A world without hunger is possible

The first of the Millennium Development Goals, which were adopted by the world’s leaders at the United Nations in 2000, was a promise to fight poverty and reduce the number of the hungry by half by 2015, from 850 million to 425 million hungry souls on this planet. Today, the figure has risen to almost 1 billion. Between now and tomorrow morning, 40,000 children will starve to death. The day after tomorrow, 40,000 more children will die. In a "world of plenty," the number of human beings dying or suffering from hunger, malnutrition, and hunger-related diseases is staggering. It is inconceivable that people are still going hungry in a world as productive and interconnected as ours. In the 19th century, some people looked at slavery and said that it was monstrous and unconscionable; that it must be abolished. They were known as the abolitionists, and they were motivated not by economic self-interest but by moral outrage. Today the condition of hunger in a world of plenty is equally monstrous and unconscionable, and it too must be abolished. We must become the new abolitionists. Our global goal should be that all people enjoy food security: reliable access to a sufficient quantity, quality, and diversity of food to sustain an active and healthy life. Most developed countries have achieved this goal through enormous advances in agricultural techniques, plant breeding, and engineering schemes for irrigation and drainage, and these advances are making a difference in developing countries as well. Still, much more needs to be done. Achieving global food security will require progress in the following areas: • Increasing production to expand the caloric output of food and feed at rates that will match or exceed the quantity and quality requirements of a growing population whose diets are changing because of rising incomes. This increase must be fast enough for prices to drop (increasing the accessibility of the available food to the world’s poor) and be achieved by increasing the productivity of the small farmers in the less-developed countries so as to raise their incomes even as prices drop. • Such productivity increases will require all available technology, including the use of biotechnology, an approach that every scientific body has deemed to be safe but is being bitterly fought by the organic food growers’ lobby and various (mainly European) nongovernmental organizations. • Climate change has increased the vulnerability of poor farmers in rain-fed areas and the populations who depend on them. Special attention must be given to the production of more drought-resistant, saline-resistant, and less-thirsty plants for the production of food and feed staples. • Additional research is needed to develop techniques to decrease post-harvest losses, increase storability and transportability, and increase the nutritional content of popular foods through biofortification. • Biofuels should not be allowed to compete for the same land and water that produce food for humans and feed for their livestock. We simply cannot burn the food of the poor to drive the cars of the rich. We need to develop a new generation of biofuels, using cellulosic grasses in rain-fed marginal lands, algae in the sea, or other renewable sources that do not divert food and feed products for fuel production. • Because it is impractical to seek food self-sufficiency for every country, we need to maintain a fair international trading system that allows access to food and provides some damping of sudden spikes in the prices of internationally traded food and feed crops. • The scientific, medical, and academic communities must lead a public education campaign about food security and sound eating habits. Just as we have a global antismoking campaign, we need a global healthy food initiative. • And we need to convince governments to maintain buffer stocks and make available enough food for humanitarian assistance, which will inevitably continue to be needed in various hot spots around the world. NEW TECHNOLOGIES TO THE RESCUE No single action is going to help us solve all the problems of world hunger. But several paths are open to us to achieve noticeable change within a five-year horizon. Many policy actions are already well understood and require only the will to pursue them. But there are a few more actions that will become effective only when combined with the development of new technologies that are almost within our grasp. Critical advances in the areas of land, water, plants, and aquatic resources will enable us to take a variety of actions that can help put us back on track to significantly reduce hunger in a few short years. Land. Agriculture is the largest claimant of land from nature. Humans have slashed and burned millions of hectares of forest to clear land for farming. Sadly, because of poor stewardship, much of our farmland is losing topsoil, and prime lands are being degraded. Pressure is mounting to further expand agricultural acreage, which means further loss of biodiversity due to loss of habitat. We must resist such pressure and try to protect the tropical rainforests in Latin America, Africa, and Asia. This set of problems also calls for scientists to: • Rapidly deploy systematic efforts to collect and classify all types of plant species and use DNA fingerprinting for taxonomic classification. Add these to the global seed/gene banks and find ways to store and share these resources. • Use satellite imagery to classify soils and monitor soil conditions (including moisture) and launch early warning campaigns where needed. • For the longer term, conduct more research to understand the organic nature of soil fertility, not just its chemical fertilizer needs. Water. Water is life. Humans may need to consume a few liters of water per day for their survival and maybe another 50 to 100 liters for their well-being, but they consume on average about 2,700 liters per day for the food they consume: approximately one liter per calorie, and more for those whose diet is rich in animal proteins, especially red meat. At present, it takes about 1,200 tons of water to produce