More than Eco-efficiency is Required to Improve Food Security

Agricultural eco‐efficiency is promoted as a means of increasing agricultural production and improving the security of food systems in response to climate change. The rationale is that economic and environmental resources will be used more efficiently, enabling increased amounts of food to be produc...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Park, S.E., Howden, S.M., Crimp, S.J., Gaydon, D.S., Attwood, S.J., Kokic, P.N.
Format: Journal Article
Language:Inglés
Published: Wiley 2010
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/10568/128787
_version_ 1855513761381613568
author Park, S.E.
Howden, S.M.
Crimp, S.J.
Gaydon, D.S.
Attwood, S.J.
Kokic, P.N.
author_browse Attwood, S.J.
Crimp, S.J.
Gaydon, D.S.
Howden, S.M.
Kokic, P.N.
Park, S.E.
author_facet Park, S.E.
Howden, S.M.
Crimp, S.J.
Gaydon, D.S.
Attwood, S.J.
Kokic, P.N.
author_sort Park, S.E.
collection Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace)
description Agricultural eco‐efficiency is promoted as a means of increasing agricultural production and improving the security of food systems in response to climate change. The rationale is that economic and environmental resources will be used more efficiently, enabling increased amounts of food to be produced from the same amount or fewer inputs. We used (i) a quantitative literature analysis to examine current usage of the eco‐efficiency concept to assess strategies aimed at improving food security under climate change, and (ii) a wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) simulation experiment to consider possible tradeoffs between economic benefits of agricultural intensification, environmental performance, and social impacts. Two issues were highlighted from this. First, the relationship between economic and environmental outcomes is regularly assumed, leading to potentially erroneous conclusions and unintended outcomes. Second, the lack of any consideration for the social dimensions of food security ignores variability in incomes generated from agricultural production, and the potential for reduced quantities of food to be produced as a rational response to maximizing gross margins. We suggest the eco‐efficiency concept explicitly include social as well as economic and environmental criteria if it is to avoid poor rates of uptake of eco‐efficiency technologies, the promotion of practices that reduce the effectiveness of hunger‐reduction efforts, and unintended environmental degradation.
format Journal Article
id CGSpace128787
institution CGIAR Consortium
language Inglés
publishDate 2010
publishDateRange 2010
publishDateSort 2010
publisher Wiley
publisherStr Wiley
record_format dspace
spelling CGSpace1287872023-10-02T08:10:10Z More than Eco-efficiency is Required to Improve Food Security Park, S.E. Howden, S.M. Crimp, S.J. Gaydon, D.S. Attwood, S.J. Kokic, P.N. Agricultural eco‐efficiency is promoted as a means of increasing agricultural production and improving the security of food systems in response to climate change. The rationale is that economic and environmental resources will be used more efficiently, enabling increased amounts of food to be produced from the same amount or fewer inputs. We used (i) a quantitative literature analysis to examine current usage of the eco‐efficiency concept to assess strategies aimed at improving food security under climate change, and (ii) a wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) simulation experiment to consider possible tradeoffs between economic benefits of agricultural intensification, environmental performance, and social impacts. Two issues were highlighted from this. First, the relationship between economic and environmental outcomes is regularly assumed, leading to potentially erroneous conclusions and unintended outcomes. Second, the lack of any consideration for the social dimensions of food security ignores variability in incomes generated from agricultural production, and the potential for reduced quantities of food to be produced as a rational response to maximizing gross margins. We suggest the eco‐efficiency concept explicitly include social as well as economic and environmental criteria if it is to avoid poor rates of uptake of eco‐efficiency technologies, the promotion of practices that reduce the effectiveness of hunger‐reduction efforts, and unintended environmental degradation. 2010-03 2023-02-20T18:56:08Z 2023-02-20T18:56:08Z Journal Article https://hdl.handle.net/10568/128787 en Open Access Wiley Park, S.E.; Howden, S.M.; Crimp, S.J.; Gaydon, D.S.; Attwood, S.J.; Kokic, P.N.. 2010. More than Eco-efficiency is Required to Improve Food Security. Crop Science 50 (1):
spellingShingle Park, S.E.
Howden, S.M.
Crimp, S.J.
Gaydon, D.S.
Attwood, S.J.
Kokic, P.N.
More than Eco-efficiency is Required to Improve Food Security
title More than Eco-efficiency is Required to Improve Food Security
title_full More than Eco-efficiency is Required to Improve Food Security
title_fullStr More than Eco-efficiency is Required to Improve Food Security
title_full_unstemmed More than Eco-efficiency is Required to Improve Food Security
title_short More than Eco-efficiency is Required to Improve Food Security
title_sort more than eco efficiency is required to improve food security
url https://hdl.handle.net/10568/128787
work_keys_str_mv AT parkse morethanecoefficiencyisrequiredtoimprovefoodsecurity
AT howdensm morethanecoefficiencyisrequiredtoimprovefoodsecurity
AT crimpsj morethanecoefficiencyisrequiredtoimprovefoodsecurity
AT gaydonds morethanecoefficiencyisrequiredtoimprovefoodsecurity
AT attwoodsj morethanecoefficiencyisrequiredtoimprovefoodsecurity
AT kokicpn morethanecoefficiencyisrequiredtoimprovefoodsecurity