, especially in the south,” said Hans Bruyninckx, EEA Executive Director. Extreme weather and heatwaves in many parts of the EU are already causing economic losses for farmers. The bad news is that these impacts are expected to increase in the years to come.

Future climate change might also have some positive effects due to longer growing seasons and better crop conditions, mainly for farmers in parts of northern Europe. “The projected climate change conditions will determine an increase in crop productivity by 2050 for cereal crops (such as wheat, maize and barley) and root and tuber crops (such as sugar beet and potato),” the authors write. They also expect a gradual northwards shift of current olive cultivation areas in the coming decades. But any advantages will largely be outweighed by the losses from extreme events and decreasing crop productivity in southern Europe. “According to projections using a high-end emission scenario, yields of non-irrigated crops like wheat, corn and sugar beet are projected to decrease in southern Europe by up to 50% by 2050,” the authors warn. Across Europe, the overall economic loss to agriculture from climate change could be as high as 16% by 2050, with large regional variations.

In addition, farmland values could decrease in parts of southern Europe by more than 80% by 2100, which could result in land abandonment. “Two thirds of the loss in land values in the EU could be concentrated in Italy, where the revenues of Italian farms are very sensitive to seasonal changes in climate parameters, especially under more severe climate scenarios,” the report says. On the contrary, land values could increase in western Europe and by an even higher percentage in northern European countries. Climate change will also have an impact on trade patterns, which in turn affects agricultural income. According to the EU agency, fodder and food security in the EU will probably not be an issue, but increased food demand worldwide could exert pressure on food prices in the coming decades.

The study says that adapting to climate change must be made a top priority for the EU’s agriculture sector if it is to improve resilience to extreme events like droughts, heatwaves and floods. “Despite some progress, much more must be done to adapt by the sector itself, and especially at farm-level, and future EU policies need to be designed in a way to facilitate and accelerate transition in this sector,” said Hans Bruyninckx. The EEA report stresses that adaptation at the farm level often does not take place due to of lack of financing, policy support, knowledge and awareness. It gives examples of adaptation measures for the agriculture sector. Crop diversification and rotation, for example, improve the resilience of crops and deliver a range of ecosystem services, such as efficient nutrient cycling, conservation of biodiversity and improved soil quality. Another measure is the use of cover crops, which can significantly reduce the risk of soil degradation. “The use of cover crops can also reduce the amount of nitrogen fertilisation required, and in turn the emissions of nitrogen not used by preceding crops, which can decrease nitrate leaching. Cover crops can improve wildlife habitats and diversity by decreasing erosion,” the authors explain.

EEA also recommends using adapted crops to adapt to the impact of extreme weather and climate events, such as frost or droughts. “This measure has synergies with mitigation in that soil carbon storage can increase. Introducing new crops or bringing back heritage crops has positive effects on biodiversity and ecosystem services and increases the genetic diversity of species, which in turn can become more resilient to extreme weather and climate conditions.” Another adaptation option is organic farming: “Using organic fertilisers in organic farming promotes organic carbon storage in soils. Organic farming practices generate high levels of soil organic matter. This enhances water storage capacities and increases resilience against droughts and floods.” The report notes that modifying the timing of sowing and harvesting can help to make use of better soil moisture conditions and improve yields. Adaptation measures also include field margins and agroforestry as well as improved irrigation efficiency, rainwater harvesting and water reuse. However, adaptation measures focused on delivering wider public benefits need to be made more attractive to farmers. The report suggests that EU Member States should better prioritise adaptation in the farming sector, for example by increasing the financing of measures in the framework of the Common Agricultural Policy. (ab)

US agriculture is 48 times more toxic to bees and other insects than it was 25 years ago, new research shows. According to a study published in the journal PLOS One, neonicotinoid pesticides are to blame for most of the increase in toxicity. “It is alarming that U.S. agriculture has become so much more toxic to insect life in the past two decades,” said study co-author Kendra Klein, who is also a senior staff scientist at Friends of the Earth. “We need to phase out neonicotinoid pesticides to protect bees and other insects that are critical to biodiversity and the farms that feed us.” The peer-reviewed study, published on August 6, quantifies how hazardous US agricultural lands and surrounding areas have become for insect by calculating the Acute Insecticide Toxicity Loading (AITL). This new method accounts for the total mass of insecticides used in the US, acute toxicity to insects (bees) and the environmental persistence of the pesticides. It provides a way to compare changes in the toxicity of U.S. agriculture for insects on a yearly basis from 1992 through 2014.

