Squandering Australia’s food security—The environmental and economic costs of our unhealthy diet and the policy Path We’re On
Introduction
Food security is recognised as a significant global problem and considerable research has focussed on addressing the question of how to produce enough food to feed a growing population with finite resources and also mitigate and adapt to climate change (Cassidy et al., 2013, Godfray et al., 2010a, Smith et al., 2013). Australia is currently considered to be food secure—domestic production of most major food groups equals or exceeds domestic consumption; Australian farmers produce the equivalent of 90% of daily domestic food supply and export enough to feed an additional 40 million people (DAFF, 2013).
Global concern around the future of food is intensifying (Coates, 2013, FAO, 2015a, IPRI, 2015, Lawrence et al., 2013, Millar and Roots, 2012), with evidence mounting of the impacts of climate change, water scarcity and energy costs (for example) on food production, alongside continued urbanisation and degradation of agricultural land (Cadilhac et al., 2011b, Ceccarelli et al., 2010). Increasing incidences of ‘food shocks’ are occurring as declining energy stocks and fiscal measures and political or trade agreements reduce access to food or viability of farming for significant global populations (Anon, 2006, Suweis et al., 2015). These and other factors are driving civil disturbance and unrest worldwide, with the largest movements of migrants and refugees since World War II. This may be just the beginning, with the real impacts of climate, water, food and economic destabilisation still to come (ABS, 2006, Suweis et al., 2015). While some nations, like China and the United Arab Emirates, have clear intentions and actions underway to secure future food supplies for their populations, many others—like Australia—have an assumed ongoing surplus and a strong faith in the market economy to secure any additional stocks required. Further, the common political narrative (Commonwealth of Australia, 2015a) sees Australia’s economic future continuing to come from the land and its resources on which it has long depended.
However, increasing population, resource constraints (land, water, energy, fertilisers), climate change impacts and growing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have implications for future Australian food security, with evident global repercussions. Although Australia’s land area is substantial, only 6% is arable land suitable for intensive soil-based agriculture such as cropping and sown pasture (ABARES, 2010). Most of this arable land is located on the coastal fringe of the continent, coinciding with major urban centres and fossil fuel deposits. Since population increases are occurring mainly in urban areas (ABS, 2013a), their expansion (ABS, 2008) often displaces highly productive agricultural areas (Carey et al., 2016b). Yields per hectare in Australia are also diminishing due to various degradation processes (National Land and Water Resources Audit, 2001, PMSEIC, 2010). This will intensify current dependence on imported and limited fossil fuel based fertilisers, making food production increasingly vulnerable to shocks and stresses in the global economy.
The productivity of dry-land farming—which constitutes the majority of the Australian agricultural sector—is likely to be negatively impacted by climate change (Gunasekera et al., 2007). Increasing temperatures due to climate change will increase heat stress on crops and livestock, decreasing productivity. At the same time, increased evaporation due to warmer conditions and potential increased water demand from the mining and energy sector will reduce water availability for irrigation on an already arid continent. Mitigation measures for climate change may also put further pressure on agricultural land availability if the transfer of land from agriculture to forestry to offset emissions or sequester carbon becomes necessary (Keating and Carberry, 2010). Due to these pressures, tensions between food supply and demand are likely to occur, with implications for future food security (Ramsey and Gallegos, 2011).
The critical issue of food production is only one aspect of food security, which also entails issues of access, utilisation and affordability (Farmar-Bowers et al., 2012). A coherent understanding of these issues requires a ‘food systems approach’ (Ingram, 2011), in which food system activities (namely production, processing, packaging/distribution and consumption) mediate the bidirectional relationship between environmental resources and public health nutrition status (Lawrence et al., 2015). Greenhouse gas emissions, resource intensity and health concerns associated with the prevalence of meat-based diets, now increasing significantly in developing countries, is a case in point (Friel, 2010a). Unfortunately there is a general lack of research and scenarios exploring these wider issues underpinning food security (Ericksen et al., 2009).
Instead, a narrow ‘production-volumes’ perspective is common, illustrated by recent Australian government research and reports. Scenario modelling employed by the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (ABARES) “…to investigate the possible response of world food prices, food production and trade to the projected increase in demand” concluded that increases in agricultural productivity and trade liberalisation were required (Linehan et al., 2013). Although environmental outcomes were considered, the ABARES research focused heavily on the economic value of food production and trade. The most recent Agriculture Productivity Report (Commonwealth of Australia, 2015a) promotes an economically competitive production system with sparse consideration of climate change, future resource constraints or other food system challenges. The narrow perspective overlooks the economic value of a production system that promotes healthy diets. Similarly, the National Food Plan (DAFF, 2013) was founded on expansion of production, without adequate consideration of the impact of this on the health of the nation. A simplistic focus on efficiency is also evident internationally in the FAO-UNEP Sustainable Food Systems Programme (FAO, 2015b).
