This event was co-hosted by TABLE, the Global Alliance for the Future of Food, and IPES-Food on 4 November 2024 and took the format of a panel discussion moderated by Jack Thompson (Freelance Journalist) with:Errol Schweizer (Grocery Expert, IPES-Food);Ruchi Tripathi (Climate & Nature Director, Global Alliance for the Future of Food);Lili Fuhr (Director of the Fossil Economy Program, Center for International Environmental Law);Nnimmo Bassey (Director, Health of Mother Earth Foundation). The event was inspired by the new podcast series "Fuel to Fork".

This study in Nature Food claims that widespread efforts to sequester carbon on agricultural land could offer farmers around the world extra income and allow net zero emissions in agriculture by 2050 for a lower cost than other options. To achieve this, the study argues that it requires deploying highly efficient institutions and monitoring systems across the world in the next five years. 

This study finds methane emissions from slurry stores on dairy farms may be up to five times greater than official statistics suggest. It also claims there is huge potential for turning them into a renewable energy source. The study shows that if captured and turned into biogas, emitted methane could be valuable.

This study explores how the impacts of pig farming co-vary in different pig production systems across Brazil and the UK. It argues that the externalities (consequences that affect external parties) of pig production have historically been examined in isolation, and trade-offs have never been robustly investigated. Based on 91 widely varying farms, the authors find that no particular farming type, from organic to indoor intensive, free range to woodland - performed well across all the main impact categories examined; greenhouse gas emissions, land-use, antimicrobial use and animal welfare. However, it finds that individual farms performed well across the categories. Therefore the study concludes that efforts to minimise trade-offs should focus on lowering impacts within system types rather than only changing between them.

This article investigates the current state of nutrition and sustainability of plant-based and animal-sourced products, mainly beef. It reflects upon the different metrics used in research and how they impact research results, narratives and policies. From the literature they reviewed, the authors found there to be a consensus that plant-based beef generates fewer greenhouse gas emissions than conventionally reared beef. They found it is more difficult to make nutritional comparisons due to the variability in plant-based beef products. Comparisons mainly focus on nutritional content, water use, land use and greenhouse gas emissions, but exclude social and economic sustainability. The authors highlight the impact of funding sources on the type of metrics chosen and call for more independent analysis focusing on a wider range of metrics.

Former officials at the FAO have revealed a history of corporate lobbying from the livestock sector, undermining the integrity of the FAO’s reporting on emissions from cattle and their contribution to rising global temperatures. Former officials detail how they were censored, sabotaged, undermined and victimised for more than a decade.

This paper is the first system-wide assessment of the effects of substituting animal based products with novel plant based alternatives on a range of food system concerns . The paper analyses four substitution scenarios (corresponding to 10%, 25%, 50% and 90% incremental substitution from 2020 to 2050) and determines the net results for food system outcomes including food availability, undernourishment levels, crop use and food prices, and environmental outcomes including land use change, emissions reduction, biodiversity intactness and nitrogen input.

Only an urgent societal transformation can deliver the emissions cuts needed to limit climate warming to 2°C or 1.5°C, according to this report from the United Nations Environment Programme. The report sets out a sector-by-sector examination of how to achieve this transformation.

The Science Based Targets initiative has published guidance for companies in land-intensive sectors on how to set science-based targets for reducing emissions from agriculture, forestry and other land use in line with the Paris Agreement’s climate goals. The key components include: setting near-term emissions reduction targets for the next 5-10 years; account for carbon sequestration options such as forest management and soil carbon sequestration; set long-term targets of cutting emissions by 74% by no later than 2050; set zero deforestation targets for no later than 2025; and set emissions reduction targets for both land use and fossil fuel use.