The study reveals that the toxicity load has increased dramatically since neonicotinoids, a class of insecticides which affect the central nervous system of insects, were introduced in the 1990s. The authors found a 48-fold increase in toxic load from 1992 to 2014. Neonicotinoids are primarily responsible for this increase, representing between 61 to nearly 99% of the total toxicity loading in 2014. The study also shows a dramatic increase in the toxicity load beginning in the mid-2000s, which is when the practice of using neonicotinoids to coat the seeds of commodity crops like corn and soy started. Seed coatings now account for approximately 80-90% of total neonicotinoid use in the US. The three neonicotinoids that contributed most to the increasing toxic load were imidacloprid and clothianidin, manufactured by Bayer, and thiamethoxam, a product of Syngenta-ChemChina. In their press release, Friends of the Earth point to research, including an Environmental Protection Agency assessment, which shows that neonicotinoid seed coatings provide little to no economic benefits to farmers but come at a high cost to the environment. Only about 5% of the neonicotinoid coating is absorbed by the plant, the remainder is left in the soil where it can harm wildlife and run off to contaminate rivers, lakes and drinking water sources.

According to the study, the persistence of neonicotinoids creates a cumulative toxic burden in the environment that is much higher than that experienced by insects 25 or more years ago. While other commonly used insecticides break down within hours or days, neonicotinoids can be effective at killing insects for months to years after application. The authors state that the increase in toxic load measured by the study is consistent with recent reports of dramatic declines in beneficial insects and bird populations. “Our screening analysis demonstrates an increase in pesticide toxicity loading over the past 26 years, which potentially threatens the health of honey bees and other pollinators and may contribute to declines in beneficial insect populations as well as insectivorous birds and other insect consumers,” the authors warn. They assert that existing regulations for the registration of pesticides in the US are not adequate to prevent the introduction of chemicals that can cause harm in the environment. “Congress must pass the Saving America’s Pollinators Act to ban neonicotinoids,” said Klein. “In addition, we need to rapidly shift our food system away from dependence on harmful pesticides and toward organic farming methods that work with nature rather than against it.” (ab)

Paraguay must take action to prosecute those responsible for the massive use of pesticides which led to the poisoning of citizens, the contamination of water, soil and food, a UN body has ruled. In a landmark decision published on August 14th, the UN Human Rights Committee said that the South American country failed to protect its citizens from the effects of toxic agrochemicals. The Committee, which is made up of 18 independent human rights experts, urged the Paraguayan government to undertake an effective investigation, to make full reparation to the victims, and to publish the decision in a daily newspaper with a large circulation. The case concerns a family of rural workers in Canindeyú Department, an area of major expansion of agribusinesses and extensive mechanized cultivation of genetically modified soybeans. The victims complained that the pesticide use at soy farms in the area resulted in the death of a 26-year old farmer and the poisoning of 22 other community members.

“The large-scale use of toxic agrochemicals in the region has had severe impacts on the victims’ living conditions, health, livelihoods, contaminating water resources and aquifers, preventing the use of streams, and causing the loss of fruit trees, the death of various farm animals and severe crop damage,” the UN Committee said in a press release. The victims experienced a range of physical symptoms, including nausea, dizziness, headaches, fever, stomach pains, vomiting, diarrhoea, coughing and skin lesions. The death of Rubén Portillo Cáceres and the poisening occurred in 2011. The family filed an “amparo”, a remedy for the protection of constitutional rights, and the Paraguayan courts found that the State had violated its obligations “to protect the constitutional right to health, to physical and psychological integrity, to quality of life and to live in a healthy and ecologically sound environment”. The court said that the Ministry of the Environment (SEAM) and the National Plant and Seed Quality and Health Service (SENAVE) had allowed serious physical harm by failing to protect citizens. The court ordered both institutions to protect environmental resources and ensure that buffer zones separate the areas where agrochemicals are used from human settlements and waterways. The family also lodged a criminal complaint and samples were collected from the well at the victims’ house. The results showed the presence of agrochemicals banned many years ago.

