Impacts of Climate Change | California Climate & Agriculture Network

California Small Farm Conference Draws Enthusiastic Growers to Valencia

March 21, 2012 by Ted Quaday 1 Comment

More than 400 small farm operators in California came together in southern California recently for the 25^th annual California Small Farm Conference. The event provided attendees with opportunities to learn the ins and outs of developing successful and sustainable farm businesses.

Bringing the next generation of growers into farming was an area of concern, as were means of protecting farms against invasive pests. Farmers also got a chance to learn more about evolving energy and carbon markets as the state of California implements its cap-and-trade program.

Dave Runsten (left) and Bob Corshen with the Community Alliance with Family Farmers in Davis, CA confer during tabling activities at the 2012 Small Farm Conference in Valencia.

As a presenter in the “Alternative Energy & Carbon Markets: Promises and Pitfalls” workshop, I briefed farmers on the challenges climate change will bring including the potential for increased flooding in winter and deeper droughts in summer. Erratic and extreme weather events already seem on the way to becoming the norm. Yield reductions, shifting crop patterns and increased and changing pest and disease pressures are also likely to occur. All of these changes leave California’s farmers economically vulnerable.

I also talked about steps farmers can take to adapt to the changing climate. Some ideas include working to increase soil fertility and water-holding capacity, increasing biodiversity, and on-farm water storage, as well as finding ways to minimize the use of fossil-fuel based inputs including motor fuels and synthetic nitrogen fertilizer.

To learn more about what climate challenges lie ahead and ways to adapt, check out CalCAN’s web-based resource information.

On the policy front, I talked about the idea that the entire state needs to be looking for ways to invest in California’s agricultural future. One of the ways to do that is by directing some of the revenue generated by the new cap-and-trade program toward agricultural research, technical assistance and in support of on-farm practices that produce climate benefits.

Over the next few months, the state legislature will weigh in on areas where cap-and-trade revenue (estimated at between $500 million and $1 billion in 2012) should be invested. CalCAN continues to advocate that sustainable agricultural solutions be a part of the cap-and-trade investment plan.

Among folks at the Small Farm Conference, interest in ways to help farmers meet the challenges of climate change was strong. You can help CalCAN continue building statewide backing for this deeper investment in sustainable agriculture by contacting us at info@calclimateag.org.

Filed Under: AB 32 Implementation, Farmer Resources, Featured - Sidebar, Impacts of Climate Change, Uncategorized Tagged With: AB 32, California agriculture, cap-and-trade, climate change, climate legislation, effects of climate change, farmer, sustainable agriculture

Rangeland Conservation Group Impresses with Leadership & Vision

January 26, 2012 by Renata Brillinger Leave a Comment

After attending the annual summit of the California Rangeland Conservation Coalition (CRCC) in Davis last week, I’m more impressed than ever with the group and their efforts. The long-term viability of California’s grazing lands — under siege in many ways — depends on the leadership, partnership and vision of the stakeholders in this coalition.

CRCC is a coalition of ranchers, environmentalists, land trusts, public agencies and researchers working together to preserve and enhance the ecosystems services of California’s rangeland while supporting the long-term viability of the ranching industry. The focus of the summit was on managing rangelands for multiple ecosystems services and highlighting the many public benefits rangelands provide — food provision, wildlife habitat, open space, limiting urban sprawl, watershed protection, recreation, and not least of all, carbon sequestration.

The summit also highlighted the threats to these working lands. For example, many speakers mentioned the negative impact of the defunding of the Williamson Act (a program that has provided tax incentives for farmland protection for decades) that is no longer effective in providing counter-pressure against development. A research team from UC Davis reported on rancher survey findings indicating that 42 percent of ranchers would sell some or all of their land without financial support from the Williamson Act, and 56 percent of those predicted the land would be developed for non-agricultural purposes. Jaymee Marty from The Nature Conservancy stated that their research shows the biggest threat to rangeland conversion is from intensive agriculture such as vineyards, orchards and irrigated pasture — a threat that the Williamson Act does not mitigate. This gap points to a need for better programs to protect rangeland.

