We all know the equation: more mouths to feed, finite land and resources to grow more food, and a global soil resource that's depleting faster than it can replenish itself. Business-as-usual food production might have sustained the world for a century, but it just doesn't add up anymore.
Food production is critically linked to not only our own health, but the health of the planet. And there is now a strong awareness that the current food system harms both. Inequitable access to food is causing under- and over-nourishment diseases, depending on which part of the world we are born in. More than half the world's soils are degraded. And one-third of global greenhouse gas emissions come from food production alone.
It's clear that any discussion about a broader global sustainability agenda must include food. And at the highest political levels, we're finally hearing the right noises: like the United Nations' COP28 declaring food and ag solutions must be part of efforts to meet global climate goals.
But at the moment, it is still just noise. An agenda, or intention - which isn't the same as action.
That action must come from commercial businesses along the value chain, but we can't expect them to shoulder the burden of change on their own. We need governments and regulators to link agenda with impact, through incentives that drive practice change to reduce food's impact on the planet.
Incentives that underline the importance of sustainable agriculture and land use management. Incentives for nature-based solutions that harness nature to protect and restore itself. Incentives that support the emergence and longevity of resilient food systems.
Incentives will kickstart change at the business level, but to deliver transformation at a global scale - and sustain it - we need catalytic collaboration by all actors in the value chain: all tiers of government, businesses, financiers, philanthropy, NGOs, and producers, all working towards the same outcome.
Such collaboration will drive new investment, and a new investment philosophy. One where transition finance across agriculture and food-related industries plays a greater role, and where new financing mechanisms emerge that better align with our sustainability agenda.
We need the global leaders in the food value chain to take the lead on transformation, too. To materially move from talk into action. To articulate that the transition will be fully costed, and lean on their shareholders to help shoulder the work by taking small decrements in EPS so their business can go faster - and deliver even faster impact.
It won't be for long; I'm optimistic that consumers will reward businesses who take the lead, and EPS returns will normalise and grow accordingly.
But what about producers? This paradigm shift calls on those with the most power in our supply chains (the processors, brands, and retailers) to accelerate the transition for farmers by positively pricing and discriminating towards products that are produced regeneratively. And in turn, educate their consumers by positively positioning and pricing these foods., i.e. play the long game by taking a margin hit as they facilitate their scope 3 emitters (their suppliers) to transition.
By definition, transformation is big. Big changes, big risks, big rewards. That battle is being fought and won right now on Australian farms by progressive broadacre farmers and graziers shown the way by regenerative farmers who've moved beyond business-as-usual to a new way of doing business: a principles-based approach that works with nature to benefit production, people, and planet.
Once dismissed as a fringe movement, the success of those early adopters is normalising regen ag across the farming sector - transforming food production one farm at a time.
In our quest to redesign a more sustainable global food system, we'd do well to take a leaf from their playbook.
- Hugh Killen is the chief executive officer and managing director Australia of Impact AG, Australia's leading regenerative ag-focussed asset management firm.
