The link between desertification and food, climate change, migration and employment, in an interview with United Nations Under-Secretary-General and UNCCD Executive Secretary Monique Barbut.
Monique Barbut is United Nations Under-Secretary-General and Executive Secretary of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), the UN agency responsible for combating desertification. Hers is a complex struggle, against a phenomenon — soil degradation — that does not always make front-page news, yet has a profound impact on the environment, the climate and local communities.
What is the definition of desertification adopted by the UNCCD, and how does it differ from ordinary deserts?
In our work, desertification is defined as the loss of land productivity as a result of human activities, compounded by the effects of climate change. These are therefore man-made deserts, as distinct from natural deserts such as the Sahara.
The problem is becoming increasingly severe across the world. What are the key figures, and what are the main consequences for the peoples affected?
On a global scale, 30 per cent of land is now degraded (focusing on agricultural land, the figure rises to 52 per cent). Some 1.3 billion people live on these areas. If this phenomenon were to continue unchecked, it would pose a high and direct risk to 500 million small farms that provide livelihoods — in terms of employment, food and income — for more than two billion people. The continent most affected is Africa: it is the area where the situation is most serious. It is no coincidence that the majority of irregular migrants arriving in Europe come from these regions.
On the subject of migration, what are the projections for the future?
We believe that around 135 million people could be forced to abandon their lands by 2045. According to the United Kingdom's Ministry of Defence, around 60 million will attempt to migrate to Europe.
Climate change, intensive agriculture, pollution: who bears the greatest responsibility for desertification?
In general, human activities are unquestionably the main driver of land degradation. More specifically, the expansion of intensive agriculture is the most critical phenomenon, for two reasons: first, because it affects a large number of people who are already considered vulnerable. Second, because it is the form of degradation that would be easiest to prevent. Yet the political will to change things is still lacking.
Are these phenomena reversible, then? Are there any virtuous examples in this regard?
Absolutely — many positive examples can be cited. Land degradation can be avoided by adopting sustainable land management practices. Hundreds of useful approaches have been adopted in Niger, Burkina Faso, Senegal and Ethiopia. It is also possible to reverse and prevent desertification through sound land-use planning: for instance, by controlling urban sprawl, which in some cases ends up encroaching on highly productive agricultural land.
Intensive agriculture frequently raises environmental concerns. Yet within a few decades the world population will reach 10 billion: how will it be possible to feed all of humanity?
The output of small farming operations currently sustains a large part of the world's population. They will play a crucial role — perhaps the most important one — in ensuring food for the 10 billion people who will inhabit the Earth in 2050. The reality is that we will not be able to meet future food demand, and at the same time address global environmental challenges, without investing in small-scale realities. But these will also need effective development mechanisms to help them access knowledge, technical advice, credit, infrastructure and all the resources they will require in order to produce food sustainably.
In this way we will be able to increase production, create green jobs, strengthen resilience to extreme weather events, and enable families forced to flee their lands to return to them. Let me give you a concrete example: improving land and water management on just 25 per cent of the 300 million hectares available in Africa would translate into an increase in agricultural production of 22 million tonnes. The potential is therefore enormous and particularly attractive to investors, both public and private. It is precisely for this purpose that the Land degradation neutrality fund was created.
Do you think the problem of desertification is given sufficient attention? In the Paris Agreement, for example, the issue is not mentioned…
It took a great deal of time for governments to recognise that initiatives to combat desertification, land degradation and drought contribute significantly to limiting the rise of average global temperature to a maximum of 2 degrees Celsius. On one hand, a portion of the excess CO2 could be stored in the soil; on the other, the productivity of the land would be safeguarded (whatever degree of atmospheric warming we end up facing).
At COP 21 in Paris, the role of terrestrial ecosystems in climate change mitigation was recognised and, for the first time, the capacity of the land to retain carbon dioxide was highlighted. These are important advances: the goal is to ensure that sustainable soil management becomes a global priority.
Restoring the lands of degraded ecosystems means enabling them to absorb up to three billion tonnes of CO2 per year — equivalent to up to 30 per cent of the emissions generated each year by the use of fossil fuels. This is how we can make a decisive contribution to achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement.