This is a group not afraid to talk about climate change, both in terms of the impacts it will have and the climate benefits offered by rangelands. Many rancher members are carefully watching the carbon market in hopes that it will provide new financial incentives to keep them in business. The many scientific and political barriers to fulfilling these hopes have yet to be overcome.

To put a point on the impacts of climate change discussed at the summit, just a couple of days later a report was released called “The Impact of Climate Change on California’s Ecosystem Services.” Predictions under two climate models are both bad for ranching — warmer, drier conditions will desiccate grasslands while warmer, wetter conditions will cause intrusion of less digestible brush. Summarizing the findings for rangelands, lead author Rebecca Shaw said, “A less stable climate will reduce the ability of natural landscapes to support cattle grazing, so ranchers may have to grow or buy extra hay instead of getting it for free from nature, as they do now.”

Some of the most exciting research work in this field is coming out of the California Rangeland Watershed Laboratory at UC Davis at the Graduate Group in Ecology, both headed by Ken Tate. Several members made presentations at the summit and are closely involved with CRCC. They have a strong interest in improving their participatory research efforts by working more closely with ranchers to correlate research findings with on-the-ground experience.

One of the most interesting presentations was made by Valerie Eviner (a CalCAN science advisor) who described how difficult it is to translate scientific findings and models to real ranch conditions, and how challenging it can be for ranchers to balance competing ecosystems management and economic priorities. She acknowledged that scientists still are not able to give prescriptions to ranchers since there is so much variability in rangeland systems. She described an ambitious project they are undertaking to collect vast amounts of information and observations from ranchers in an attempt to draw connections between management strategies, geographic and climatic conditions and the resulting impacts on ecosystems indicators. CalCAN will play a supporting role in this research as it moves forward.

Keep an eye on this coalition. There is a lot to learn from their whole systems approach and collaborative multi-stakeholder structure.

Filed Under: Climate & Ag Research, Farmer Resources, Impacts of Climate Change Tagged With: conservation, ecosystems services, ranching, rangeland

Governor’s Conference on Climate Risks Signals Need for Deeper Investment

January 2, 2012 by Jeanne Merrill 1 Comment

2011 was a year of extreme weather events in the United States: devastating floods along the Mississippi River, severe drought in the southwest, tornadoes and hurricanes with grave impacts. Making the connections between a rise in extreme weather events and climate change was the focus of Governor Jerry Brown’s December conference on Extreme Climate Risks and California’s Future, held at the Academy of Sciences in San Francisco.

Governor Jerry Brown offers opening remarks at the conference on Extreme Climate Risks and California's Future.

The impetus for the conference was a recent report released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), entitled Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation. Rising global temperatures, the report argues, will lead to frequent and longer periods of heat waves as well as shifts in precipitation patterns that will lead to more frequent and severe floods and droughts. All of which will stress and strain our economies, leading to greater numbers of “climate refugees”, those displaced by extreme weather events, unless we act now to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and put in place measures to adapt to a changing climate.

In our blog we’ve written extensively on the connections between rising temperatures, changing climate patterns, and the impacts on California agriculture. At a time when climate change appears to be on the political backburner, the Governor’s conference put climate change and its real life impacts on people back in the forefront.

The President of the California Farm Bureau Federation, Paul Wenger, addressed the conference attendees about the real concerns that climate change will lead to greater water scarcity in California. Farmers and ranchers will find their ability to produce food and fiber deeply challenged if adequate water supplies to produce their crops and livestock are not available.

The conference was an important step by Governor Brown to demonstrate his commitment to maintaining California’s work to address climate change and move us toward an economy that supports renewable energy and sustainable, healthy communities with good jobs. But the path forward is not always clear.