Eight years later, the UN Human Rights Committee looked into the case and found that the decision of the Paraguayan court had not been implemented. “The investigations have made no substantive progress and have not led to any finding of criminal responsibility or to the redress of the harm,” the Committee writes in its statement. “Fumigations have continued without any environmental protection measures, and soybean producers located next to the victims’ home are still applying massive amounts of agrochemicals without environmental permits.” The Committee noted that the State failed to honour its obligations and did not exercise adequate controls over illegal polluting activities. The human rights body concluded that “heavily spraying the area with toxic agrochemicals poses a reasonably foreseeable threat to the victims’ lives” and declared that the right to life and the right to private life, family and home had been violated.

“This is a landmark decision in favour of the recognition of the link between severe harms to environment and the enjoyment of core civil and political rights”, said Hélène Tigroudja, Member of the Committee. “Hundreds of similar cases around the world could be submitted for our consideration. We deeply encourage States to protect the right to life understood as the right to enjoy a life with dignity against environmental pollution”, she added. The Committee has requested Paraguay to report back within 180 days, detailing the measures it had been taken to implement the decision. Paraguay is one of the 173 States parties which have signed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Since Paraguay also acceded to the Optional Protocol to this Covenant, the Committee has the mandate to examine allegations of human rights violations by the State party. “Although the Human Rights Committee’s decisions aren’t binding, it’s usually awkward and embarrassing for countries to ignore or discount them,” Professor John Knox, the Former Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment, explained on Twitter. “The decision is the first one in which a treaty body has so clearly stated that a State’s failure to protect against environmental harm can violate its obligations to protect rights of life and of private/family life.” (ab)

Making fields smaller is an effective way to produce greater biodiversity in agricultural landscapes, since farmed landscapes with smaller fields and more diverse crops harbour more species. This was the finding of an international team of scientists, published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). “Agricultural intensification and the destruction of semi-natural habitats (shrubland, hedges, herb-rich strips) is one of the principal causes of observed biodiversity loss,” the authors explain in the abstract of the study. Increasing agricultural landscape heterogeneity by increasing semi-natural cover can help to mitigate biodiversity loss. However, the amount of semi-natural cover is generally low and difficult to increase in many intensively managed agricultural landscapes. But there is another option: The researchers showed at a large geographical scale that increasing the complexity of the crop mosaic by making field sizes smaller is as beneficial for biodiversity as increasing the quantity of semi-natural habitats.

The researchers selected eight contrasting agricultural regions in Europe and Canada in which average field size, crop diversity and semi-natural habitat area varied. They collected data from three sampling sites (i.e. agricultural fields) within 435 different agricultural landscapes of 1 x 1 km, identifying more than 2,795 species spread across seven taxonomic groups (birds, butterflies, bees, hoverflies, spiders, ground beetles and plants). They found that a complex crop mosaic, with small fields and diverse crops – dubbed “crop heterogeneity” by the scientists – was associated with an increase in biodiversity. For instance, the effect of decreasing field size from 5 to 2.8 hectares was as strong as that observed when the cover semi-natural habitat rises from 0.5 to 11%. The study showed that small fields also had a positive effect on biodiversity even in the absence of semi-natural vegetation between the fields, such as hedges or grassy margins.

The scientists also found that increasing the number of crop types also had a positive effect on biodiversity. “Crop diversity also had a positive effect on biodiversity because different crop types often harbour different species, but also because different crops supply complementary and necessary resources to support certain species in farmed landscapes,” said team member Jordi Recasens from the Universitat de Lleida. However, the effect of increasing crop diversity in the landscape surrounding fields sampled depended on the amount of seminatural cover. “Increasing the complexity of crops therefore represents an as yet unrecognized but valuable measure to conserve and restore farmland biodiversity,” the researchers write in the abstract. They argue that agri-environmental policies favouring a reduction in the average size of cultivated fields and, in some conditions, more diverse cropping, make it possible to maintain high biodiversity as well as to maintain the existing surface areas under agricultural production. The researchers hope that their results will contribute to informing the ongoing debate around the reform of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy. (ab)