a ton of wheat, and 2,000 to 5,000 tons of water to produce a ton of rice. Rainfall is also likely to become more erratic in the tropical and subtropical zones where the vast majority of poor humanity lives. Floods alternating with droughts will devastate some of the poorest farmers, who do not have the wherewithal to withstand a bad season. We absolutely must produce “more crop per drop.” Some of what needs to be done can be accomplished with simple techniques such as land leveling and better management of irrigation and drainage, but we will also need plants that are better suited to the climate conditions we expect to see in the future. Much can be done with existing knowledge and techniques, but we will be even more successful if we make progress in four critical research areas: • First, we know hardly anything about groundwater. New technologies can now map groundwater reservoirs with satellite imagery. It is imperative that an international mapping of locations and extent of water aquifers be undertaken. New analysis of groundwater potential is badly needed, as it is likely that as much as 10% of the world’s grain is grown with water withdrawals that exceed the recharge rate of the underground reservoirs on which they draw. • Second, the effects of climate change are likely to be problematic, but global models are of little help to guide local action. Thus, it is necessary to develop regional modeling for local action. Scientists agree on the need for these models to complement the global models and to assist in the design of proper water strategies at the regional and local scales, where projects are ultimately designed. • Third, we need to recycle and reuse water, especially for peri-urban agriculture that produces high-value fruits and vegetables. New technologies to reduce the cost of recycling must be moved rapidly from lab to market. Decision-makers can encourage accelerated private-sector development programs with promises of buy-back at reliable prices. • Finally, the desalination of seawater, not in quantities capable of supporting all current agriculture, but adequate to support urban domestic and industrial use, as well as hydroponics and peri-urban agriculture, is possible and important. Plants. Climate change is predicted to reduce yields unless we engineer plants specifically for the upcoming challenges. We will need a major transformation of existing plants to be more resistant to heat, salinity, and drought and to reach maturity during shorter growing seasons. Research can also improve the nutritional qualities of food crops, as was done to increase the vitamin A content of rice. More high-risk research also deserves support. For example, exploring the biochemical pathways in the mangrove that enable it to thrive in salty water could open the possibility of adding this capability to other plants. Too much research has focused on the study of individual crops and the development of large monoculture facilities, and this has led to practices with significant environmental and social costs. Research support should be redirected to a massive push for plants that thrive in the tropics and subtropical areas and the arid and semiarid zones. We need to focus on the farming systems that are suited to the complex ecological systems of small farmers in poor countries. This kind of research should be treated as an international public good, supported with public funding and with the results made freely available to the poor. Such an investment will reduce the need for humanitarian assistance later on. Aquatic resources. In almost every aspect of food production, we are farmers, except in aquatic resources, where we are still hunter-gatherers. In the 19th century, hunters almost wiped out the buffaloes from the Great Plains of the United States. Today, we have overfished all the marine fisheries in the world, as we focused our efforts on developing ever more efficient and destructive hunting techniques. We now deploy huge factory ships that can stay at sea for months at a time, reducing some species to commercial extinction. We need to invest in the nascent technologies of fish farming. There is some effort being made to promote the farming of tilapia, sometimes called the aquatic chicken. In addition, integrating some aquaculture into the standard cropping techniques of small farmers has proven to be ecologically and economically viable. The private sector has invested in some high-value products such as salmon and shrimp. But aquaculture is still in its infancy compared to other areas of food production. A massive international program is called for. Marine organisms reproduce very quickly and in very large numbers, but the scientific farming of marine resources is almost nonexistent. Proper farming systems can be devised that will be able to provide cheap and healthy proteins for a growing population. About half the global population lives near the sea. Given the billions that have gone into subsidizing commercial fishing fleets, it is inconceivable that no priority has been given to this kind of highly promising research. Decisionmakers must address that need today. Science has been able to eke out of the green plants a system of food production that is capable of supporting the planet’s human population. It is not beyond the ken of scientists to ensure that the bounty of that production system is translated into food for the most needy and most vulnerable of the human family. Science, technology, and innovation have produced an endless string of advances that have benefited humanity. It is time that we turn that ingenuity and creativity to address the severe ecological challenges ahead and to ensure that all people have that most basic of human rights, the right to food security. Most of the necessary scientific knowledge already exists, and many of the technologies are on the verge of becoming deployable. It is possible to transform how we produce and distribute the bounty of this earth. It is possible to use our resources in a sustainable fashion. It is possible to abolish hunger in our lifetime, and we need to do so for our common humanity.