California will need to invest in making the transition towards a clean, green economy possible. We cannot avoid the worst impacts of climate change without the resources needed in our communities to reduce GHG emissions and adapt to a changing climate. That’s why CalCAN sponsored the Agriculture Climate Benefits Act, Senate Bill 237, and it’s why we will continue to make the case for AB 32 investments in our communities, now and into the future.

Filed Under: California Policy, Climate & Ag Research, Impacts of Climate Change Tagged With: AB 32, agricultural economy, California agriculture, effects of climate change, farmer, SB 237

Crop Insurance Reform Must Reflect Climate Realities

December 19, 2011 by Renata Brillinger 1 Comment

There are some good reasons suggesting that we need to reevaluate federal crop insurance policies.

First, the effects of climate change are already being felt by farmers across the country. The extreme weather events of 2011 throughout the United States — including severe floods and drought, and the related economic losses into the billions of dollars — have raised awareness about the vulnerability of agriculture to more extreme and unpredictable weather patterns. Farmers, government agencies and policymakers are now considering how to be better prepared for weather extremes, including reforming how we insure farms against catastrophic losses.

Second, in the recent flurry of farm bill activity sparked by the (now failed) “super committee” process, robust debates began on how to spend public money on supporting the country’s food and farming system. There is every indication that powerful agribusiness interests will agree to reduce, or in some cases eliminate, commodity payments that for decades have guaranteed billions of dollars in revenue for producers of the major commodities (e.g., corn, soy, wheat, rice, cotton, etc.). However, this historic concession will come with a significant tradeoff — namely, the expansion of federal crop insurance payments, essentially continuing the practice of minimizing economic risk for producers of these crops. Farmers need good crop insurance. The question is how crop insurance is structured, which will impact not only what is grown and how, but whether or not taxpayers are on the hook for what could be expensive and risky policies.

Lastly, all of these debates come at time when federal policy decisions continue to be examined through the lens of budgetary austerity, and farm bill programs are no exception. In the case of crop insurance, which must be considered in light of climate change, the challenge will be to sort out what risk management programs and policies are truly the most economical and sustainable over the long term.

A new briefing, A Risky Proposition: Crop Insurance in the Face of Climate Change by the Institute for Agriculture & Trade Policy (IATP) makes the case that farmers need adequate insurance, particularly in view of increased challenges caused by climate change. But the authors also argue that the support should be coupled with measures that mitigate climate change risk for agriculture and increase on-farm resilience. To do otherwise, they say, is “like offering a home owner a fire insurance policy, but not even requiring the most basic preventative measures, such as smoke alarms or fire extinguishers.”

As the authors note the current system of taxpayer-backed farm insurance isn’t working as well as it needs to. Some highlights:

Organic operations — arguably among the most resilient farming systems — pay a five percent surcharge on their insurance policies, and any losses they incur are reimbursed at conventional crop prices without consideration of the higher market value of organic products. This disadvantage should be corrected in the next farm bill.
Of particular relevance to California is the fact that fruit and vegetable producers have fewer options under the federal insurance program.
Most crop insurance policies favor less diverse operations by making it difficult to insure integrated, multi-crop, mixed crop/livestock systems. Yet one of the most important tools for resilience to climate change and other unpredictable events is to diversify. This practice must be re-examined and revised to encourage and reward diversification.

One potential solution is whole-farm revenue insurance. Our colleagues at the National Center for Appropriate Technology, in a report funded by the USDA Risk Management Agency (available by emailing Jeffs@ncat.org), make the following case:

Whole-farm revenue insurance is not currently the major way many farmers insure their production in the United States. Seventy-six percent of the total liability covered by federally subsidized crop insurance in 2010 was attributed to four crops: corn, soybeans, wheat and cotton. However, whole-farm revenue insurance could provide a more effective way to insure not only specialty crops, but all crop and livestock production in the United States. Rather than the continued proliferation of single-crop based insurance products, whole-farm revenue insurance would likely be a less costly way to provide publically subsidized insurance for farmers. We understand that one key to sustainability in agriculture is expanding crop and livestock diversity.