A transition towards sustainable land management and diets which help reduce emissions and pressure on land is required in order to feed the world in a changing climate. This is the message of the latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which was adopted by the 195 IPCC member states on August 7th. The Special Report on Climate Change and Land was prepared by 107 experts from 52 countries and provides a peer-based review of the latest research on climate change, food security and land use. “Land plays an important role in the climate system,” said Jim Skea, Co-Chair of IPCC Working Group III. Agriculture and food production are major drivers of climate change: Agriculture, forestry and other types of land use accounted for 23% of human greenhouse gas emissions during the period 2007 to 2016. The sector was responsible for 13% of CO2, 44% of methane and 82% of nitrous oxide emissions from human activities globally. If emissions associated with pre- and post-production activities in the global food system are included, the estimated share in global anthropogenic emissions is 21-37%. “At the same time, natural land processes absorb carbon dioxide equivalent to almost a third of carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels and industry,” added Skea. The report shows that managing land resources sustainably can help address climate change and limit global warming to 1.5ºC or well below 2°C - but only if immediate action is taken.

The authors highlight that climate change creates additional stresses on land, exacerbating existing risks to livelihoods, biodiversity, human and ecosystem health, infrastructure, and food systems. Roughly 500 million people are already living in areas that experience desertification. “Food security will be increasingly affected by future climate change through yield declines – especially in the tropics – increased prices, reduced nutrient quality, and supply chain disruptions,” said Priyadarshi Shukla, Co-Chair of IPCC Working Group III. “We will see different effects in different countries, but there will be more drastic impacts on low-income countries in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean,” he said. The level of risk posed by climate change will therefore depend on the world population and the way it consumes, produces and manages land. Or as the scientists put it in their report: “Pathways with higher demand for food, feed, and water, more resource-intensive consumption and production, and more limited technological improvements in agriculture yields result in higher risks from water scarcity in drylands, land degradation, and food insecurity.”

The report states that coordinated action to address climate change can simultaneously improve land, food security and nutrition, and help to end hunger. Response options throughout the food system, from production to consumption, can be deployed and scaled up to advance adaptation and mitigation, the authors write. The report notes that about one third of food produced is lost or wasted. Causes of food loss and waste differ substantially between developed and developing countries, as well as between regions. Reducing this loss and waste would reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve food security. But also a change in people’s diets can make a difference. “Some dietary choices require more land and water, and cause more emissions of heat-trapping gases than others,” said Debra Roberts, Co-Chair of IPCC Working Group II. “Balanced diets featuring plant-based foods, such as coarse grains, legumes, fruits and vegetables, and animal-sourced food produced sustainably in low greenhouse gas emission systems, present major opportunities for adaptation to and limiting climate change.”

The report includes several enabling response options for the appropriate design of policies, institutions and governance systems at all scales which can contribute to land-related adaptation and mitigation. “Policies that support sustainable land management, ensure the supply of food for vulnerable populations, and keep carbon in the ground while reducing greenhouse gas emissions are important,” said Eduardo Calvo, Co-Chair of the Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. The adoption of sustainable land management and poverty eradication can be enabled by improving access to markets, securing land tenure, factoring environmental costs into food, making payments for ecosystem services, and enhancing local and community collective action. The scientists are clear: Only rapid reductions in anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions across all sectors following ambitious mitigation pathways can reduce negative impacts of climate change on land ecosystems and food systems. Delaying climate mitigation and adaptation responses across sectors would lead to increasingly negative impacts on land and reduce the prospect of sustainable development. (ab)

Countries across the globe, which are home to a quarter of the world’s population, are currently at severe risk of running out of water. According to new data published by the global environmental think tank “World Resources Institute”, 17 countries worldwide are facing “extremely high” water stress, meaning that they are using nearly all the water available. In those countries, irrigated agriculture, industries and municipalities withdraw more than 80% of available surface and groundwater in an average year. Another 44 countries, home to one-third of the world’s population, face “high” levels of stress, where on average more than 40% of available supply is used every year. “Water stress is the biggest crisis no one is talking about. Its consequences are in plain sight in the form of food insecurity, conflict and migration, and financial instability,” said Dr. Andrew Steer, President and CEO of the World Resources Institute (WRI). When demand rivals supply, even small dry shocks – which are set to increase due to climate change – can produce dire consequences.