How to feed the global population sustainably by 2050

 As our planet warms and the population continues to increase, one of the most significant issues is going to be that of food security - how do we continue to feed people when the amount of arable land is finite and the plants themselves are coming under increasing threat from drought, heat and fungal attack?

The direct consequences of a novel disease outbreak like Covid-19 are immediate and obvious: rising numbers of famine, illnesses and deaths. Today, nearly 823 million people or one in eight is undernourished. By 2050, that number could grow by two billion.

There is a big shortfall between the amount of food we produce today and the amount needed to feed everyone in 2050. There will be nearly 10 billion people on Earth by 2050—about 3 billion more mouths to feed than there were in 2010. As incomes rise, people will increasingly consume more resource-intensive, animal-based foods.

Feeding 10 billion people sustainably by 2050, then, requires closing three gaps:

·         A 56 percent food gap between crop calories produced in 2010 and those needed in 2050 under “business as usual” growth;

·         A 593 million-hectare land gap (an area nearly twice the size of India) between global agricultural land area in 2010 and expected agricultural expansion by 2050; and

·         An 11-gigaton GHG mitigation gap between expected agricultural emissions in 2050 and the target level needed to hold global warming below 20C (3.6°F), the level necessary for preventing the worst climate impacts.

My Five-Menu Solutions for a Sustainable Food Future

There is no silver bullet to close the food, land and GHG mitigation gaps. I have researched and identified solutions that need to be simultaneously applied to close these gaps. The relative importance of each solution varies from country to country.

The solutions are organized into a five- menu:

 (1) Reduce growth in demand for food and other agricultural products;

(2) Increase food production without expanding agricultural land;

(3) Protect and restore natural ecosystems;

(4) Increase fish supply; and

(5) Reduce GHG emissions from agricultural production.

First Menu: Reduce Growth in Demand for Food and Other Agricultural Products

Reduce food loss and waste.

Approximately one-quarter of food produced for human consumption goes uneaten. Loss and waste occurs all along the food chain, from field to fork. Reducing food loss and waste by 25 percent by 2050 would close the food gap by 12 percent, the land gap by 27 percent and the GHG mitigation gap by 15 percent.

Actions to take include measuring food waste, setting reduction targets, improving food storage in developing countries and streamlining expiration labels.

Shift to healthier, more sustainable diets.

Consumption of ruminant meat (beef, lamb and goat) is projected to rise 88 percent between 2010 and 2050. Beef, the most commonly consumed ruminant meat, is resource-intensive to produce, requiring 20 times more land and emitting 20 times more GHGs per gram of edible protein than common plant proteins, such as beans, peas and lentils.

Limiting ruminant meat consumption to 52 calories per person per day by 2050—about 1.5 hamburgers per week—would reduce the GHG mitigation gap by half and nearly close the land gap. In North America this would require reducing current beef and lamb consumption by nearly half.

Actions to take include improving the marketing of plant-based foods, improving meat substitutes and implementing policies that favor consumption of plant-based foods.

Avoid competition from bioenergy for food crops and land.

If bioenergy competes with food production by using food or energy crops or dedicated land, it widens the food, land and GHG mitigation gaps. Biomass is also an inefficient energy source: Using all the harvested biomass on Earth in the year 2000—including crops, crop residues, grass eaten by livestock and wood—would only provide about 20 percent of global energy needs in 2050. Phasing out existing biofuel production on agricultural lands would reduce the food gap from 56 to 49 percent.