We believe that critical analyses and innovative proposals such as these by IATP and NCAT should underlie decisions in the next and future farm bills. Solving multiple complex problems such as agricultural risk management, climate change preparedness and economic frugality demands it.

Filed Under: Federal Policy, Impacts of Climate Change

New Reports Flag Climate Change Food Challenges

November 23, 2011 by Ted Quaday 1 Comment

World climate and agriculture research scientists weighed in heavily last week with two new reports that underscore the urgent need to address climate change and its potential impact on our food supply.

The first report, Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation, was issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a group of 220 leading climate scientists. It makes clear there is a direct link between the short-term weather extremes we’ve been experiencing and the longer-term climate changes brought on by greenhouse gas accumulation in the atmosphere.

The atmosphere is warming and has been for decades. The new IPCC analysis says that globally there is no doubt we will see increased and more extreme heat waves, droughts, and flood conditions. Each of these extremes has implications for food production in California, as we discussed in a recent blog.

The second report, produced by 13 scientists on the international Commission on Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change, is entitled Achieving Food Security in the Face of Climate Change. It cautions that the time is now to begin transforming our food production, distribution, and consumption activities. It lays out a set of action points that are sobering in their scope. As the authors put it, what is required is a “transition to a global food system that satisfies human needs, reduces its carbon footprint, adapts to climate change and is in balance with planetary resources requires concrete and coordinated actions, implemented at scale, simultaneously, and with urgency.”

The scientists warn that “business as usual in our globally interconnected food system will not bring us food security and environmental sustainability.” They add that “greatly expanded investments in sustainable agriculture, including improving supporting infrastructure and restoring degraded ecosystems, are an essential component of long-term economic development. The sooner they are made, the greater the benefits will be.”

Though these two reports are global in focus, they contain important warnings that could easily apply to food and farming here at home.

We know the obesity epidemic will have a huge financial impact on our health care system, and huge personal impacts on individuals, families, and communities. It is another indication that business as usual is neither healthy, nor sustainable.

Never has consumer interest in food been greater and better informed. The rise of the good food movement is already prompting shifts in farming practices, food policies, and consumer buying preferences. Organic sales continue to rise despite the on-going economic slide. People are demanding access to locally produced foods that are raised sustainably and arrive in the marketplace fresh and flavorful. They are using their food dollars to say clearly that they want their local family farmers and farm laborers to thrive.

New federal programs aim to improve the quality of school lunch and to provide universal access to fresh fruits and vegetables. Other programs encourage on-farm conservation practices that have provided tremendous opportunities to reverse environmental damage that is often the result of industrial agriculture practices. But these programs are under constant threat of being scaled back or eliminated.

As with most complex problems, a systems approach to the solutions is needed, and these solutions must address multiple challenges. We agree with the authors of the global food security report — sustainable agriculture solutions, grounded in a system-wide reconfiguration of how food is produced and distributed, are the most powerful way to solve many of the limits and shortcomings of our current approach.

While the international commission offered its recommendations in a global context, we believe that their call for a coordinated framework of sustainable agriculture policies and programs is applicable in California as well. Here are some actions we can take at the state level to help ensure our own food security and the economic security of our food producers:

Invest in more research to identify the best farming practices for mitigation and adaptation to climate change,
Provide more technical assistance to help farmers reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change,
Reward farmers who adopt climate-friendly food production systems that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change,
Strengthen support for on-farm conservation, and
Encourage renewable energy production through grant support and farmer-friendly policies.

We can achieve a vibrant economy that supports healthy food access, even in the face of climate change. But it will take investment. Funds generated through implementation of California’s climate change law (AB32) should go to supporting our food security in the face of challenging climate changes.

Filed Under: California Policy, General Information, Impacts of Climate Change Tagged With: California agriculture, climate change, policy, sustainable agriculture

What are farmers around the world doing to prepare for climate change?

November 15, 2011 by Elena Idell Leave a Comment

Farmers around the globe are experiencing the impacts of a changing climate. However, we don’t have to wait to see what happens to our food and farming systems. It’s possible to take proactive action now to address climate change. And some countries are doing just that.