WRI’s updated Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas ranks water stress, drought risk and riverine flood risk across 189 countries and their sub-national regions, using open-source, peer reviewed data. The researchers found that water withdrawals globally have more than doubled since the 1960s due to growing demand. The hot spots for water risk are concentrated in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, home to 12 of the 17 countries facing “extremely high” stress. The region is hot and dry, so water supply has always been low, but increasing demand pushed countries further into extreme stress, WRI warns. Climate change is set to complicate matters further. The World Bank says that this region has the greatest expected economic losses from climate-related water scarcity, estimated at 6-14% of GDP by 2050. Qatar, Israel and Lebanon rank in the top 3 on the list of “extremely highly” water stressed countries, followed by Iran and Jordan. India, ranked 13th on the list, has more than three times the population of the other 16 countries in this category combined. Northern India faces severe groundwater depletion. “The recent water crisis in Chennai gained global attention, but various areas in India are experiencing chronic water stress as well,” said Shashi Shekhar, former Secretary of India’s Ministry of Water Resources. But even in countries with low overall water stress, communities may still be experiencing extremely stressed conditions. South Africa, for example, ranks 48th on the list, yet the Western Cape experiences extremely high stress levels. In 2018, Cape Town was on the brink of running out of water and the government announced “day zero” – the day when all dams in the city would be dry.

However, there are also many opportunities to boost water security. The World Resources Institute highlights three ways to reduce water stress. The first is to increase agricultural efficiency: “The world needs to make every drop of water go further in its food systems. Farmers can use seeds that require less water and improve their irrigation techniques by using precision watering rather than flooding their fields.” And consumers can save water by reducing food loss and waste, which uses one-quarter of all agricultural water. Second, WRI calls for more investment in grey and green infrastructure. Their research shows that built infrastructure (like pipes and treatment plants) and green infrastructure (like wetlands and healthy watersheds) can work in tandem to tackle issues of both water supply and water quality. Third, WRI recommends treating and reusing wastewater. In the MENA region, for example, about 82% of the region’s wastewater is not reused; harnessing this resource would generate a new source of clean water. “A new generation of solutions is emerging, but nowhere near fast enough. Failure to act will be massively expensive in human lives and livelihoods,” Dr. Steer added. There are undeniably worrying trends in water, he said. But by taking action now and investing in better management, we can solve water issues for the good of people, economies and the planet. (ab)

July 29th marks Earth Overshoot Day this year – the day humanity has used up all the resources nature can sustainably supply in a year, according to data from the Global Footprint Network, an international sustainability organization. For the rest of the year, we will be living on resources borrowed from future generations. And the speed at which we exhaust the planet’s resource budget is increasing – this year’s overshoot day is the earliest date ever recorded since the world first went into global overshoot in the 1970s. It is two months earlier than it was 20 years ago. To maintain current levels of consumption, we would need the equivalent of 1.75 Earths. Earth Overshoot Day is calculated each year by contrasting the world’s demand on nature (ecological footprint), including demand for food, timber, fibres (cotton) and accommodation of infrastructure with the planet’s ability to replenish resources and absorb waste, including carbon dioxide emissions.

Overshooting can only be temporary because we are depleting our natural capital, compromising humanity’s future resource security, the organisation warns in a press release. The costs of this global ecological overspending are becoming increasingly evident in the form of deforestation, soil erosion, biodiversity loss, or the buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The latter leads to climate change and more frequent extreme weather events. “We have only got one Earth – this is the ultimately defining context for human existence. We can’t use 1.75 without destructive consequences,” said Mathis Wackernagel, co-inventor of Ecological Footprint accounting and founder of Global Footprint Network. He argues that humanity will eventually have to operate within the Earth’s limited resource budget. According to the think tank, the estimated level of resources and ecosystem services required to support human activities today is 1.75 Earths. If everyone lived the way US citizens do, it would take 5 Earths to sustain global consumption. If the entire world followed Australia’s example, it would take 4.1 Earths. Russia and Germany are using 3.2 and 3.0 Earths respectively, using nature three times faster than ecosystems can regenerate. India only needs the equivalent of 0.7 planets.

