Speaker 0:
joining me. Now, in this exclusive interview for the E s G virtual conference, I'm joined by Peter Alwin, head of the Food and Land Use Programme at Planet Tracker. Today, we will be discussing the road map for transforming the global food system. Welcome, Peter.

Speaker 1:
Hi. Thanks, Chloe. Great to be with you.

Speaker 0:
So, Peter, take us through what Planet tracker is. And how does it relate to E S G investing?

Speaker 1:
Yeah. So Planet Tracker is a nonprofit think tank, uh, focused on the financial markets. Um, so we're funded by philanthropy organisations, and what we're aiming to do is to use the financial markets and, uh, financial institutions as a lever to create change in the underlying systems that we're focused on. We look at food systems, including oceans and aquaculture, and we also

Speaker 1:
look at materials, uh, transformation as well, in terms of textiles and plastics. Uh, and then we have a programme looking at influences, too, including the advertising agencies. But in all of those things, we're always coming at it from a financial markets focus thinking about how financial markets and financial institutions allocate their capital and the policies that they have when they're engaging with the companies and the underlying systems. So what is the

Speaker 0:
framework, then? Peter? That planet tracker provides in the analysis of E S G factors of large Corporates.

Speaker 1:
So the, um, the analysis of large Corporates sort of varies really depending upon the system, uh, that we're looking at. So you mentioned that the financial markets road map that we just created So that's a a guide for financial institutions setting out a framework that they can use when they

Speaker 1:
are seeking to engage with the global food system, whether that be the upstream end, in terms of maybe lending money to to farmers, to food producers or, indeed, the downstream end. If you're thinking about food retailers and the food service companies where actually equity investment shareholder involvement is is much more important.

Speaker 1:
But the, uh, the frameworks that financial institutions need to use will will vary to be honest, depending upon which part of the system they're looking at. So we don't provide them with one sort of, uh, one framework, one universal, uh, ring to rule them all as it were. Um, we give them, uh, guidance and support and the sort of, uh, intellectual uh, um, sort of firepower. If you like to really engage with companies where those companies are and and whatever the business that the companies are doing actually is.

Speaker 0:
So then how would it then relate to the United Nations S D G. S? Um, these this firepower that you talk

Speaker 1:
of? Yes, Well, that's a good question. Um, so the the challenge for financial institutions, you know, the S D. G s are are are wonderful sort of ambitions. They provide a A really good but very broad framework. And so something like, you know, zero hunger, for example, um is is a a fantastic ambition

Speaker 1:
but extremely difficult, really. For financial institutions to actually engage with practically when they're talking to a particular company because there's no there's no single company in the food system that can actually achieve zero hunger on its own. It's a systemic issue, and it requires systemic solutions.

Speaker 1:
But the advantage that financial institutions have is because they're looking at life from a portfolio perspective. Whether that be a a lending portfolio or indeed, an equity shareholder portfolio or, of course, bonds as well is they're looking at the system in the round they're investing in consumer goods companies. They're investing in food producing companies. They're investing in companies that handle the waste and the packaging. So they're actually exposed to the whole

Speaker 1:
system. So they do have an ability to influence the whole system, but not through a particular company. And that's why our our road map is very focused on, um, providing them with a with a proper framework for really thinking about how to actually change the food system and also the risks to them. If if they continue to support business as usual and ignore the, uh, the the changes that are coming down the track,

Speaker 0:
why then, is there an inefficiency in the global food system? And what are the general themes surrounding its transition?

Speaker 1:
Yeah, the the food system, as you say is, is massively inefficient. I mean, you know, to be honest, if any other business system operated this way, it would have changed many years prior. Something like a third of the sort of the protein, the calories that start their journey at the beginning of the food system, fail to actually make it into the, uh into the mouths of the people they're intended to feed. So it's wasting about a third of of the sort of the food in the system, which is an extra extraordinary level of waste.

Speaker 1:
Now that equates, of course, to a massive cost and therefore a loss of profit and a loss of of financial reward to investing institutions. So it's certainly something that should be, um, a real concern. And I think there's a growing trend now for, uh, companies in the food system and therefore also for food. Uh, for financial institutions investing in the food system to really begin to think about, um, that that waste in the system and to seek ways to make it more more efficient

Speaker 1:
that gaining getting that efficiency is is not simple again. It's a It's a whole supply chain issue, Um, and there are a variety of measures that financial institutions can support. There are measures around packaging that obviously has consequences in terms of our use of plastics. So there's a there's more thought and technology and innovation required there. There are also, um, issues around transport, and particularly refrigeration and other sorts of interventions that can really help.