Australia and Scotland both have innovative agriculture and climate change programs that combine farmer know-how and science to ensure sustainable farming systems for the years to come.

Australia

Australia’s Farming Future is the government-run program that assists farmers in preparing for climate change. It includes the Climate Change Research Program, the FarmReady Program, and the Climate Change Adjustment Program.

The Climate Change Research Program provides on-farm demonstrations and research on how changes in farming practices can help with climate change adaptation and mitigation of climate change for primary agricultural industries, focusing on the management of soils in farming practices, reducing greenhouse gas pollution, and adapting practices to climate change. This research program is large scale, involving various research providers, industry groups, and universities, and represents the first steps toward Australia’s solutions to climate change.

The FarmReady program is a grant program involving training farmers, indigenous land managers and farming groups in ways to develop practices for responding to the impacts of climate change. The program provides grant funding for producers to train their staff in new practices to adapt to climate change as well as undertake projects for adapting to climate change. The two grants available are the FarmReady Reimbursement Grants, which allow producers and industries to receive up to $1,500 (AUD) for training courses, and the FarmReady Industry Grants, which allow up to $80,000 (AUD) per year for the installation of farm management practices for adjusting to climate change impacts.

The Climate Change Adjustment Program is an advice, counseling, and assessment program that also aims to help producers and industries manage the impacts of climate change through training grants, financial assessment, and business analysis. This program allows farmers to use the assistance of the government to re-evaluate farming practices and create a Climate Change Action Plan for an industry in order to better its farming practices and prepare for the impacts of global warming.

The Torr Farm participates in Scotland's Climate Change Focus Farms Initiative.

Scotland

The Scottish Agricultural College’s program Farming For a Better Climate (FBCC) provides research opportunities, planning and information on ways that farmers can reduce greenhouse gas emissions and address climate change.

A related initiative, the Climate Change Focus Farms Initiative, works with four farms to demonstrate practical approaches to climate change. Through the program, each operation seeks to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and use practices that increase farm resilience to climate change. These farms are part of the program run by the government-funded Scottish Agricultural College FBCC initiative that works toward climate change research and mitigation.

One of the participating farms is Torr Farm, an organic dairy farm that uses clovers to fix nitrogen in the soil and uses nitrous oxide monitoring chambers to monitor how much nitrous oxide is released from the soils. Stewart Tower Farm is in the process of working toward combating climate change by taking account of the nutrients in farmyard manure as well as using inorganic fertilizers more efficiently.

Maintaining a viable food production base in the face of climate change is central for our health and security. By combining research, on-farm demonstration, training, and technical support Australia and Scotland are taking steps to ensure that agriculture is ready for a changing climate. There’s no reason California and the rest of the United States cannot do the same.

Filed Under: Climate & Ag Research, Farmer Resources, Impacts of Climate Change Tagged With: Australia, climate change, farmer, livestock agriculture, policy, Scotland

Weather Extremes Signal Need for Bold Action to Transform California Agriculture

November 15, 2011 by Ted Quaday Leave a Comment

It seems like not a day goes by without a report from somewhere in the world of an extreme weather event. A couple weeks ago an unusually early winter storm in New England dumped two feet of snow, cut power to millions, and caused death for some. Last week, Alaska’s Pacific Coast was slammed by a so-called “monster” storm that devastated coastal villages and threatened Nome with flooding and high winds. Last spring and summer, unusually powerful tornadoes wrecked destruction and death across wide sections of the Great Plains and South. An on-going drought in the Southwestern United States continues to threaten crops and livestock.

All this extreme weather can’t help but raise the specter of climate change as a primary cause. Quite simply, a warming atmosphere fueled by increasing greenhouse gas emissions is creating dangerous weather. Sadly, the news on the emissions front seems to be going from bad to worse. Last week the US Department of Energy reported that carbon emissions worldwide made their biggest annual increase ever in 2010. That report was followed by a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration report that it’s Annual Greenhouse Gas Index was also on the rise.