But the Global Footprint Network also believes that living within the means of our planet is possible and that the current trends can be reversed. The organisation has identified five major areas which offer significant opportunities to address ecological overshoot and improve sustainability: cities, energy, food, planet and population. For instance, cutting CO2 emissions from fossil fuel burning by 50% would move Earth Overshoot Day back 93 days. Moving the date back 5 days each year would allow humanity to reach one-planet compatibility before 2050. “We know what the solutions are so it’s time to be hopeful and bold and grab the opportunity to make a positive difference while we still can,” said Aaron Kiely, climate campaigner at the environmental campaign group Friends of the Earth. “We have to think again about how we consume. Large-scale political intervention is desperately needed, but as individuals there’s things we can do: stop buying what we just don’t need, make things last, insulate our homes, and collectively stop digging ourselves into ecological debt.” (ab)

The number of undernourished people in the world has increased to more than 820 million in 2018, or one in every nine people, warns a report released on Monday by five UN agencies. At the same time, overweight and obesity are growing in all world regions, particularly among school-age children and adults. According to “The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World”, an estimated 821.6 million people did not have enough to eat in 2018, up from 811 million in the previous year. After a decade of steady decline, this is the third year of increase in a row. Considering all people in the world affected by moderate levels of food insecurity together with those who suffer from hunger, it is estimated that over 2 billion people do not have regular access to safe, nutritious and sufficient food. “Our actions to tackle these troubling trends will have to be bolder, not only in scale but also in terms of multisectoral collaboration, involving the agriculture, food, health, water and sanitation, education, and other relevant sectors; and in different policy domains, including social protection, development planning and economic policy,” the heads of the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International Fund for Agricultural Development, UNICEF, the World Food Programme and the World Health Organization urged in their joint foreword to the report.

Almost 62.5% of the world’s undernourished people, or 513.9 million, live in Asia, mostly in southern Asian countries, followed by Africa with 256.1 million (31.2%) and Latin America and the Caribbean with 42.5 million. The report also notes that the share of people who are chronically hungry remains virtually unchanged in the past three years at a level slightly below 11%. Africa remains the region with the highest share of undernourishment, affecting 20% of the population in 2018. The situation is especially alarming in Eastern Africa, where a third of the population (30.8%) is undernourished. In addition to climate and conflict, economic slowdowns and downturns are driving the rise. In Asia, 11.3% of the population are affected while the share is 6.5% in Latin America and the Caribbean.

This year’s report highlights that hunger is increasing in many countries where economic growth is lagging, particularly in middle-income countries and those that rely heavily on international primary commodity trade. The authors write that income inequality is rising in many of the countries affected by food insecurity, making it even more difficult for the poor, vulnerable or marginalized to cope with economic slowdowns and downturns. The chances of being food insecure are higher for women than men, with the largest gap in Latin America. “We must recognize the importance of safeguarding food security and nutrition in times of economic difficulty. We must invest wisely during periods of economic booms to reduce economic vulnerability and build capacity to withstand and quickly recover when economic turmoil erupts,” the UN leaders said in the foreword. “We must foster pro-poor and inclusive structural transformation focusing on people and placing communities at the centre to reduce economic vulnerabilities and set ourselves on track to ending hunger, food insecurity and all forms of malnutrition while ‘leaving no one behind’.”

And there is more bad news: Some 148.9 million children aged under five (21.9%) are stunted (too short for their age), while 49.5 million (7.3%) suffer from wasting, meaning their weight is too low for their height. “With regard to nutrition indicators, we are faring no better. If current trends continue, we will meet neither the 2030 SDG Target to halve the number of stunted children nor the 2025 World Health Assembly target to reduce the prevalence of low birthweight by 30 percent,” the UN leaders continue. Together, Africa and Asia bear the greatest share of all forms of malnutrition, accounting for more than nine out of ten of all stunted children and over nine out of ten of all wasted children worldwide. At the same time, overweight and obesity continue to increase in all regions, particularly among school-age children and adults. Adult obesity continued to rise, from 11.7% in 2012 to 13.2% worldwide in 2016. 672 million adults are obese. In addition, 338 million school-age children and adolescents are overweight. The report calls for a profound transformation of food systems to provide sustainably-produced healthy diets for a growing world population. This requires balancing a set of policies and investments to achieve a structural transformation that also fosters poverty reduction and more egalitarian societies. “We must also ensure that reducing gender inequalities and social exclusion of population groups is either the means to, or the outcome of, improved food security and nutrition,” the UN heads conclude in their foreword. (ab)