Opinion: Farmers cannot lose out in the race to net-zero

The energy sector is often central in climate discussions around a “just transition.” Yet the agrifood sector must also ensure a just shift to sustainable practices — without disproportionately burdening farmers or low-income countries. A just transition for agriculture therefore deserves the same prominence and attention at the ongoing United Nations climate conference, COP29, as the just energy transition. The principle of a just transition is intended to minimize the negative effects of necessary short-term shifts to go from high- to low-carbon economies. It features at the COP29 climate talks through the Just Transition Work Program. It is about ensuring that no people, sectors, countries, or regions are left behind in a transformation that is needed to avert the climate crisis. The move to resilient, low-emission agrifood systems must address unique features, specific vulnerabilities, and the range of potential routes to emission reductions in the sector to ensure no one is left behind. It also needs to account for the new and profound stresses placed on the natural systems that agrifood systems rely on, and consequently on the livelihoods of people who depend on them. Part of the transition, including healthier livestock, alternatives to chemical fertilizers and pesticides, and hardier crops, will likely involve short-term pain for long-term gain — both for the farmer and society as a whole. The transition to organic farming, for example, was found to match the productivity and surpass profitability of conventional farming systems — but only after several years. To both limit temperature increases that are driving the world toward planetary tipping points and adapt to a changing climate, the world has no other option than to move quickly toward a more sustainable and resilient food system. But transitioning from high-emitting practices, such as intensive cropping and livestock farming prevalent in some countries, can result in yield penalties and even job losses in the short term. The consequences, if not carefully managed, may include global price increases and food shortages that affect low-income regions and the poorest the most. The question, then, is how to tide farmers over long enough for them — and the environment — to reap the benefits of adopting low-emission practices and new technologies, and this question is likely to feature at next year’s COP30 in Brazil. In the spirit of a just transition, governments can and must act to minimize the anticipated disruption to agrifood systems, redistribute the resulting costs and benefits, and protect food and nutrition security and farmers’ livelihoods. Safety nets for farmers while they transition to climate-friendly farming will be critical to compensate for reduced harvests and ensure enough farmers continue to operate to fully realize the transition to low-emission agriculture. This is especially important for women farmers in the global south who already face significant disadvantages, including barriers to land ownership, finance, and training. Despite making up an estimated 45% of the agricultural workforce in climate-vulnerable countries, women receive less than 10% of available finance. Providing gender-responsive support will be critical in delivering a just agricultural transition. To enable the transition to low-emission agriculture, farmers also urgently need more and better green equipment and resources. Sustained investment in the energy sector has meant that renewable energy sources are now as competitive as fossil fuels. Similarly, ramping up public and private investment into demand-driven agricultural research and development would accelerate the emergence of new, more effective low-emission technologies to help advance a just agrifood transition. Green ammonia, for example, is ammonia — a key ingredient in nitrogen-based fertilizers — produced using renewable energy, water, and nitrogen from the air. But unlike traditional ammonia production, which relies on fossil fuels, green ammonia is made in a way that drastically reduces greenhouse gas emissions, making it a critical player in the global shift toward sustainable energy and agriculture systems. At present, green ammonia is more expensive than its fossil fuel-based alternative, with more research needed to achieve cost-effective production in the years ahead. Meanwhile, governments, development organizations, and international agencies must do more to help farmers access and adopt the latest green technologies and production methods while agricultural innovations are developed and tested. Finally, governments must shift financial incentives to reward — not only compensate — farmers who adopt more sustainable forms of agriculture. Direct agricultural subsidies currently surpass $600 billion a year, much of which encourages the use of high-emitting agrochemical inputs and the expansion of commodities that contribute to deforestation. Redirecting these subsidies and repurposing agricultural investments toward greener technologies, commodities, and practices would derisk the agricultural revolution and encourage more farmers to invest in sustainable alternatives. Agrifood systems must urgently transform to reduce and avoid unnecessary emissions and environmental impact. But the transition must — and can — be managed carefully so as not to jeopardize the livelihoods and food security of the almost 4 billion people whose households are dependent on agrifood systems. The climate movement simply cannot afford to leave farmers behind. Meeting both global climate and food security goals relies on farmers, and farmers rely on patience, support, and investment to change one of the world’s most complex, ancient, and important trades.