page 1
page 2
page 3
page 4
page 5
page 6
page 7
page 8
page 9
page 10
page 11
page 12
page 13
page 14
page 15
page 16
page 17
page 18
page 19
page 20
page 21
page 22
page 23
page 24
page 25
page 26
page 27
page 28
page 29
page 30
page 31
page 32
page 33
page 34
page 35
page 36
page 37
page 38
page 39
page 40
page 41
page 42
page 43
page 44
page 45
page 46
page 47
page 48
page 49
page 50
page 51
page 52
page 53
page 54
page 55
page 56
page 57
page 58
page 59
page 60
page 61
page 62
page 63
page 64
page 65
page 66
page 67
page 68
page 69
page 70
page 71
page 72
page 73
page 74
page 75
page 76
page 77
page 78
page 79
page 80
page 81
page 82
page 83
page 84
page 85
page 86
page 87
page 88
page 89
page 90
page 91
page 92
page 93
page 94
page 95
page 96
page 97
page 98
page 99
page 100
page 101
page 102
page 103
page 104
page 105
page 106
page 107
page 108
page 109
page 110
page 111
page 112
page 113
page 114
page 115
page 116
page 117
page 118
page 119
page 120
page 121
page 122
page 123
page 124
page 125
page 126
page 127
page 128
page 129
page 130
page 131
page 132

a local level. This has been underlined in recent daysby the discovery that the "once in a hundred yeardrought" (that by the way has now occurred twice infive years!) has killed so many trees in the Amazon thatthe depleted forest may be becoming a source ofgreenhouse gas rather than a store. Stoppingdeforestation is not a lifestyle choice, it is an absolutelycritical part of any low- carbon growth plan. If we fail toaddress this problem, despite everything else we mightdo, there is no answer to climate change.Neither is there any way around the fact that we haveto move away from our conventional economic modelof growth, based, as it is, on the production andconsumption of high carbon intensity goods. We needto meet the challenge of decoupling economic growthfrom increased consumption in such a way that boththe wellbeing of Nature's ecology and our owneconomic needs do not suffer. It seems to me that weneed a framework focused on resilience that enablesus to recalibrate and balance our approach. If we donot think about creating such a framework and resolvethat central dilemma soon, then I fear we are in for avery rough ride indeed. The trouble is we do not havethe luxury of failure and success will be in buildinglow-carbon industries that provide not only substantialeconomic opportunity, but also a means to ensureEurope's competitiveness.There are, happily, some encouraging signs ofprogress. I have followed closely - and have been veryencouraged by - the Strategic Energy Technology planwhich aims to transform the entire European energysystem: how we source it, produce it, transport andtrade it. This is a big step towards making low-carbontechnologies affordable and competitive and,therefore, a market choice. In fact, with this particularinitiative you have offered a very encouraging exampleto the rest of the world. I know only too well thedifficulties you must have encountered in musteringsupport for the European Union (EU) target of reducinggreenhouse gases by 20 per cent by 2020. But climatescientists by their hundreds are warning that if we areto avert the worst consequences of climate change wehave to reduce CO2emissions by at least 50 per centby 2050. That can only mean your 2020 target has tobe a minimum ambition. I know that many in the EUaspire to agree a target of reducing greenhouse gassesby 30 per cent, and I can only applaud their efforts.Let us not forget that the oil-dependent, high-input,industrialised form of agriculture, which nowdominates food production around the world, ties foodprices firmly to the price of oil. One study estimatesthat a person on a typical Western diet is, in effect,consuming 4.4 litres of diesel per day and this factorhelped push the FAO's Food Price Index up lastDecember to its highest level since it was created in1999. We should also bear in mind that we live in aworld where one billion people go hungry and anotherbillion are nutritionally deficient, while yet another048SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENTbillion suffer from the health impacts of over-eatingand obesity; mostly in richer countries where billions ofdollars worth of food are also wasted and thrown awayevery year. At the same time, in the developing worldaround 40 per cent of agricultural produce is wastedbefore it even gets to market. Poor land managementmeans that yields are frequently at only 40 per cent ofcapacity. This is surely an insane situation.And sadly, our highly intensive form of agriculture alsoaffects our marine environment as nutrient enrichmentcaused by agricultural run-off is becoming a majorissue for marine health. As you will know better than I,nutrient enrichment leads to algal blooms which causesignificant depletion of dissolved oxygen levels in the water and so create "dead zones" that arePhoto: © European Union, 2011

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT049Above:The oil-dependent, high-input,industrialised form ofagriculture, which nowdominates foodproduction around theworld, ties food pricesfirmly to the price of oiluninhabitable to fish. The UNEP's Global EnvironmentOutlook report in 2004 cited over 140 dead zonesworld-wide - among the largest and most famous beingthe one that occurs annually in the Gulf of Mexico dueto run-off from the US corn belt. In 2002, thisparticular dead zone was estimated to be the size ofMassachusetts. Furthermore, a recent report fromDenmark suggested a possible scenario, where acombination of higher temperatures and increasedlevels of carbon dioxide leads to a rise in thesepersistent dead zones from just under two per cent ofoceans (today) to in excess of 20 per cent (by 2100).It is perhaps worth noting that 25 per cent of thecarbon dioxide we emit is absorbed by the oceans. But,it appears that the capacity of the oceans to continuethis function is decreasing due to the loss of coastalhabitat: for example 13.5 giga-tonnes of carbondioxide will be released within the next 50 years as aresult of mangrove clearance that occurred between1980 and 2005 (much of this due to shrimp farmingfor the European market). This is equivalent to alltransport-related emissions in 27 EU countries over a15-year period from 1997 to 2005. In addition tothese problems, the health and productivity of ouroceans is also at threat from over-fishing, climatechange, toxic pollution, invasive species and habitatdegradation. These multiple threats make it imperativethat a holistic and precautionary approach is adoptedin order to manage marine ecosystems so as to ensuremaximum food security benefit from fisheries andwhile understanding the carbon-related consequences?