The world is hungry for changes in meat and fertilizer production, except for Canada and the US.

Countries gathered for the COP26 climate conference in Glasgow, Scotland, agreed for the first time that the world must transition to more sustainable agricultural practices if we are to mitigate climate change and prevent millions of people from starving.

The 197 nations also agreed to consider agroecology, a sustainable and socially just approach to agriculture, as a key tool in addressing the climate crisis despite opposition from Canada, the United States and other countries.

In a preliminary document released on Saturday, the only process dedicated to agriculture under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, or UNFCCC, recognized the negative impacts of intensive meat production and the excessive use of artificial fertilizers. Meat production and artificial fertilizers account for the largest share of global food-related emissions, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or IPCC.

Still, advocates warn that they won’t signal victory until countries agree to include agroecology in the final text. It is currently in square brackets in a draft version, which means that it will continue to be discussed at COP27 in Egypt next year.

Agribusiness favors technological solutions

“(This) is really exciting: we have agroecology in a negotiated text for the first time in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change,” said Teresa Anderson, director of climate policy at ActionAid International. “It’s something to fight for.”

The decision comes as agribusiness and agroecology advocates vie for control of the future of food at COP26, short for the 26th conference of the parties to the UN climate accord. Despite support for agroecology from the EU and several other countries, Canada, the United States and other countries with industrial agriculture typically block progress for inclusion in the text.

Instead, these countries made a series of voluntary commitments to invest heavily in “climate-smart” agriculture, a set of techniques expected to rely heavily on drones, robots and other new technologies. While agricultural technology may help farmers, critics worry that the new promises will give large agribusinesses control over food and farmers.

That’s why it’s so important to include agroecology, Anderson explained. While the approach accepts that farmers must adapt to their specific conditions, it enshrines concepts such as promoting biodiversity and giving farmers and communities control over their food.

Glenn Wright, a Saskatchewan farmer and representative of the National Farmers Union of Canada echoed that thought at COP26. He has adopted various agroecological practices on his farm and is a strong defender of the independence and food sovereignty of farmers.

“I think technology is certainly going to be part of this because the time is so late that we need to pull all the levers and turn all the knobs that are going to reduce our emissions,” he said. “(But) we want to see that if these technologies are necessary, they should be available, not withheld on the basis of intellectual property law and patent protection.”

Some subsidies fuel greenhouse gases

Including agroecology in the text will not force countries to adopt the approach, Anderson admitted. However, as the UNFCCC is considered the highest authority on climate, it will encourage them to adopt it in their national policies on agriculture and climate change, and could influence the types of projects that receive support from funding agencies such as the World Bank. .

A report released earlier this year by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) found that nearly 90 percent of the world’s agricultural subsidies contribute to damaging the environment. Redirecting this $ 470 billion from industrial agricultural practices to more sustainable approaches could “transform” food systems, the authors noted.

That’s why countries with close ties to large agribusinesses, including Canada, generally avoid using the word, Anderson said. Terms like “climate smart” agriculture or “innovations” in agriculture leave the door open for policies that do not reduce the power of agribusinesses over food or improve the tools to ensure that they actually pollute less.

Resistance was evident in the negotiations, said a source within the discussions who spoke on condition of anonymity. Some countries objected to including the word on concerns because it was too limiting for the agricultural sector, even though the approach defined by FAO does not include rules or require farmers to use specific practices. Many of these countries prefer a broader wording of “innovative approaches”.

Still hopeful

Canada was one of the countries that blocked the inclusion of agroecology in the final text, Anderson said. The ministry in charge of agricultural negotiations under the UNFCCC, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, did not respond to a request for comment.

Despite this resistance, Anderson remains hopeful. The draft text released Saturday emphasized some key agroecological principles, such as raising meat less intensively and reducing fertilizer use, and could pave the way for more substantial changes next year.

“Agroecology is not only good for farmers and agriculture and biodiversity, but it is also an incredible climate solution both for building resilience and reducing emissions. It is something that we have seen tremendous momentum over the last two years. , and it’s exciting we have the possibility of the UNFCCC recognizing this, “he said.