 Actions to take include eliminating biofuel subsidies and not treating bioenergy as “carbon-neutral” in renewable energy policies and GHG trading programs.

Achieve replacement-level fertility rates.

The food gap is mostly driven by population growth, of which half is expected to occur in Africa, and one third in Asia. Most of the world is close to achieving replacement-level fertility by 2050 (2.1 children per woman). Sub-Saharan Africa is the exception, with a current fertility rate above 5 children per woman and a projected rate of 3.2 in 2050. If sub-Saharan Africa achieved replacement-level fertility rates along with all other regions by 2050, it would close the land gap by one quarter and the GHG mitigation gap by 17 percent while reducing hunger.

Actions to take include achieving the three forms of social progress that have led all others to voluntarily reduce fertility rates: increasing educational opportunities for girls, expanding access to reproductive health services, and reducing infant and child mortality so that parents do not need to have as many children to ensure survival of their desired number.

Menu 2: Increase Food Production without Expanding Agricultural Land

Increase livestock and pasture productivity.

Livestock production per hectare varies significantly from country to country and is lowest in the tropics. Given that demand for animal-based foods is projected to grow by 70 percent by 2050 and that pastureland accounts for two thirds of agricultural land use, boosting pasture productivity is an important solution.

A 25 percent faster increase in the output of meat and milk per hectare of pasture between 2010 and 2050 could close the land gap by 20 percent and the GHG mitigation gap by 11 percent. Actions farmers can take include improving fertilization of pasture, feed quality and veterinary care; raising improved animal breeds; and employing rotational grazing.

Governments can set productivity targets and support farmers with financial and technical assistance.

Improve crop breeding.

Future yield growth is essential to keep up with demand. Conventional breeding, the selection of best-performing crops based on genetic traits, accounted for around half of historical crop yield gains. New advances in molecular biology offer great promise for additional yield gains by making it cheaper and faster to map genetic codes of plants, test for desired DNA traits, purify crop strains, and turn genes on and off.

Actions to take include significantly increasing public and private crop-breeding budgets, especially for “orphan crops” like millet and yam, which are regionally important, but not traded globally.

Improve soil and water management.

Degraded soils, especially in Africa’s drylands, may affect one quarter of the world’s cropland. Farmers can boost crop yields in degraded soils—particularly drylands and areas with low carbon—by improving soil and water management practices. For example, agroforestry, or incorporating trees on farms and pastures, can help regenerate degraded land and boost yields.

Trial sites in Zambia integrating Faidherbia albida trees yielded 88–190 percent more maize than sites without trees. A 20 percent faster increase in crop yields between 2010 and 2050—as a result of improvements in crop breeding and soil and water management—could close the land gap by 16 percent and the GHG mitigation gap by 7 percent.

Actions to take include increasing aid agencies’ support for rainwater harvesting, agroforestry and farmer-to-farmer education; and reforming tree-ownership laws that impede farmers’ adoption of agroforestry. Agencies can also experiment with programs that help farmers rebuild soil health.

Plant existing cropland more frequently.

Planting and harvesting existing croplands more frequently, either by reducing fallow land or by increasing “double cropping” (planting two crops in a field in the same year), can boost food production without requiring new land. Increasing annual cropping intensity by 5 percent beyond the 2050 baseline of 87 percent would shrink the land gap by 14 percent and the GHG mitigation gap by 6 percent.

Researchers should conduct more spatially explicit analyses to determine where cropping intensity increases are most feasible, factoring in water, emissions and other environmental constraints.

Adapt to climate change.

The 2014 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report projected that without adaptation, global crop yields will likely decline by at least 5 percent by 2050, with steeper declines by 2100. For example, growing seasons in much of sub-Saharan Africa are projected to be more than 20 percent shorter by 2100. A 10 percent decline in crop yields would increase the land gap by 45 percent.

Adaptation will require implementing other menu items, as well as breeding crops to cope with higher temperatures, establishing water conservation systems, and changing production systems where major climate changes will make it impossible to grow certain crops. 

