This initiative is timely and valuable. Some comments on scope.
- 1. Existing projections
- Projections are a good departure point.
- They should also include projected large increases in consumption of produce and processed food.
- Many projections assume extrapolation from current trends but it is also important to explore trends under different scenarios (see Tilman & Clark, Nature 515: 518-522).
- Projections should also look at changes in retail structure (especially the back-pedelling on 'supermarketisation') and of course broader shocks.
- OECD is conducting a foresight exercise with "regional growth" "sustainability" and "globalisation" futures. This might also be a useful lens.
2.Implications
I would argue that implications for food safety should also be considered. Our work suggests foodborne disease currently cost around 40 million DALYs - a similar burden to lung cancer or TB. Unlike most infectious diseases, foodborne diseases tend to increase with development and urbanisation: witness the problems experienced in China. Vector-borne and water-associated diseases will be important in Africa where massive investment in irigation is anticipated in the next 50 years.
3. Sustainability
Part of the solution is in disease-proofing change. Our research in irrigated and non-irrigated areas confirms that irrigation changes disease profiles but also finds that clinics are not equipped to deal with this, continuing to diagnose malaria and typhoid even when our serology shows high levels of Q fever, West Nile virus and brucellosis. Irrigation with training of health personnel could avoid this.
It is important to also consider drug resistance and emergence of novel diseases, both of which are strongly linked to livestock intensification.
Important to consider aquaculture as well as livestock
Delia Grace