This contrasts with concerns that neo-liberal productivist approaches are proving incapable of guaranteeing national food security. Earlier scenario modelling provided insights on this, identifying tensions between the food required for a healthy diet for Australia’s growing population and that which could be produced using traditional broad-acre agricultural methods (Larsen et al., 2011, Turner et al., 2012). This work was mainly focused on the state of Victoria, and explored the implications of three scenarios that diverged from the current state, substantially in some cases. No scenario achieved comprehensive food security – scenarios resulted in either significant imports of key foods, environmental deficits or economic problems.
This earlier research did not quantify health implications associated with the current unhealthy diet (inconsistent with the recommended number and type of food group serves for population groups as specified in the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating (reference) and the health and economic benefits of shifting to a diet consistent with the Australian Dietary Guideline recommendations. In Australia, the majority of the population are not consuming the recommended number of serves for each of the five nutritious food groups while consuming 35% (adults) and 39% (children) of energy from non-essential ‘discretionary foods’ (ABS, 2014). In addition, excessive dietary energy intake has resulted in 63% of adults and 25% of children being overweight or obese (ABS, 2013b). These dietary imbalances and excesses are linked to a wide range of non-communicable diseases which are a leading cause of death and disability in Australia. Dietary risk factors are now the leading contributors to the burden of disease in Australia contributing to over 500,000 Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) and approximately 36,000 deaths annually (Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, 2015b, Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, 2015c). Since 1990, high body-mass index (BMI) has overtaken smoking and is now the second highest ranking risk factor for disease burden, resulting in over 400,000 DALYs and over 18,000 deaths annually. Currently, over 18% of the total burden of disease in Australia is attributable to these two preventable risk factors, namely poor diet and high BMI. (Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, 2015a). In addition to the health impact of these modifiable risk factors, there is also a significant economic impact on society as a result of lost productivity and health care costs.
In this paper, we improve on earlier food security analysis by modelling the food system with a national coverage and incorporating economic costs of the current unhealthy diet. Our analysis also differs from earlier scenario modelling that was based on divergent scenarios; here, we explore near-term environmental and economic ramifications of ‘The Path We’re On’, incorporating substantial detail on contemporary policy positions and resource exploitation trends, including heavy reliance on fossil fuel use and mineral exports. An analysis of the current Australian diet completes the scenario, thereby enabling an assessment of the Australian food system’s ability to meet current demands.
We first outline the components of our analytic approach, which involves inter-disciplinary scenario modelling, and subsequently summarise the assumptions and settings of ‘The Path We’re On’ scenario. While the scenario settings focus specifically on the 10-year period to 2025, the results section typically presents simulation outcomes to 2040 in order to highlight impending environmental, resource and economic issues. We discuss the interpretation of our results, including factors such as sensitivity and reliability, and then present our conclusions – that Australia’s food system is insecure when viewed in a whole-of-economy perspective.
Section snippets
Inter-disciplinary scenario modelling approach
Food systems are complex socio-ecological entities (Lawrence and Worsley, 2007). Patterns of consumption influence, and are influenced by, health, economic and environmental factors. Analysing food systems requires a coherent assessment of the interactions between these factors, and an awareness and incorporation of factors and patterns that cannot necessarily be forecast from historical trends.
Scenario analysis, and later scenario modelling, have long been used by government planners,
Simulation outcomes for The Path We’re On
Since the foundations for food security and economic activity are our natural resources (healthy soils, clean water, stable climate, good-grade minerals, biodiversity) (Lawrence et al., 2015), we present indicators for these first. Subsequently, food balance accounts are provided, which essentially indicate a proximate measure of food security in terms of Australia’s dependence on imports. This leads into a consideration of economic outcomes, first at the macro level (e.g., GDP and debt), and
Discussion
Our inter-disciplinary analysis of Australian food security avoids the usual pitfall of presenting the implications of unhealthy diet in solely health terms by situating diet within a comprehensive account of economic and environmental assessments. The coverage of our analysis provides finer detail on health costs, coupled to a broad strategic view of environmental and food security measures. This depth and breadth is intended as the basis for developing policy options for addressing food
Conclusions
This modelling has revealed serious tensions in Australia’s desired energy use, land use, food production and population health that will emerge by 2025 and subsequent years. Overall, the environmental, economic and food security outcomes of The Path We’re On scenario are challenging. Australia becomes substantially reliant on imports before 2040 for many nutritious food types, particularly nuts, fish and dairy. This situation occurs in the context of the current diet in which the consumption
Acknowledgements
Lawrence, Ryan, Friel, Turner, Larsen, Ogilvy, Moodie, Candy, James and Ananthapavan are researchers within an Australian Research Council Linkage Project, ‘Modelling policy interventions to protect Australia’s food security in the face of environmental sustainability challenges’ (LP120100168). Lawrence, Moodie and Ananthapavan are researchers within a NHMRC Centre for Research Excellence in Obesity Policy and Food Systems (APP1041020). Turner was a Senior Research Fellow in the Melbourne
References (113)
- et al.
