by Marielena Herbst de Cortina | Jun 10, 2024 | Blog
Even if we entirely stopped burning fossil fuels today, emissions from our “business as usual” food system would push average global temperature rise over 1.5°C by 2100. However, a recent study projected that we have a chance of staying below the 2°C threshold—and maybe even below the 1.5°C threshold—if we globally mitigate impacts from production methods, diet, and food waste. In my three-part series on our food system, I dive into each of these mitigation areas—from farm to table to trash.
Farm
Food production alone accounts for 26% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.To simply produce less food is not an option—the global population is expected to reach 9.8 billion in 2050 and 11.2 billion in 2100. Expanding agricultural lands is not a viable solution either. Not only is land a limited resource—around 40% of the planet’s surfaceand 50% of its habitable land are dedicated to agriculture already—but also land clearing is one of the most significant sources of agricultural emissions. With these challenges in mind, decarbonizing our agricultural system will require technological and human solutions. I’ll focus on two opportunities to reduce impact by combining scientific advancement and operational shifts.
Solution #1 Change our production processes to use agricultural inputs more efficiently
There are currently large discrepancies between potential and actual crop yields, called “yield gaps.” Global food production could more than double if we closed yields gap by 75% to 90%. Crop yields increase through improved farming methods that work synergistically with the natural environment, or “agroecological practices.” Planting nitrogen-fixing crops during fallow periods, rotating crops rather than practicing monoculture, and employing integrated pest management—where pesticides are applied sparingly and in addition to mechanical pest control methods—have been shown to increase crop yields.
Solution #2: Optimize fertilizer application
Applying fertilizer consciously when plants most demand nutrients reduces use without negatively impacting yields. Fertilizer production is one of the most GHG intensive elements of farming, and its application is spatially and temporally mismanaged. Fertilizers are under used in many economically developing nations where they are difficult or expensive to procure and overused in other parts of the world. Increasing access in underserved regions, particularly to lower-impact fertilizers, could go far in closing yield gaps. At the same time, producing more food in a given area through the responsible use of fertilizers decreases the need for further land clearing and thus avoids the climate impacts associated with land use change.
It will take a concerted global effort and widespread adoption of improved farming methods to capture the potential benefits of these solutions. Like so many societal issues, reducing our agricultural carbon footprint will involve breaking down systemic barriers. But if you’re not a farmer or a policymaker, how can you make a difference? In my next blog, I’ll cover dietary climate impact and how we can mitigate our individual footprints.
by Marielena Herbst de Cortina | Jul 13, 2023 | Blog
Urban greening projects are well-intentioned. City leaders build parks, trails, and playing fields to cut pollution, reduce flooding, offer shade during heatwaves, and encourage healthier lifestyles. But urban greening also leads to “green gentrification.” Property prices soar and the people the projects are designed to help get displaced.
A park built on an elevated rail line in Manhattan drove nearby home prices 35%[1] higher than those for similar homes less than a mile away. Rents rose too, jumping 68% within four years of building the park. As a result, long-term, low-income communities were priced out.[2] A similar project along a railway corridor in Atlanta also caused displacement. As the project got press, housing prices rose significantly compared to homes further from the park[3].
But it doesn’t have to be this way. With the federal government’s recent announcement of $1 billion in funding for urban greening projects[4], it’s time to think about how to do things differently. Proper planning and community involvement can increase green spaces without gentrification. Green gentrification prevention researchers recommend meaningfully involving local communities and pairing urban greening projects with anti-displacement measures, such as rent control policies, property tax freezes, and commitments to build low-income housing[5].
In Washington, D.C., residents were initially opposed to the 11th Street Bridge Park project due to the possibility of displacement and gentrification. Hearing their concerns, the non-profit behind the park worked with community members to establish an equitable development plan that includes down payment assistance and provisions for affordable housing. The plan also includes a commitment to hire residents from the neighboring communities for roles in building and maintaining the park[6].
Building anti-displacement policy into greening projects directly prevents green gentrification, while a “just green enough” strategy provides the recreational and environmental benefits of a park without making it prone to gentrification[7]. In Brooklyn, community activists worked closely with city officials to develop the Newtown Creek Nature Walk along the banks of a Superfund-designated creek. The park isn’t fully greened – it’s mostly gravel with a few trees and bushes – but it meets the needs of the community.
With our climate crisis becoming more apparent each day, urban greening can be a crucial mechanism for furthering localized social and environmental justice. If this important cause speaks to you, encourage your lawmakers to implement greening projects with meaningful protections for the most vulnerable members of your community.
[1] Black and Richards, 2020. Eco-gentrification and who benefits from urban green amenities.
[2] Wolch, Byrne, and Newell, 2014. Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: The challenge of making cities ‘just green enough.’
[3] Immergluck, 2007. The Beltline and Rising Home Prices: Residential Appreciation Near the Beltline Tax Allocation District and Policy Recommendations to Minimize Displacement.
[4] USDA, 2023. Biden-Harris Administration Announces Historic Funding to Expand Access to Trees and Green Spaces in Disadvantaged Urban Communities.
[5] Rigolon and Christensen, n.d. Greening without Gentrification: Learning from Parks-Related Anti-Displacement Strategies Nationwide.
[6] Ramirez, 2020. Building Bridges.
[7] Sheikh, 2016. An alternative to parks that gentrify.
