A brave new diet
The relationship between humans and food is sacred—what we choose to nourish our bodies with is shaped by our surroundings, our relationships, and decades of cultural influences. However, food production practices and the choices made by increasingly populous and affluent societies have contributed to unprecedented environmental degradation and climatic change. The future of food is more uncertain than ever.
Until recently, many assumed food production and the environment were getting along more or less amicably. By altering the environments in which food was produced—and even the food itself—billions of people attained the nourishment they needed. Those with enough to eat suddenly had options; luxuries such as meat, dairy, and exotic or out of season produce eventually transformed into “needs.”
Like most good things in life, increasing food production through intensifying agroecosystems came with a cost: the environment. Now, agriculture is one of the most significant causes of climate change, habitat degradation and loss, species extinction, resource issues, and pollution.
The solution does not lie in ending agricultural intensification or turning to organic agriculture. Fertilizers and pesticides, when used correctly, can maintain the integrity of the environment while enhancing yields and improving livelihoods. Organic systems produce less food at a higher cost to farmers, consumers, and even the environment.
Besides, there is no new arable land suitable for agriculture, unless significant ecosystems are sacrificed. The world’s population continues to grow. How will we feed nine billion mouths without losing the ecosystem services central to our survival?We can change what we eat.
The Western diet is one of the worst environmental offenders. It’s heavy on red meat, dairy, and processed foods, with minimal intake of fruits, veggies, whole grains, and legumes.
Red meat
Red meat is an incredibly inefficient source of calories. A report by the U.K.’s Institution of Mechanical Engineers determined that producing one kilogram of beef requires anywhere from 5,000 to 20,000 litres of water. An input of 20,000 calories of grain, such as corn, will produce 2,000 calories of beef; billions more people could be fed on less land if everyone ate less meat.
According to the Worldwatch Institute, meat production also contributes to climate change from increased methane emissions and energy consumption, habitat loss from pasture conversion, land erosion, and pollution.
[media-credit id=115 align=”aligncenter” width=”1020″]
Dairy and eggs
Dairy and egg production also contribute to the same issues as meat, though the end products are more calorie dense and therefore more energy efficient.
Fish and rice
The West is not the only offender. For instance, East and Southeast Asian diets also contain a large amount of meat, especially in more affluent areas. People also consume large amounts of fish and rice, which contribute to widespread ecosystem disruption, habitat loss, and water scarcity. Science Daily reports that methane emissions from rice also accelerate climate change.
Agricultural practices
Some would argue that agricultural and food production practices are the direct cause of the issue and, therefore, improving them would make the greatest impact, not changing what we eat. That is a perfectly logical statement; there is a lot of room for improved sustainability in agricultural practices. However, producers need to make money too and, if there is a huge demand for meat, dairy, and fish coming from affluent societies, production will have to keep up.
Food wastage and transport is another major issue that needs more attention, but meat spoiling in transit or in the fridge is worse than wasting plant-based foods.
The vegetarian diet
A 2016 study led by Christian J. Peters explored the carrying capacity of agricultural land in the U.S. and found that the optimum diet from an environmental perspective is either a vegetarian diet that includes dairy and/or eggs, or an omnivorous diet that is 60 to 80 per cent vegetarian with 20 per cent of meals containing meat.
The study found the vegetarian diet optimal as the largest amount of people can be fed on the least amount of land; grazing lands, perennial croplands, and cultivated croplands are all used effectively. This is because some land simply can’t support crops or cereals; the grass that grows in infertile soils can be fed to livestock. Eating nutrient-rich animal byproducts, such as milk, cheese and yogurt is much more sustainable than consuming lots of beef.
[media-credit id=115 align=”aligncenter” width=”1020″]
The vegan diet
Researchers also found that vegan diets would feed a lot less people than the vegetarian and slightly omnivorous diets, since vegan staple foods such as nuts and some vegetables require a ton of water to grow. The lack of animal byproducts in a vegan diet also means that land that could be used to graze livestock would go to waste, or require a lot of chemical and water inputs to grow food crops.
Alternatives to meat protein
Arguments for eating meat often stem from the idea that animal protein is the only “true” source of protein. However, here is a wide range of vegetarian foods containing complete proteins: whole grains, seeds, legumes, mushrooms, dairy, and eggs. Plus, eating more veggies and alternatives can open up a world of culinary possibilities.
Switching to diets low in meat and high in alternative protein sources is the best option for ensuring a sustainable food future at the individual level while agricultural practices and technology continue to improve.
Photo by Mariah Bridgeman/The Ontarion.