Integrating climate change and health into food policy: an analysis of how climate change can affect food prices and population health
Food Policy
(2013) Build it back better: deconstructing food security for improved measurement and action
Glob. Food Secur.
(2013)- et al.
Food security and global environmental change: emerging challenges
Environ. Sci. Policy
(2009) - et al.
The design approach to socio-economic modelling
Futures
(1987) - et al.
Healthy and environmentally sustainable food choices: consumer responses to point-of-purchase actions
Food Qual. Prefer
(2017) - et al.
Shrinking the food-print: a qualitative study into consumer perceptions, experiences and attitudes towards healthy and environmentally friendly food behaviours
Appetite
(2017) - et al.
A healthy diet consistent with Australian health recommendations is too expensive for welfare-dependent families
Aust. N. Z. J. Public Health
(2009) - et al.
Food security in Australia in an era of neoliberalism, productivism and climate change
J. Rural Stud.
(2013) - et al.
A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease and injury attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21 regions, 1990-2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010
The Lancet
(2012) - et al.
Effects of climate change on global food production under SRES emissions and socio-economic scenarios
Glob. Environ. Change
(2004)
Land Use in Australia at a Glance 2006. Australian Collaborative Land Use and Management Program (ACLUMP)
1301.0-Year Book Australia, 2006-The Australian Wheat Industry %U
4613.0-Australia’s Environment: Issues and Trends, 2007 %U
3218.0-Regional Population Growth, Australia, 2011-12 %U
4364.0.55.003-Australian Health Survey: Updated Results, 2011-12
Australian Health Survey: Nutrition First Results – Food and Nutrients, 2011-12
The impact of food prices on consumption: a systematic review of research on the price elasticity of demand for food
Am. J. Public Health
Measures for Improving the Environmental Sustainability of Building Materials - Scoping Study to Investigate Measures for Improving the Environmental Sustainability of Building Materials
The impact of temperature variability on wheat yields
Glob. Change Biol.
Allocated health expenditure 2008-09
Historical Calibration of a Water Accounting System
Friction-cost method as an alternative to the human-capital approach in calculating indirect costs
Pharmacoeconomics
Labelling Logic: Review of Food Labelling Law and Policy
2014 Australian Energy Update
Australian Energy Projections to 2049-50
The Evolution of Australian Towns
The economic benefits of reducing physical inactivity: an Australian example
Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act.
The Heath and Economic Benefits of Reducing Disease Risk Factors VicHealth
The societal benefits of reducing six behavioural risk factors: an economic modelling study from Australia
BMC Public Health
The health and economic benefits of reducing intimate partner violence: an Australian example
BMC Public Health
Modelling food system resilience: a scenario-based simulation modelling approach to explore future shocks and adaptations in the Australian food system
J. Environ. Stud. Sci.
Redefining agricultural yields: from tonnes to people nourished per hectare
Environ. Res. Lett.
Opportunities and challenges in developing a whole-of-government national food and nutrition policy: lessons from Australia’s National Food Plan
Public Health Nutr.
Melbourne’s Food Future: Planning a Resilient City Foodbowl
Plant breeding and climate changes
J. Agric. Sci.
Australia’s Unconventional Energy Options
Trends in the cost of a healthy food basket and fruit and vegetable availability in New South Wales, Australia, between 2006 and 2009
Nutr. Dietetics
The economic contest between coal seam gas mining and agriculture on prime farmland: it may Be closer than we thought
J. Econ. Soc. Policy
Agricultural Competitiveness White Paper - Stronger Farmer, Stronger Economy
Intergenerational Report. The Treasury
The Emissions Reduction Fund—what it Means for You
The Renewable Energy Target (RET) Scheme
Austrade
Australian Dairy Industry in Focus 2013
National Food Plan: Our Food Future
Watermark Coal Project-the Facts
Symposium on ’Intervention policies for deprived households’ Policy initiatives to address low-income households’ nutritional needs in the UK
Proc. Nutr. Soc.
Climate change adaptation at the intersection of food and health
Asia Pac J. Public Health
What is the vulnerability of a food system to global environmental Change ?
Ecol. Soc.
Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security in Asia and the Pacific
Cited by (13)
Environmental assessment of diets: overview and guidance on indicator choice
2024, The Lancet Planetary HealthSustainable, resilient food systems for healthy diets: The transformation agenda
2019, Public Health NutritionLighting Up Agricultural Sustainability in the New Era through Nanozymology: An Overview of Classifications and Their Agricultural Applications
2022, Journal of Agricultural and Food ChemistryIdentifying trends over time in food affordability: The Illawarra Healthy Food Basket survey, 2011-2019
2022, Health Promotion Journal of AustraliaA Rapid Review of the Environmental Impacts Associated with Food Consumption in Australia and New Zealand
2021, Current Nutrition ReportsCan Australia transition to an agroecological future?
2021, Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems