Climate change and its real consequences cannot be addressed without recognising the central role of the industrial, globalised food system both in contributing to and perpetuating the climate crisis, and in creating vulnerabilities in global agri-food systems. The industrial agricultural system is characterised by the use of hybrid or GM commercial seeds, the cultivation of monocultures relying on fossil fuel-based chemical inputs, intensive livestock farming, and changes in land use that cause problems such as large-scale deforestation. Food produced by the industrial agricultural system then enters the global processing and transport market, which generates enormous quantities of food waste. Fossil fuels are used in almost every stage of the food chain, from fossil fuel-based chemicals in the form of pesticides or synthetic fertilisers, to fuel-consuming agricultural machinery, to a massive global system of processing, packaging and transport based on fossil fuels.

Agrobiodiversity at risk

Taken together, these ecologically destructive practices account for 44 to 57 per cent of total greenhouse gas emissions, making the global food system one of the main drivers of global warming and environmental degradation. The climate crisis is the result of indifference and an inability to understand the earth's living systems — an inability sustained by a profit-oriented mindset. This same mindset has allowed agribusiness to encroach on forests and other vital ecosystems, making the industry responsible for 70 to 90 per cent of global deforestation and effectively displacing indigenous peoples.

Agrobiodiversity is also among the principal victims of the modern agricultural paradigm. Today, approximately 80 per cent of the world's arable land is organised into monocultures of uniform, genetically identical crops. This has caused an unprecedented extinction of both agrobiodiversity and wild biodiversity, making ecosystems, as well as food security, even more vulnerable to climate change. The evidence that artificial fertilisers have reduced soil fertility and food production, and have contributed to desertification, water scarcity and, consequently, global warming, is mounting. Soils treated with chemical fertilisers and depleted of organic carbon and nutrients lose their capacity to retain water, making these areas more vulnerable to droughts and floods. They also create a perpetual need to use greater quantities of water and chemicals to replace the depleted nutrients. This has compounding effects on ecosystems, as the use of nitrogen fertilisers also leads to the pollution of water sources, the drying out of land and the destruction of soil.

The false solutions of Cop26

Faced with the looming climate emergency, world leaders gathered at the United Nations climate conference (Cop26) in Glasgow from 31 October to 12 November to draw up an action plan to address the crisis. Among the summit's main objectives were commitments to increase funding for technology to build climate resilience and reduce global greenhouse gas emissions, in order to meet the 1.5-degree target by the end of the century. After just one week, Cop26 had already been described as the most exclusive and inaccessible climate conference ever held, and had drawn considerable criticism from activists and civil society groups, who questioned its legitimacy. Cop26 managed to mobilise more than 100,000 people and gave rise to more than 300 demonstrations worldwide denouncing false solutions to the problem and demanding greater participation in climate justice.

Most events took place behind closed doors and were marked by a series of speeches from world leaders repeating the same familiar talking points on greenhouse gas reduction and climate finance. The fact that the floor was given to philanthropists and major tech investors rather than to civil society groups and marginalised communities perfectly illustrates the stance taken by Cop26 and its commitment to technological solutions over regenerative, biodiversity-centred ones.

Cop26 will in all likelihood go down as yet another missed attempt to hold polluting companies accountable for their actions, thereby lending credibility to the false solutions to climate change that those companies champion. Cop26 will serve as an arena for corporate greenwashing, rebranding the protagonists of Big Tech and industrial agriculture as the heroes providing solutions to climate change, rather than rightly identifying them as the culprits. Rather than reversing the current trend, everything seems to be pointing towards a further digitalisation of agriculture through an increase in climate-resistant GM crops, artificial and lab-grown foods, carbon credits and other false solutions that do not challenge the root causes of global warming.

The hollow promise of "natural" solutions

The solutions proposed by these "climate lords" consist of costly, inadequately tested and often dangerous technological innovations — such as artificially lab-grown food, gene editing, CO2 capture, carbon credits and geoengineering — all aimed at replacing natural processes themselves. These technological solutions completely ignore the power of nature and deny its regenerative capacities. And yet, despite this, they are backed by multinationals and major Big Tech investors, who market them as the only possible solution to the climate problem. False solutions and biotechnologies shift political power away from organic farmers and local communities towards biotech companies and large investors. They take no account whatsoever of local and indigenous knowledge, nor of the diverse food cultures that have evolved alongside different ecosystems.

CO2 capture and net zero

The concept underpinning "net-zero" consists in balancing greenhouse gas emissions with the removal of those same gases until zero is reached. To reach zero, the amount of CO2 added cannot exceed the amount removed from the atmosphere in the same period of time. This equation is problematic because it implies that companies can achieve net zero by investing in CO2 offset schemes. However, net zero will not lead to real emissions reductions for several reasons. First, this approach focuses solely on emission flows and as such does not account for the cumulative nature of CO2. Carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere for hundreds or thousands of years unless it is stored elsewhere, which means that past, present and future emissions will have a cumulative impact on both global warming and ocean acidification. Second, offsets do not actually reduce atmospheric concentrations of CO2. Carbon dioxide levels will therefore continue to rise at an alarming rate if they are not effectively absorbed by soils and oceans.

In reality, net zero is nothing more than an elaborate industrial greenwashing scheme that grants polluting companies the right to expand their activities and continue polluting by sequestering CO2 elsewhere. By offsetting their emissions through the planting of monoculture tree plantations, companies will continue to trigger land grabbing and the displacement of communities, human rights violations, water scarcity and further biodiversity loss. These so-called nature-based solutions divert attention from the root causes of the climate and health crisis. A dangerous tactic for delaying radical action, allowing multinationals, governments and financial institutions to continue operating as usual without addressing the causes of the problem. Nature-based solutions instrumentalise nature through the transactional logic of market mechanisms and externalise ecological destruction through offset projects.

The illusory solution of geoengineering

The idea behind geoengineering is to deploy a range of technologies to deliberately intervene in and alter the earth's climate system. For example, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Harvard University are working together to fund a plan to inject sulphate aerosols into the atmosphere to block sunlight. In theory, blocking incoming sunlight through chemicals would reduce the problem of global warming, thereby giving us control over the climate. However, the warming effect of carbon dioxide on the atmosphere can persist for up to 10,000 years. It is also believed that the particles capable of attenuating the effects of the sun leave the atmosphere after approximately one year, which means that, for this technology to be effective, the atmosphere would need to be continuously pumped with chemical aerosols.

Geoengineering by definition aims to alter planetary boundaries such as the carbon cycle and the hydrological cycle, but does not set out to address the root causes of climate change. The solutions outlined so far are the product of a mechanistic worldview that sees nature as dead, inert matter that can be engineered and manipulated to suit our needs and serve the interests of large corporations. By placing technological innovations on a pedestal and presenting them as the only possible option for solving the world's many crises, large multinationals are dictating their own priorities and further cementing their control. This reluctance to address systemic issues is by no means accidental; rather, it is a deliberate attempt by multinationals to maintain control by perpetuating the very power structures that created the current crisis, without taking any responsibility for large-scale pollution and environmental degradation. This is not the transition we need. The goal should not be solely CO2 sequestration, but the overall health of ecosystems and people, the generation of livelihoods and healthy economies, and the creation of equity and justice. We must protect our forests, safeguard biodiversity and thereby build health and climate resilience.

The role of biodiversity and agroecological systems

Unlike the false promises pursued by multinationals and billionaire investors, true solutions to climate change should not seek to engineer or manipulate our planet for profit. On the contrary, they should aim to work alongside nature to restore its biodiversity and regenerate its natural cycles. These solutions already exist and are being pursued by local food communities around the world, showing us that a path to living in harmony with nature is possible. The biodiversity of plants, animals and microorganisms is the key to providing the stability and balance needed to create resilient agroecosystems capable of addressing climate change. The very food and agricultural systems that conserve and regenerate biodiversity also mitigate global warming and contribute to good health and improved livelihoods through living, regenerative economies.

Agroecology is built on a broad set of principles and encompasses various methods for working in harmony with nature and regenerating biodiversity through living seeds and soils, local food communities, without resorting to the use of chemicals derived from fossil fuels. Agroecological systems are designed to mimic natural processes and regenerate biodiversity so as to provide ecological services such as natural pest control, nutrient cycling, soil regeneration and improvement, increased CO2 sequestration and greater water retention in soils. By focusing on the local and shifting production away from globalised supply chains, these systems are able to replace high fossil-fuel-intensity methods with low-input, regenerative systems that strengthen the soil and fix carbon dioxide back into it. Agroecosystems thus maintain their climate-regulating functions and are able to mitigate the effects of climate change.

The transition towards organic farming and regenerative agriculture should be the absolute priority

Working with nature, regenerative and agroecological agriculture can generate greater food resilience while drawing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and returning it to the soil through photosynthesis. Increasing CO2 sequestration in soils is a vital aspect of mitigating climate-related problems. Agroecological solutions represent a departure from the industrial food system and embrace a different vision of food system transformation. They are based on a systemic approach, a deep understanding of nature's and the earth's vital cycles, and entail transformation at the political, social and economic level. Agroecological transformation is incompatible with the industrial agriculture paradigm, as it requires a complete departure from the hypercentralised, multinational-controlled industrial food system. Any compromise, such as the adoption of certain ecological techniques and practices that do not alter the monoculture model of industrial agriculture, can only temporarily moderate the negative impacts, while directly contributing to further climate crises in the long term. True transformation can therefore only come about through a transition towards agroecological food systems.

Further resources:
Bill Gates & His Fake Solutions to Climate Change, Navdanya International, 2021.
Gates Ag One: The Recolonisation Of Agriculture, Navdanya International, 2020
La Legge del Seme, Commissione Internazionale per il Futuro del Cibo e dell'Agricoltura, Navdanya International, 2013
Patto per la Terra, Navdanya International, 2015
Plants, Planet & People – The Living Earth and Climate Change, Dr Vandana Shiva, Navdanya, October 2021
Shroff, R., Cortés, C.R. The Biodiversity Paradigm: Building Resilience for Human and Environmental Health. Development 63, 172–180 (2020)