Future technologies and systemic innovation are critical for the profound transformation the food system needs. These innovations range from food production, land use and emissions, all the way to improved diets and waste management. Here, we identify these technologies, assess their readiness and propose eight action points that could accelerate the transition towards a more sustainable food system. We argue that the speed of innovation could be significantly increased with the appropriate incentives, regulations and social license. These, in turn, require constructive stakeholder dialogue and clear transition pathways. Main To date, the future sustainability of food systems, the role of changing diets, reducing waste and increasing agricultural productivity have been mainly studied through the lens of existing technologies. Regarding the latter, for example, a common research question concerns what level of yield gain could be achieved through new crop varieties, livestock breeds, animal feeds, or changes in farming practices and the diffusion of technologies such as irrigation and improved management 7-13. Yet, as studies have shown, even with wide adoption of existing agricultural technologies,

Food system innovations will be instrumental to achieving multiple Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). However, major innovation breakthroughs can trigger profound and disruptive changes, leading to simultaneous and interlinked reconfigurations of multiple parts of the global food system. The emergence of new technologies or social solutions, therefore, have very different impact profiles, with favourable consequences for some SDGs and unintended adverse side-effects for others. Stand-alone innovations seldom achieve positive outcomes over multiple sustainability dimensions. Instead, they should be embedded as part of systemic changes that facilitate the implementation of the SDGs. Emerging trade-offs need to be intentionally addressed to achieve true sustainability, particularly those involving social aspects like inequality in its many forms, social justice, and strong institutions, which remain challenging. Trade-offs with undesirable consequences are manageable through the development of well planned transition pathways, careful monitoring of key indicators, and through the implementation of transparent science targets at the local level.

Sugarcane production relies on the application of large amounts of nitrogen (N) fertilizer. However, application of N in excess of crop needs can lead to loss of N to the environment, which can negatively impact ecosystems. This is of particular concern in Australia where the majority of sugarcane is grown within catchments that drain directly into the World Heritage listed Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Multiple factors that impact crop yield and N inputs of sugarcane production systems can affect N use efficiency (NUE), yet the efficacy many of these factors have not been examined in detail. We undertook an extensive simulation analysis of NUE in Australian sugarcane production systems to investigate (1) the impacts of climate on factors determining NUE, (2) the range and drivers of NUE, and (3) regional variation in sugarcane N requirements. We found that the interactions between climate, soils, and management produced a wide range of simulated NUE, ranging from ∼0.3 Mg cane (kg N)-1, where yields were low (i.e., <50 Mg ha-1) and N inputs were high, to >5 Mg cane (kg N)-1 in plant crops where yields were high and N inputs low. Of the management practices simulated (N fertilizer rate, timing, and splitting; fallow management; tillage intensity; and in-field traffic management), the only practice that significantly influenced NUE in ratoon crops was N fertilizer application rate. N rate also influenced NUE in plant crops together with the management of the preceding fallow. In addition, there is regional variation in N fertilizer requirement that could make N fertilizer recommendations more specific. While our results show that complex interrelationships exist between climate, crop growth, N fertilizer rates and N losses to the environment, they highlight the priority that should be placed on optimizing N application rate and fallow management to improve NUE in Australian sugarcane production systems. New initiatives in seasonal climate forecasting, decisions support systems and enhanced efficiency fertilizers have potential for making N fertilizer management more site specific, an action that should facilitate increased NUE.

Soil organic carbon (SOC) is an important and manageable property of soils that impacts on multiple ecosystem services through its effect on soil processes such as nitrogen (N) cycling and soil physical properties. There is considerable interest in increasing SOC concentration in agro-ecosystems worldwide. In some agro-ecosystems, increased SOC has been found to enhance the provision of ecosystem services such as the provision of food. However, increased SOC may increase the environmental footprint of some agro-ecosystems, for example by increasing nitrous oxide emissions. Given this uncertainty, progress is needed in quantifying the impact of increased SOC concentration on agro-ecosystems. Increased SOC concentration affects both N cycling and soil physical properties (i.e., water holding capacity). Thus, the aim of this study was to quantify the contribution, both positive and negative, of increased SOC concentration on ecosystem services provided by wheat agro-ecosystems. We used the Agricultural Production Systems sIMulator (APSIM) to represent the effect of increased SOC concentration on N cycling and soil physical properties, and used model outputs as proxies for multiple ecosystem services from wheat production agro-ecosystems at seven locations around the world. Under increased SOC, we found that N cycling had a larger effect on a range of ecosystem services (food provision, filtering of N, and nitrous oxide regulation) than soil physical properties. We predicted that food provision in these agro-ecosystems could be significantly increased by increased SOC concentration when N supply is limiting. Conversely, we predicted no significant benefit to food production from increasing SOC when soil N supply (from fertiliser and soil N stocks) is not limiting. The effect of increasing SOC on N cycling also led to significantly higher nitrous oxide emissions, although the relative increase was small. We also found that N losses via deep drainage were minimally affected by increased SOC in the dryland agro-ecosystems studied, but increased in the irrigated agro-ecosystem. Therefore, we show that under increased SOC concentration, N cycling contributes both positively and negatively to ecosystem services depending on supply, while the effects on soil physical properties are negligible.