Looking at these distressing reports, the phrase that comes to mind is the Boy Scout motto “Be Prepared.” Be prepared for weirder, wackier, more extreme weather as we continue to load the atmosphere with carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and other greenhouse gases.

At the California Climate and Agriculture Network, we do a good bit of thinking about just exactly how we might prepare ourselves to face this on-going global crisis. Data analyzed in the report Ready… Or Not? tells a disturbing story — California farmers and ranchers will not escape climate change effects, and there are insufficient resources available help them cope.

A diminished Sierra snowpack will melt earlier, causing flooding in the spring and reducing water supplies over the summer. Scientists predict chill hours — the time fruit and nut trees need to spend in cooler temperatures to produce fruit — will decline dramatically over the next several decades. A drop in chill hours will threaten key California crops like nuts, grapes, stone fruit, avocadoes and some wine grape varietals.

State livestock producers, who generated $8 billion in revenues in 2009, will also face challenges. Water shortages will cut animal productivity. More livestock will die. Those that live will lose appetite, produce less milk and fewer eggs, and be less able to reproduce. None of this news is good.

California agriculture contributes $37 billion dollars annually to the state economy. Our farms and ranches are among the most productive on the planet. Clearly, we need to increase our efforts to slow and ultimately reverse this damage. We can’t afford to wait.

Concerns over the agricultural impact of climate change are gaining traction with state policy makers. The California State Board of Food and Agriculture will host a forum in mid-November to learn more about the risks our food producers face due to extreme weather events. In December, Governor Brown will host a conference on confronting climate change. We need to start now and we need bold action to help our food producers and the state’s agricultural economy meet the climate change threat.

Food producers are skilled at adapting to difficult circumstances, and the most innovative growers can lead the way to greater resilience. They know that healthy soil and expansive rangeland can trap carbon and slow climate change. They understand that on-farm water storage can help alleviate summer shortages. Crop diversity can reduce pest damage. Agricultural waste can be transformed into an energy resource.

But given the magnitude of the expected impacts of climate change, California’s farmers and ranchers will need more than individual actions if our agriculture system is to thrive in the coming decades. More research is needed to identify the best farming practices for adapting to climate change. More technical assistance is needed to help farmers make transitions. A state-level conservation program is needed to reward those farmers who adopt new, more resilient food production systems. CalCAN has detailed these and other suggested changes in a comprehensive set of policy recommendations to the Brown Administration.

Funds to support these initiatives could be provided by tapping a percentage of state revenue garnered through the sale of carbon allowances to the biggest CO₂ emitters. Strengthening support for on-farm conservation efforts is also crucial. On-going efforts to encourage renewable energy production through grant support and better policies and programs could reduce grower dependence on fossil fuels.

The challenges of extreme weather and climate change are daunting; the stakes for California’s food production system are high. Bold, innovative programs are needed now to help ensure a thriving farm economy.

Filed Under: California Policy, Climate & Ag Research, Impacts of Climate Change Tagged With: California agriculture, effects of climate change, policy, Weather

Southwest Drought Offers Key Lesson – Act Now to Reduce Drought Impacts

October 13, 2011 by Elena Idell Leave a Comment

AP Photo/Austin American Statesman, Jay Jenner

Several southwest states are in the midst of an epic drought that is causing billions of dollars in crop and livestock losses, rising food prices and uncertainty.

Climatologists predict that the current drought in the southwest could last up to 12 months or even continue into years to follow, posing deep challenges for the farmers and ranchers dependent on steady water supplies.

There are valuable lessons to be learned from our fellow southwest states, particularly Texas.

Drought losses for the agricultural industry in Texas are nearing $9 billion. Without adequate water to care for their livestock, cattle ranchers are culling herds and facing significant loss of profits and rising cattle prices.

The Lubbock area, the state’s main cotton production area, faces $2.3 billion in losses from the drought. Cotton farmers believe their industry will survive on irrigation, but cattle farmers will need a few years to recover from reduced herds.

