The trade fallout of the Russia-Ukraine conflict would be devastating for the world’s poor for whom inflation has put even the most basic foods beyond reach.
In this difficult time, we should tighten health protocols in agro-industrial value chains but without curbing the mobility of food or key inputs. Otherwise, the consequences could be extremely serious.
Feeding the poor doesn’t have to come at the expense of saving the planet, and vice versa. But it requires looking at food systems holistically – a major departure from the current siloed approach. To avoid unintended consequences, it is essential to quantify any trade-offs with data.
This year an additional 49 million people may fall into extreme poverty due to the COVID-19 pandemic, leaving the most vulnerable people in the worst case scenario.
The agri-food systems of the indigenous peoples suggest solutions to feed 811 million hungry people — without damaging biodiversity.
A world wrecked by inequality, poverty and global warming isn’t a secure, safe world — for anyone.
Eighty percent of the world’s poorest people — or 600 million people — live in rural areas, work in agriculture and, ironically, go to bed hungry.
Los servicios ecosistémicos del regadío incluyen la conservación del hábitat, la regulación del clima y servicios culturales o recreativos.
In a few years, the pandemic will be behind us. We can decide whether we also leave behind deeply entrenched inequality and the structural drivers that cause them.
The pandemic has wiped out entire sections of many developing economies. Any policy intervention should treat the fight against COVID-19 like a war and the hardest-hit economies like conflict zones.
Today, one in every six people on the planet lives in an area facing severe water constraints.
It’s not enough to slog along at the bottom of the recession in a U-shaped recovery. There will be more COVID-19s to come, and this is a rare opportunity to build resilience to manage risks.