No abstract

Livestock are a critically important component of the food system, although the sector needs a profound transformation to ensure that it contributes to a rapid transition towards sustainable food systems. This chapter reviews and synthesises the evidence available on changes in demand for livestock products in the last few decades, and the multiple socio-economic roles that livestock have around the world. We also describe the nutrition, health, and environmental impacts for which the sector is responsible. We propose eight critical actions for transitioning towards a more sustainable operating space for livestock. (1) Facilitate shifts in the consumption of animal source foods (ASF), recognising that global reductions will be required, especially in communities with high consumption levels, while promoting increased levels in vulnerable groups, including the undernourished, pregnant women and the elderly. (2) Continue work towards the sustainable intensification of livestock systems, paying particular attention to animal welfare, food-feed competition, blue water use, disease transmission and perverse economic incentives. (3) Embrace the potential of circularity in livestock systems as a way of partially decoupling livestock from land. (4) Adopt practices that lead to the direct or indirect mitigation of greenhouse gases. (5) Adopt some of the vast array of novel technologies at scale and design incentive mechanisms for their rapid deployment. (6) Diversify the protein sources available for human consumption and feed, focusing on the high-quality alternative protein sources that have lower environmental impacts. (7) Tackle antimicrobial resistance effectively through a combination of technology and new regulations, particularly for the fast-growing poultry and pork sectors and for feedlot operations. (8) Implement true cost of food and true-pricing approaches to ASF consumption.

No abstract

Purpose Private retail and brand-driven sustainable procurement standards are influencing global agri-food markets, shifting trade and export priorities and reshaping food supply chains. Using the case of Australian beef, the authors construct and evaluate three procurement activity “portfolios” and evaluate how these activity sets pull towards or against diverse organisational goals and/or science-based sustainability objectives. Design/methodology/approach A review of the academic and practitioner literature identified three key pillars for sustainable Australian beef procurement: animal welfare, environmental management and climate change (i.e. emissions). A subset of sustainable beef production activities (n = 100) was identified through this review plus semi-structured interviews with Australian beef retailers and industry bodies. This activity set was filtered (n = 40) and scored by a panel of science experts via a series of workshops and an additional survey. Using these data, the authors use a k-means cluster analysis (k = 3) to consider the strong or weak contributions of each activity portfolio towards typical sustainable beef goals. Findings A portfolio-based view of sustainable procurement puts the trade-offs between activities and the need for clear sustainability prioritisation into sharp focus. The authors find that individual strategies may be singularly more or less impactful, complex or popular, but when combined as a suite of activities enacted towards a particular goal or set of goals, essential for success. The authors find that obtaining balance across sustainable beef pillars versus within specific pillars can narrow the optimal set of activities that can succeed against multiple sustainability goals. Practical implications For procurement managers, the balance between clear focus and multidimensional progress is a difficult challenge. It requires the bold identification and articulation of an organisation’s interlocking corporate, industry or environmental objectives and flexibility on the strategies, tools and resources required. The authors posit that shifting away from a focus on rigid metrics may be useful in breaking the impasse on meaningful action. Social implications Using a set of known activities and strategies that a procurement manager might draw from in operationalising sustainability goals, the authors cluster activities into three discrete activity portfolios. Each portfolio requires differing levels of effort, implementation complexity and potential for within-pillar and cross-pillar impact (i.e. co-benefits). Assessing the evidence and potential for cross-pillar impacts of individual strategies is a complex undertaking, indicative of the systems and tangled interactions that characterise sustainability science more broadly. Originality/value By assessing how the procurement function can be leveraged and operationalised towards sustainability goals through a lens of optimal portfolio management, the authors provide a way forward for the procurement managers working within large retailers and agri-food businesses to progress towards multiple sustainability pillars simultaneously.