Speaker 1:
And then, of course, there's the consumer angle as well in terms of how food retailers and, uh, and food service companies actually interact with their customers and what they're persuading them to do, how they're educating them around their products and how they're really helping them to be more efficient as well. So how is

Speaker 0:
climate change and the demographics surrounding population growth globally shaping the future of agriculture and food production?

Speaker 1:
Climate change is really significant for food production. It's ironic, because the food system as a whole is responsible for something like a third of our G H G footprint comes from sort of food related activities so

Speaker 1:
need to control and significantly reduce the G H g s that are being generated by the food system, including methane. For example, um, from industrial meat production. Um, so the food system is a serious part of the of the problem if you like.

Speaker 1:
It also has a massive potential to be a significant part of the solution as well, and it really needs to be because at the moment, climate change is having a very negative impact on the food system as the oceans warm. That has an impact on on fishing and fish stocks and it obviously has a very negative

Speaker 1:
it impact, uh, on crop yields as well. Uh, and then the climate volatility that is coming from climate change in terms of sort of, you know, unexpected heat waves, sudden flooding, shocks of rainfall and and all of these different things just makes farming and food production much more difficult and much riskier. Which of course, means it's much more expensive to to fund. So climate is having a really negative effect on the food system,

Speaker 1:
and and you mentioned population growth, which is which is definitely something people are very cognizant of. You know, the population forecast to be somewhere in the region of 10 billion by 2050. But I think the key thing is the food system at the moment, uh, generates more than enough food for the world's population, Um, and is likely to continue doing that particularly if we focus on things like waste reduction, more efficient ways of of actually producing

Speaker 1:
food. We have every ability to continue to feed a growing population. A population is much bigger than than it is at the moment. The challenge really, uh, for feeding the world is less about quantity, and it's more about quality and then particularly distribution. At the moment, we are failing to get food to

Speaker 1:
the right people at the right time, in the right quantities and the right types of food. So we're getting too much bad food to people in the global North, and we're getting too little food, uh, to many people in the Global South. So that's really the challenge. It's not the number of people. It's actually the way the food system is functioning,

Speaker 0:
Peter. So I want to get an understanding of what 30 by 30 is. And how does it relate to Global, the global biodiversity framework? And how does this relate to the land available for agricultural

Speaker 1:
use? Yeah, that's a good question. So 30 by 30 in very simple terms is the ambition to have 30% of land and ocean resources set aside as effectively biodiversity reserves. So set aside as a as a as a

Speaker 1:
block of land or block of oceans to actually ensure, uh, the survivability and indeed the thriving of a multitude of species. And we know that we need to do that because biodiversity is absolutely crucial, obviously, to our food system, but actually to the whole economy. If we if we destroy the biodiversity of our planet, then humanity's future, uh, is unlikely to be good. So biodiversity is very important. 30 by 30 is designed as a simple framework to achieve that.

Speaker 1:
But your point is a good one. Because obviously, if you are setting aside land with the intention of enhancing biodiversity, then potentially that pre presents challenges. Um, from a food production process, uh, perspective, but

Speaker 1:
that slightly false way of thinking about things, if you like. At the moment we're very focused on a sort of an industrial food production process that simply says, you know, land land is the is the platform on which we grow food. We have to grow as much food and extract as much goodness out of that land in the shortest possible time as we possibly can.

Speaker 1:
That's an extractive and a destructive model. If you had a car manufacturing plant where every time you produced a car, you also sliced off a chunk of your production line. Uh, your your factory would soon go out of business, and that's effectively what we're doing with the food system. The the global food system is eating itself, it is destroying its natural capital base, on which it obviously depends.

Speaker 1:
If we can turn that around and have a regenerative food system where soil health is actually improved, that means the land becomes more productive over time, not less. That means it's actually absorbing carbon, not giving it off. So it becomes part of the climate solution, and it enhances biodiversity at the same time. Which means the whole system becomes a lot more resilient. If we can achieve those sorts of changes, then actually

Speaker 1:
part of the 30 by 30 well, the 30% is being set aside. Some of that will still be available for food production because we will be doing food production in a way that enhances nature. So we're not necessarily losing that land to food production,

Speaker 1:
and in fact, then the rest of the land that is still available for sort of If you like unconstrained food production because of the way we will be using it, it will actually be producing more food from less land. Um, so we can very easily meet both our 30 by 30 ambition and also, um, our desire and our need to continue to produce a lot of food for the world's population. Absolutely.