The main lesson: Texas agriculture was not prepared for this extreme event. Because the Federal Emergency Management Agency does not consider a drought a disaster, farmers can only receive limited aid from the federal government, making it an even tougher situation to deal with in the short and long run.

The detrimental effects of this disastrous event demonstrate the need for Californians to become aware of the potential harms that a severe water shortage could pose for farmers, ranchers and the state’s food consumers. And as the saying goes – an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

The climate models for California suggest that our state will see more extreme weather events, like intensified floods and droughts, in this century.

According to the California’s Natural Resources Agency’s 2009 California Climate Adaption Strategy report, California will face various challenges because of changing precipitation patterns in the coming years and decades, among them reduced water supply from our main water source, the Sierra Snowpack, and growing competition between urban, agriculture and environmental water users.

We need to act now. California can take the lead in addressing these issues by providing resources for the state’s farmers and ranchers to use water stewardship practices on their operations that promote efficiency, groundwater recharge and conservation.

We also need to reinvigorate funding for the UC Cooperative Extension, which provides the backbone of technical assistance for the state’s farmers and ranchers on key concerns like water stewardship. But Cooperative Extension budget cuts have meant dramatic cuts to services at a time when the issues facing producers are more complex than ever.

Let’s learn some lessons from our southwest neighbors and take action by investing in water stewardship now – it’s good for farmers, eaters and our environment.

Filed Under: Impacts of Climate Change

What’s Up with Rising Food Prices?

August 2, 2011 by Adria Arko 3 Comments

It’s likely that the higher prices of your whole-grain bread haven’t gone unnoticed. According to the USDA Economic Research Service your weekly grocery basket of food is costing you about 4 to 5 percent more than it did this time last year. Even with these prices, compared to what food shoppers in other parts of the world are experiencing, we are getting off lucky.

According to a recent report by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) global food prices have risen 37 percent from mid-2010. What’s behind the steep rise in food prices? There are a number of different factors, but studies are showing that an important contributor to high food prices is climate change.

For the past several years, higher temperatures, a shift in seasons, more extreme weather events, including flooding and droughts, are hurting food production. The result of which is an unmet demand for food staples, resulting in higher food prices.

Many of the recent failed harvests around the world that have led to food shortages and higher prices were a result of weather disasters. This year, drought in China followed by devastating floods disrupted world wheat production. Last year, blistering heat waves in Europe and Russia led to fires that engulfed many agricultural fields and limited world food supplies. Many scientists believe that some of these intense weather events were caused or worsened by human-induced climate change.

A recently released study links human greenhouse gas emissions with extreme rainfall in the Northern Hemisphere. Extreme rain events can reduce yields and sometimes can ruin a whole harvest. This, of course, can impact the global food supply, driving up food prices.

Extreme rain events aren’t the only way that agriculture is being impacted by climate change. Harvests have been negatively impacted by rising temperatures. Researchers have recently compared crop yields to rising temperatures. The result? Lower yields. When corn experiences temperatures of 84 degrees and soy 86 degrees, yields can fall dramatically.

While beach-goers may be celebrating the warmer days, farmers are struggling to keep their production levels high, which may be reason to worry.

The issue of climate change and its impacts on agriculture has real consequences for food shoppers around the world and at home. Food prices are up. And with it comes greater instability, poverty and for many, thinner pocket books during already tough economic times.

That’s why California, as our leading agricultural state, must embrace a plan that leads us toward assisting agriculture in addressing climate change and its impacts. We need better research, technical experts to help in the fields and conservation-oriented programs to assist farmers in addressing what’s to come – less water, changes in weather patterns and new pests – to name a few.

Filed Under: Impacts of Climate Change Tagged With: food prices

Lessons Learned from California’s Most Recent Drought

July 17, 2011 by Adam Kotin 1 Comment

One thing can be said for certain about the 2007-2009 drought in California: it sure got a lot of attention. Both its natural severity and the complex set of political, economic, and social disputes yielded a drama of epic proportions that got people talking around the state and across the country.

