FoodFood for Thought: Facts & Figures

Food for Thought: Facts & Figures

Karl Dickinson
Karl Dickinson
Change matters. It takes courage. As a writer - and citizen - I am inspired by stories of those who challenge the 'we've always done it this way' attitude. We can do better - it's time to listen to those who go against the grain.

Food is a massive and complex matter. In nature, food chains have to find a balance to prevent ecosystems from collapsing. Our human-made food network is no different. As the statistics show, a sustainable future concerns much more than what – and how much – we put on our plates. Production, trade, and consumption of food has arms that stretch out around the planet bringing with them issues that affect us on a city and global scale. To embark on truly sustainable food systems is to deal with this – and for that we need to know what we’re dealing with.

Food Demand & Security

Nearly 80% of food produced globally is consumed in urban areas.

By 2050 the planet will be home to close to 10 billion humans, two-thirds of the world’s population. To meet demand, food production will have to increase almost 50% compared to the early 2020s.

If not, hunger will continue to increase. The World Health Organisation states that “828 million people were affected by hunger in 2021 – 46 million people more from a year earlier and 150 million more from 2019”. In percentage terms globally, this continues to rise, hitting 9.3% of the population in 2020 and then almost 10% in 2021.

Quantity and quality matters: one-in-three people were unable to access adequate food in 2020.

Food insecurity affected just short of 30% (2.3 billion people) in 2021; there was a sharp rise correlating with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Action Against Hunger write that “45% of child deaths worldwide are due to hunger & related causes”.

Rising costs of living put pressure on many people’s diets:

  • In the UK, 4-in-10 shoppers reported buying less as a result of increasing financial strain.
  • British food prices rose 19.1% in April 2023 – well above general inflation – although still well below the 24% rate seen in the countries worst affected by cost rises in Africa’s sub-Saharan countries.
  • As the Food Foundation says, low-income families are less likely to each fresh fruit, veg, and fibre compared to those who earn comfortably.

In response to the struggles families face to feed themselves, food banks have become commonplace in cities in recent years.

  • In America, 1 in 7 people rely on food banks for sustenance.
  • The Trussell Trust – a UK charity working to combat hunger – reports that 655,000 people used a food bank for the first time in the 12 months to March 2024 because their incomes were insufficient to meet costs of food and heating.
  • But their presence in Africa is subdued. In early 2023, there were only 25 food banks across the continent; back in 2009 there were only two – one in Cairo and one in South Africa, although organisations like Food Banking Kenya do redistribute surplus food where it’s needed.

While so many go undernourished, overindulgence is also a problem: “more than 2 billion people are living with overweight or obesity,” writes Food Unfolded. This highlights the issues not with how much we produce, but how it’s shared: “If the food were equitably distributed, this would feed an extra one billion people.”

How We Grow

It’s estimated that almost half of today’s population would not be here if it weren’t for artificial fertiliser increasing agriculture yields. But this comes at a price.

Soil degrades without natural processes for nutrient renewal. In an untouched environment, that comes from decomposing matter – rotting vegetation – feeding the next generation of growth. When we clear land for crops of pasture, we break that cycle.

We compensate with chemical fertilisers, but these get leeched by rain runoff allowing the phosphates to pollute waterways, destroying ecosystems.

Extracting water for our food production is also damaging and we do it a lot! In 2021, agriculture accounted for 70% of all freshwater withdrawals.

Health Matters

There are other ways to fill our bellies: processed meat can be a cheap eat, but has implications for health, including higher blood pressure and risks of certain cancers.

The UK’s NHS defines processed meat as “any meat that has been preserved by smoking, curing, salting or adding preservatives” such as sausages and pâté.

According to one study, poor diets now pose a greater risk to mortality and morbidity than “unsafe sex, alcohol, and drug and tobacco use combined”.

Facts & figures - CityChangers
Image credit: Pixabay / Cherry19921025

A Taste of What’s to Come

Unless there’s change, the more food we produce, the bigger the impact it will have on the world around us.

The global food system alone – including production, processing, and distribution – accounts for 26% (13.7 billion tonnes) of greenhouse gas emissions.

Transport accounts for 19% of total emissions in the global food system; twice as much is released during delivery of fruit and veg a it created to produce them!

Meat production is the largest contributor; livestock releases 14% of all carbon dioxide derived from human activity.

Advocates of meat-free diets take aim at beef because it’s has the most impact; cows produce a lot of methane – about 500 litres a day.

  • In the US, this makes up 4.5% of total emissions.
  • However, methane also breaks down quickly – 12 years compared to a minimum of 300 years for CO2 – and so it has a much lower accumulative influence on climate change.

Rearing animals for meat and dairy requires a lot of land, though, and that rarely happens within city boundaries at a large scale. That means urban populations are reliant on rural communities – often internationally.

Agricultural expansion is the leading cause for 90% of deforestation, and therefore biodiversity loss, around the world.

In fact, agriculture takes up half of all habitable land on Earth.

  • Of that area, 82% is used for animal farming – including land for grazing and producing animal feed – but only generates 17% of global calories and 38% of all protein.

However, climate change isn’t a default devastation for crops.

