Devex Dish: What’s on the menu for food systems at COP29

The full spectacle of the United Nations climate conference, or COP29, is underway in Baku, Azerbaijan, featuring a delegation from the Taliban, the ever-present smell of petrol thanks to a nearby refinery, and incredibly fresh Uzbek apples at the country’s pavilion. This year’s summit is  known as the “finance COP” due to its focus on drumming up funds for climate finance, and we’re closely watching to see how much of that money goes to building more sustainable food systems.  

Our colleague Jesse Chase-Lubitz is on the ground (don’t miss her daily updates) while Ayenat will make her landing Sunday. It’s striking to see how food systems have truly broken into the mainstream climate change conversation, with dozens upon dozens of food, agriculture, land use, and biodiversity events across the two weeks.

Here’s what’s on our radar:

Climate cash: Everyone is eagerly awaiting countries’ consensus on the new collective quantified goal, or NCQG, a key element of the Paris climate agreement that seeks to update the longstanding $100 billion-per-year climate finance target. Tuesday marked the first substantive discussions on NCQGs, and it’s clear that countries remain far (far!) apart on what that goal should be. Another key debate is over adaptation versus mitigation financing. Once that’s all resolved, a question for post-COP29 will be how much of that finance goes to agrifood systems. In 2022, the sector received $29 billion — about 23% of total climate-related development finance, according to Food and Agriculture Organization Director-General Qu Dongyu at a high-level event Tuesday. But to reach net-zero targets, agrifood systems will require around $1 trillion annually until 2030, he noted. That’s an enormous sum, so we’ll see what unfolds.

Climate action plans: COP29 follows up on last year’s landmark COP28 UAE Declaration on Sustainable Agriculture, Resilient Food Systems, and Climate Action. The big question is how countries will deliver on their pledges to scale up climate adaptation and resilience, protect ecosystems, and strengthen water management, all while enhancing food security. Integrating food systems transformation into climate action plans — or nationally determined contributions, aka NDCs — is at least one way countries pledged to do this. At a high-level meeting Tuesday, many countries shared updates, with a shoutout to the Alliance of Champions for Food Systems Transformation, which was launched last year, and calls by the World Farmers’ Organization to ensure farmers are consulted — after all, they’re the ones who play the biggest role in carrying out this enormous task.

A few countries are expected to release their NDCs over the course of this COP and in the following weeks. The United Kingdom released its broad, headline target on Tuesday — pledging to reduce emissions by 81% from 1990 levels. “We think this sets a high bar that other countries should follow,” said Melanie Robinson, the global climate, economics, and finance program director of the World Resource Institute. Still, it will be important to see sectoral targets and financing details before making a full judgment, she added. Brazil also announced its top-level figure just before COP29’s start — it aims to reduce emissions between 59% and 67% by 2035 compared to 2005 levels — but reactions to its target were more mixed, with some critics arguing that it lacked ambition. The agricultural powerhouse is expected to publish its full NDC today.

And all the rest: The big day for this community will be Tuesday, Nov. 19, the dedicated Food, Agriculture and Water Day. The day prior, Health Day, will also have some nutrition-related programming. Another key issue to watch is methane — with the U.S., China, and Azerbaijan hosting a summit yesterday to accelerate reduction efforts. We’re also looking out for the launch of the Baku Harmoniya Climate Initiative for Farmers, billed as an “aggregator, bringing together disparate initiatives, coalitions, networks, and partnerships to empower farmers, villages and rural communities.” Stay tuned for updates next week.

Read: 7 things to watch for at COP29, from funding to food systems
See also: COP29 is the ‘finance COP.’ Here’s what that means (Pro)
And don’t miss the reporter’s notebook: Behind the scenes at COP29

+ Sign up for the daily Newswire and our podcast, This Week in Global Development, for special editions of on-the-ground coverage of COP29 from Baku.

Are you attending the conference and want to meet? Let us know here.

Trump won. What now?

The big question hanging over COP29 — and pretty much anywhere else — for food systems experts is how the incoming Trump administration will affect the United States’ foreign policy and development initiatives. 