But now that the dust has settled, the time has come to figure out what it all really meant, and how to prepare for when it happens again. Not surprisingly, the recent drought has enlivened the ages-old debate on water management in the state.

Two reports released in June, one from the Pacific Institute and one from the California Roundtable on Water and Food Supply, offer valuable insights and recommendations on how to reduce vulnerability and increase resiliency in the event of future droughts.

The Pacific Institute’s report claims to provide “the most comprehensive and updated information on the impacts of the 2007-2009 drought.” The authors crunched volumes of data on water and energy use, employment and poverty, crop insurance indemnities, precipitation, fisheries, and various other economic and political factors to guide their analysis.

Their overall conclusion is that while the drought certainly had some devastating impacts on agriculture, they were neither as severe nor as widespread as had been previously estimated. While the all-time high gross revenue for California farms was reached in the midst of the drought (in 2008), significant revenue declines were seen in some counties. The state’s overall harvested acreage, which has diminished annually for at least decade, actually slowed its decline during the drought. Some growers adopted effective and sustainable coping strategies, while others relied too heavily on groundwater pumping, according to the Pacific Institute.

The report recommends moving away from “crisis management” responses to drought, urging instead the adoption of “risk management and resilience frameworks.” These would necessitate increased water monitoring systems, vulnerability assessments, and support for anticipatory actions, such as on-farm adaptive strategies.

The Roundtable report brought together twenty-five diverse stakeholders. Though the report does not directly reference the 2007-2009 Drought, its recommendations push multi-stakeholder ‘water stewardship’ as the new management paradigm. Such a process aims to provide multiple co-benefits through water management, ensuring that all parties and regions are properly prepared to cope in the event of the next drought.

‘Water stewardship’ shifts the focus from broad-scale aggregate impacts and statewide strategies to local ecologies and economies. It reframes water debates around regional contexts, thereby recognizing the specific needs of each area.

Given the regional disparities in drought impacts highlighted by the Pacific Institute report, a regional water stewardship approach could also help identify the most vulnerable growers and develop consensus-based strategies to alleviate risk.

Although entirely different approaches were used in crafting the two reports, they both identify some common needs, including better data collection.

The Roundtable cites the need for a “stronger knowledge base,” stating, “a one-size-fits-all approach is impracticable and insufficient to address today’s challenges; a watershed-by-watershed approach is required to identify appropriate and effective management solutions.”

In other words, it is misguided and simplistic to simply call for reduced water consumption—we need to better understand the dynamics of withdrawal and groundwater recharge to make changes where they are most needed.

The Pacific Institute report cites the near-impossibility of accurate drought prediction, stating that expanded data collection would facilitate “informed response and planning” in face of uncertainty. It also cites CalCAN’s Ready…Or Not? report, which highlights the need for more research capacity given the specter of climate change.

But both reports stress that, perhaps even more important than data collection itself, is the capacity to distribute needed information to the public. The Roundtable calls for more “efficient and effective” systems of data dissemination that are available to decision-makers at all stakeholder levels. Most crucially, this would require more trained support staff for growers along with retention of existing (but dwindling) staff resources from agencies like UC Cooperative Extension and USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service.

Overall, the Roundtable’s recommendations revolve around one major principle: support for collaboration. All parties should work to encourage agricultural stakeholder participation within the Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) plans, which bridge political, jurisdictional, and watershed boundaries to craft “mutually beneficial solutions.” For multi-stakeholder processes to work at the local scale, growers need the institutional capacity, knowledge networks, and alignments in policy that are required to build a consensus view.

It’s no secret that agriculture is particularly vulnerable to the increased drought impacts expected in the years to come. Now is the time to put systems in place that will keep growers going strong, regardless of the challenges that lie ahead.

Filed Under: General Information, Impacts of Climate Change Tagged With: California agriculture, drought, water impacts