  • As a drought-resistant crop, sorghum is already on the rise.
  • Projections shared by National Geographic outline a mixed future: while the Americas will see production decline, Europe is expected to experience extended potato growing seasons; extreme weather in parts of Africa could boost rice yields; Australia may gain decent arable land; and rising sea levels are likely to cut into agricultural land area in Asia.
  • Specifically, NASA writes, “Maize crop yields are projected to decline 24%, while wheat could potentially see growth of about 17%.”

Even if there are positives on the horizon, the decline in production already encountered due to irregular drought is already worrying – as Argentina’s 27% decrease in soybeans in 2023 indicates.

What’s Wrong with Waste?

Issues don’t stop after we’ve eaten. Waste is a big challenge.

According to the UNEP, we wasted 931 million tonnes of food globally in 2019, or a whopping 17% of all the food that was commercially available to us.

Food is packed full of carbon, so what goes unconsumed is a major (and unnecessary) contributor to emissions: 8-10% of all greenhouse gases, roughly on a par with global transport.

This is an unfortunate byproduct of overproduction (at least in some geographies) and poor behaviours: buying more than we need and chucking away what we don’t use.

It’s not all down to consumers, though. Affecting 14% of the world’s supply, food loss is the term given to waste occurring between harvest and retail. This is when ‘ugly’ fruits and vegetables are disposed of on the assumption their appearance makes them hard to sell; this affects around a third of all produce in Europe.

Food loss and waste can also occur because of inefficient harvesting and storage processes, said to cost the global economy approximately $400 billion per annum.

Some Stats on Urban Agriculture

What about the more sustainable options?

Well, whether it’s to meet demand from increasing populations or a move towards becoming self-sufficient, more cities are turning to urban agriculture as a source for their foodstuffs.

Urban agriculture has the potential to provide between 10% and 20% of all crops we need; to hit a full 100%, we’d need to farm 30% of urban land – so it seems citys will still rely heavily on rural and peri-rural partners to eat for the foreseeable future.

Still, growing within city boundaries has secondary advantages for urban areas, such as energy savings, nitrogen sequestration, and better stormwater management. It’s estimated that this could benefit the economy by around $33 billion each year.

Primarily, though, urban agriculture may be a way to combat food insecurity on our doorstep – cutting down on transport emissions in getting grub to market, too.

It’s difficult to pinpoint how many urban farms there are currently. If this article is to be believed, 800 million people practice urban agriculture, but the report it refers to is less clear.

A Good Day to Diet Hard!

It’s not only a change in how we produce food that’s going to create more sustainable systems, but also what.

Over the past 50 years, diets have generally changed – for one thing, most countries have diversified their food intake. This bodes well as food security may rely on urban populations being open minded about the next big meal ideas.

One study in the EU found that 56% of respondents claim to maintain a sustainable diet most of the time. That may be a misconception: these claims are based mainly on the believe that a sustainable diet is one that includes a variety of fruit and vegetables rather than how they’re produced.

Still, diets are changing because of lifestyle choices and out of awareness for the environment, health, and animal welfare.

Facts & figures - CityChangers
Image credit: Unsplash / Danielle Suijkerbuijk

A Meaty Topic

One study claims that:

  • animal proteins contribute “up to 40% of total protein consumption at present, with similar increasing trend predicted in the near future”.
  • the biggest increase in demand over the next half-decade is expected to be from the Global South.
  • we slaughtered 80 billion animals in 2019 to meet demand for the 325 millions tonnes of flesh we ate.

Some hail lab-grown meat as a more ethical alternative, as it:

  • needs up to 90% less land space to produce than conventional meat practices, and;
  • causes up to 94% less air pollution, 98% less acidification of soils, and 99% less marine eutrophication (excess algae caused by an artificial build-up of nutrients).

However, cultured meat or in-vetro meat as it’s also known is currently developed from stem cells taken from foetal blood so still requires some slaughter.

Questions around where lab-grown meat sit with regard to religious practices are still open for debate.

Sales are still limited; in summer 2024 it was finally approved for consumption in the UK – but restricted to pets. Lab-grown chicken is available in Singapore, but 97% of it is still plant-based material.

Research found that 2.6 million Europeans (3.2%) identify as vegan.

  • Three years earlier there was already an increase of 22% in plant-based food sales, indicating a rising interest among the general population.

In the United States, Black Americans are leading change as the fastest growing meat-free group, with around 1 in 12, or 8%, reporting a commitment to a vegan of vegetarian diet.

  • By 2040, some estimates say that only 40% of the entire population will be meat-eaters.

Kafkaesque Cooking

Completely meatless isn’t the only option. Forty per cent of those responding to a YouGov survey in the UK said they would be willing to eat meals containing of insect-based ingredients.

  • Some claim this could be done at just 1% of the current emissions of raising and preparing cows and pigs for consumption.
  • Apparently, “half a hectare of the larvae can produce more protein than 52 hectares of soya beans” writes The Guardian, after a study from South Africa’s University of Stellenbosch.
  • We don’t have to eat it – another option could be to use it a replacement for animal feed.

So, cultivating insect ‘meat’ close to home could make a lot more sense than importing soya beans from abroad, which results in a lot of carbon emissions.

There’s an economic argument for it too. Barclays claim that the “insect protein market could be worth up to $8bn by 2030”.

To really take off in the high street, though, they suggest it needs to be costed reasonably and requires a change in cultural acceptance and an introduction of regulation that supports industry growth.

You Might Also Like