Agricultural Yields Already Suffering With Climate Change

We really haven't noticed it yet, but climate change is 
cutting into agricultural yields, and the problem will
keep worsening as the world warms. 

There aren't any big worldwide food shortages, at least not yet, due to climate change, but a new study suggests we are definitely heading in the wrong direction.  

According to Preventionweb.net:

"Global agricultural productivity has declined by about 21 percent in the last 60 years as a result of climate change - the equivalent of seven years' lost production - a study has found. 

The decrease was most pronounced in warm regions such as Africa (30 percent) and Latin America and the Caribbean (26 percent) according to research published in Nature Climate Change, which looked at data from 1961 to 2020."

The seeming disconnect behind what seems to be adequate food supply and lost production is explained this way:

"Ariel Ortiz-Bobea, professor of applied economics at Cornell University and lead author of the study, told SciDev.Net: 'These numbers don't mean that we are producing less than we did back in 1961 - we've actually produced more year after year. Instead, our study is saying that global agricultural productivity is almost 21 percent lower than it could have been in a world without climate change.'"

Improvements in productivity have helped keep up yields, but it's not translating to resilience to climate change. 

There are considerations that the study might not have entirely taken into account. Per Preventionweb.net:

"This research doesn't consider small-scale agriculture which persists in different parts of the world, like Africa and Latin America, probably because this type of production is usually not included in official records," said Carolina Greta-Sanchez of the Center of Atmospheric Sciences at the National Autonomous University of Mexico. 

Other research is similar to the one I described above. 

A June New Scientist article has this to say:

"Rising global temperatures are likely to cause deep losses to the world's most important crops - despite farmers' best efforts to adapt. A global analysis to crop yields suggests that, by the end of the century, each degree Celsius of warming will reduce the food available per person any about 121 kilocalories a day. 

Under a 3 degree Celsius scenario - roughly our current trajectory - 'that works out to giving up breakfast for everyone,' says Andrew Hultgren at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champagne."

The research cited in New Scientist said the six main global staple crops. They found that all crops except rice would suffer in a hotter world. (Rice crops like hotter nights) 

An example of the projected reduced crop yields with climate change is corn. Yields would fall by 12 to 28 percent by the end of the century, depending on whether greenhouse gasses rise moderately or very quickly. 

The number these researchers came up with take into account how farmers would adapt to hotter temperatures, and the fact crops might be fertilized a bit because of higher carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere.  

Shock Waves From Climate Change Is, Will Get Assist From Geopolitics

The war in Ukraine is one example of how climate change
doesn't work alone. Climate change, war, geopolitics and 
humanitarian crimes could combine to create
increasingly severe worldwide food crises

The war between Russia and Ukraine helps highlight how fragile the global food supply is, if you think about it. 

Scientists and many others are worried over how climate change is threatening, and will threaten global food supplies. Droughts, floods and temperatures extremes are already at least nibbling at the edges of our already fragile food supply.

Our enemy climate change doesn't work alone. It unfortunately has some powerful allies, including geopolitics, war and greed. The combination will contribute to starvation, migrant crises, displacement and political upheaval.  

At this point, Ukraine and Russia could be one example of how all this works.  

As PolticoEU explains:

"Russia's war in Ukraine has sent a shockwave through international food markets, worsening the already dire problem of global hunger by disrupting supply and inflating prices. The risks tipped the poorest, most famine-ravaged regions of the planet into political chaos and creating an unprecedented migration, according to David Beasley, the World Food Programme's executive director."

This week, a United Nations task force said the Ukraine war is "supercharging" a finance, food and energy crisis in poorer countries.  The war is another complication for these poorer nations already dealing with Covid-19, climate change and a lack of funding that could help fuel economic recoveries. 

The UN task force says 69 countries with an overall population of 1.2 billion are trying, and largely failing to overcome these three crises. 

 The PolitcoEU article doesn't mention climate change as a source of this potential global crisis. However, the publication points out that Russia and Ukraine are among the world's biggest exporters of grain, and the war will surely disrupt global distribution of these commodities. Half of Africa's grain comes form Ukraine and Russia. Both nations are major fertilizer exporters. 

For us in the rich west, that just means sticker shock when we run down to Walmart, or Kroger, or whatever your local grocery store is. 

Stable, major grain producers like China, the United States and Canada can pick up some of the slack, at least we hope. Drought or other extreme weather in these nations could always make things worse. (There's troubling signs of drought in the U.S. Great Plains, for instance). 

It won't be a case of no food at all. But shortages would increase global prices, and poorer nations won't be able to afford the commodities. 

World Food Programme's Executive Director, David Beasley, told Politico that billions of dollars must come in from richer nations and billionaires to avoid famine, destabilization and mass migration.

"If you think we've got hell on earth now, you just get ready.....If we neglect northern Africa, northern Africa's coming to Europe. If we neglect the Middle East, the Middle East is coming to Europe."

Which, among many other awful things, destabilizes Europe. And probably by extension, the United States. 

There's already a refugee crisis in Europe as Ukrainians flee the war.

And let's acknowledge the elephant in the room. Ukrainians are white. They obviously deserve all the help the world can give them.  The walking war crime that is Vladimir Putin has unleashed his horrors, and the West does need to counteract the suffering he has caused in any way we can. 

As you will recall, though, migrants from Africa and the Middle East don't get so big a reception when they arrive on Europe's shores.  There's a lot of reasons for that, and one of them might be race.  A new flood of migrants to Europe and possibly the United States would guarantee lots more political unrest. And contribute to authoritarianism.

Food shortages combined with political unrest can and does fuel migration from places like Africa

Authoritarians use migrants as bogeymen to consolidate their power, convincing their population that they are under assault from "them," all aiming to take away their jobs and their way of life. Never mind that the migrants just want to create a new life in which they're not starving, and can actually get ahead if they work hard enough. 

One possible way to reduce migration is that World Food Programme. They can't change hideous regimes that terrorize their citizens and force migration. But where food is a key issue, donations from rich countries can help. Whether the cause is climate change or some horrible dictator.

We now live in the new Gilded Age. I mean, let's check out the rich guys. 

Elon Musk's net worth at last count was $223 billion as of February. Jeff Bezos is worth $178 billion.

The rest of the top 10 richest people on Earth are worth a total of $923 billion, according to Investopedia.

True, many of these mega-billionaires do give away a fair amount of money. But honestly.

People who are innovative and make a lot of money because of that deserve to be rich.  Unlike what some on the right wing would say, pretty much nobody on the left side of politics wants to take all their money away.

True, some billionaires do give quite a lot of money away to worthwhile causes. But if you have over a $100 billion, and you gave away half that, even, you're still doing pretty damn well. Something like $50 billion can do an incredible amount of good.

I'm not suggesting we seize this wealth. I just think these billionaires should think a little more about the world around them.    

Climate change, political unrest, very bad players, worldwide criminals and the maldistribution of wealth aren't exactly easy to cure, especially when they're all combined into one big mess. But Ukraine is a reminder that climate change is bad enough. When you combine it with humankind's really bad record with geopolitics, it really does turn into an existential threat.