Speaker 0:
So, Peter, I want to get a good understanding of what innovation has come to the fore with regards to optimising, um, the food production system and the supply chain and ultimately optimising the amount of food that reaches, um, consumers.

Speaker 1:
Well, really, there are. There are an enormous number of different innovations, I guess. You know, we had in the sort of fifties and sixties what's often referred to as the Green Revolution, Um, which was essentially saying we can use chemicals to sort of extract more, more value and more food from the land. Um, it's quite clear that that was a very short term solution in terms of sort of planetary time frames,

Speaker 1:
at least. And actually what we need to switch to now is much more, uh, regenerative, much more holistic processes. And there's a lot going on, uh, in that field. If you look at the annual reports of many of the really big food food sort of manufacturing companies, nestle the knows Unilever of of the world and many others, um, they are really beginning to talk a lot more about regenerative agriculture.

Speaker 1:
Now the term itself is a little bit controversial because it's, um,

Speaker 1:
it's a bit woolly. It's a bit ill defined, so it's very easy to sort of, uh, lay lay yourself open to accusations of green washing. But at its heart, the concept of regenerative agriculture is that the the soil, the land is in a better state of health at the end of the production process than it was at the start. And that's one of the key innovations coming through now, sort of 11 extreme of that, if you like is, is organic farming where you've got no chemical inputs at all, Um, and very strict sort of standards around how you actually farm.

Speaker 1:
You can do regenerative agriculture without going sort of quite to, uh, to that end of the spectrum, Um, but you're definitely looking to make sure that the soil health, uh, of your land is improving. That's a key, um, a a key technological advance, if you like.

Speaker 1:
And then there are many other, much more sort of techie technological advances as well. So you know the use of drones, the use of sort of, you know, robot weeding equipment and and real precision farming. We actually identifying which particular plant has A

Speaker 1:
you know, is less healthy. And therefore you can apply treatment just to that particular plant rather than sort of carpet bombing the whole field, Uh, with chemicals that saves nature because you're just applying the sort of chemicals where you need to. It also massively saves cost as well from a farming perspective, because you're literally using sort of, you know, millilitres, uh, of chemical rather than,

Speaker 1:
um, litres and litres or gallons and gallons. Um, and then we've got the whole food production process. So lab grown meat and using plant based, uh, foods as an alternative to meat based foods.

Speaker 1:
All of those technological advances are really, really important. I mean, the the plant based one, just as a simple example. We use at the moment something like 80% of our available land to produce 20% of protein when it goes through the sort of the meat track that's incredibly inefficient.

Speaker 1:
So we're using 20% of the land to grow plants, which are then eaten directly by humans, and that produces 80% of our protein. So you can see that just a small shift. Not everybody going vegan, but literally. A tiny tiny shift by the world's population towards more of a plant based diet would would massively free up, uh, a huge amount of land for other things, including, as you were saying earlier, 30 by 30.

Speaker 0:
So Peter to close off the session. What is the ultimate objective and outlook for the food transition road map?

Speaker 1:
Ultimately, we want a food system, which is resilient so it will withstand the the climate change that is inevitably coming down the track. Unfortunately, so it needs to be resilient. It needs to be efficient in terms of using the resources that we have available, uh, to produce more food using, uh, less fewer resources. So fewer chemical inputs, fewer sort of smaller amount of land. Um and, um,

Speaker 1:
just generating much more protein, actually getting it into the hands and the mouths of the people who need it, and it needs to be much more effective. It needs to actually distribute food, uh, in a much more equitable and effective way. And it needs to be good food food, which is actually healthy, uh, for the human beings who are consuming it. Whereas, uh, too much of our food at the moment actually is not healthy for the

Speaker 1:
human body. So that's the ultimate aim that that we want for the food system. And if we get that, it then becomes, um, a solution to the climate problem. Um, we've set out a number of actions in our road map that actually show the food system itself. You could reduce its carbon footprint by up to 60% 60. So that's a massive reduction. And it becomes a huge source of improved biodiversity and therefore support for our nature ambitions as well.

Speaker 0:
Peter, thank you very much for sharing your insights into transforming the global food system. We appreciate your time.

Speaker 1:
That's my pleasure. Chloe. It's been, er, fantastic to spend time with you, and, uh, we'd be great. People want to read more of a road map, get in touch with us. We'd love to talk about it.