As a starting point, President-elect Donald Trump, who maintains that climate change is a hoax, has pulled the United States out of the Paris Agreement once. There is every reason to expect he will do so again, which could leave a void in climate finance that could be used to transform the agrifood sector.

When it comes to the intersection of climate and agriculture on a domestic level, Project 2025, a policy blueprint for a conservative administration created by the right-wing Heritage Foundation, has a vision for a more narrowly focused U.S. Department of Agriculture. It calls for denouncing “efforts to place ancillary issues like climate change ahead of food productivity and affordability when it comes to agriculture.”

It's unlikely the Trump administration will make efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector, which is currently responsible for 10% of U.S. emissions. Some experts predict that as much as $19 billion in climate change investments made by the outgoing Biden administration in the agricultural sector could be lost.

There’s also the question of how Trump will treat foreign food aid. After all, the U.S. contributed nearly four times the amount of humanitarian funding to food as the next-closest donor, Germany, in 2023. While the first Trump administration slashed funding to international agencies, food aid was largely untouched, with Trump seemingly content to maintain support for the World Food Programme and other key players. It’s unclear what approach he will take in his second term.

Meanwhile, the massive $1.5 trillion U.S. farm bill — which sets the country’s agricultural and nutrition policy — has been languishing for more than a year. At an international level, this is important because it also controls operations for Food for Peace, the flagship U.S. food program that feeds millions of people worldwide. Republicans won control of the Senate, and if they also retain control of the House (votes are still being counted in some states) it could pave the way for passage of a version of the bill that would strip much of this food aid.

Read: Donald Trump won. What does that mean for development?

See also: How will a shifting US Congress shape foreign aid? (Pro)

+ Not yet a Devex Pro member? Start your 15-day free trial today to access all our exclusive reporting and analyses, data-driven funding insights, members-only events, the world’s largest global development job board, and more. Check out all the exclusive content available to you.

Time to get off the SOFA

The true price of food far exceeds what you’re paying in the supermarket. And thanks to FAO, we now have a sense of just how much.

For the second year in a row, FAO has dedicated its flagship State of Food and Agriculture report to true cost accounting. This approach moves beyond basic metrics like productivity and caloric intake to capture the full range of environmental, social, health, and economic impacts of the agrifood system.

And these costs come to the tune of $11.6 trillion per year, according to FAO’s estimates, with health expenses linked to noncommunicable diseases responsible for 70% of those costs. Some experts believe that’s almost certainly an undercalculation, given how difficult it is to estimate environmental impacts, like soil erosion and water pollution.

But those costs aren’t consistent across countries. That’s why this year’s report builds on the previous report by offering a more nuanced analysis of the type of agrifood system that dominates in each country. The six different categories are: industrial, formalizing, diversifying, expanding, traditional, and protracted crisis.

It then looks at how those hidden costs differ depending on which category a country falls in. The chart shows you just how varied this whole system is and offers stakeholders in those countries a starting point to figure out how to address the costs that most affect them.

While most of the six categories saw health as their chief hidden cost, those health risks are not all the same. Among the upper-middle-income countries that fit into the industrial, formalizing, and diversifying categories, noncommunicable diseases were the big threat. But in lower-middle-income and low-income countries that fit into categories that relied on expanding and traditional agrifood systems, the risk of malnutrition and nutrient deficiencies from the diet grew.

Read: Agrifood systems come with $11.6T in hidden costs driven by poor diets 

Chew on this

Armed with nearly $80 million to invest, the Financing for Agricultural SMEs in Africa, or FASA, is ready to start shoring up a lending gap to small and medium-sized agribusinesses in Africa. [Devex]

There is emerging evidence that regenerative practices, like rotating crops and adding cover crops to fields, can help prevent soil erosion and boost soil nutrients. With funding, these practices could help mitigate the impacts of climate change. [Nature]

The heroic story of the desperate effort by Soviet researchers to save a vital seed bank during the Nazi siege of Leningrad. [The Guardian]

The Biden administration backed away from its 30-day ultimatum to Israel over Gaza’s humanitarian crisis, just as U.N. experts warned of imminent famine in the territory. [Al Jazeera]