Menu 3: Protect and Restore Natural Ecosystems and Limit Agricultural Land-Shifting

Link productivity gains with protection of natural ecosystems.

While improving agricultural productivity can save forests and savannas globally, in some cases it can actually cause more land clearing locally.  To avoid these results, productivity gains must be explicitly linked with efforts to protect natural ecosystems from conversion to agriculture.

Governments, financiers and others can tie low interest credit to protection of forests, as Brazil has done, and ensure that infrastructure investments do not come at the expense of ecosystems.

Limit inevitable cropland expansion to lands with low environmental opportunity costs.

When cropland expansion is inevitable—such as for local food production in Africa and for oil palm in Southeast Asia—governments and investors should support expansion onto land with low environmental opportunity costs. This includes lands with limited biodiversity or carbon storage potential, but high food production potential. For example, analysis that applies environmental, economic and legal filters in Indonesia can develop more accurate estimates of land suitable for oil palm expansion.

Governments need tools and models to estimate yields and effects on biodiversity and climate change, and they should use these tools to guide land-use regulations, plan roads and manage public lands.

Reforest agricultural lands with little intensification potential.

In some cases, the most efficient use of land may be to restore abandoned or unproductive agricultural lands back into forests or other natural habitats. This can help offset the inevitable expansion of agriculture into other areas. This should be limited to low productivity agricultural land with limited improvement potential, such as steeply sloping pastures in Brazil’s Atlantic Forest.

Conserve and restore peatlands.

Peatlands’ conversion for agriculture requires drainage, which releases large amounts of carbon into the atmosphere. The world’s 26 million hectares of drained peatlands account for 2 percent of annual greenhouse gas emissions. Restoring them to wetlands should be a high priority and would close the GHG mitigation gap by up to 7 percent.

Actions to take include providing funds for peatland restoration, improving peatland mapping and establishing laws that prevent peatlands from being drained.

Menu 4: Increase Fish Supply

Improve wild fisheries management.

One third of marine stocks were overfished in 2015, with another 60 percent fished at maximum sustainable levels.  Catches need to be reduced today to allow wild fisheries to recover enough just to maintain the 2010 fish-catch level in 2050. This would avoid the need to convert 5 million hectares of land to supply the equivalent amount of fish from aquaculture.

Actions to take include implementing catch shares and community-based management systems, and removing perverse subsidies that support overfishing, estimated at $35 billion annually.

Improve productivity and environmental performance of aquaculture.

As wild fish catches decline, aquaculture production needs to more than double to meet a projected 58 percent increase in fish consumption between 2010 and 2050. This doubling requires improving aquaculture productivity and addressing fish farms’ current environmental challenges, including conversion of wetlands, use of wild-caught fish in feeds, high freshwater demand and water pollution.

Actions to take include selective breeding to improve growth rates of fish, improving feeds and disease control, adoption of water recirculation and other pollution controls, better spatial planning to guide new farms and expansion of marine-based fish farms.

Menu 5: Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Agricultural Production

GHG emissions from agricultural production arise from livestock farming, application of nitrogen fertilizers, rice cultivation and energy use. They’re projected to rise from 7 to 9 gigatons per year or more by 2050 (in addition to 6 gigatons per year or more from land-use change, not shown in the chart below). This course addresses each of these major emissions sources.

Reduce enteric fermentation through new technologies.

Ruminant livestock were responsible for around half of all agricultural production emissions in 2010. Of these emissions, the largest source is “enteric methane,” or cow burps. Increasing productivity of ruminants also reduces methane emissions, mainly because more milk and meat is produced per kilogram of feed. In addition, new technologies can reduce enteric fermentation. For example, 3-nitrooxypropan (3-NOP), a chemical additive that inhibits microbial methane, was tested in New Zealand and cut methane emissions by 30 percent and may increase animal growth rates.

 Governments should expand public research into compounds like 3-NOP and require or incentivize adoption of the most promising.

Reduce emissions through improved manure management.

Emissions from “managed” manure, originating from animals raised in confined settings, represented around 9 percent of agricultural production emissions in 2010. Improving manure management by better separating liquids from solids, capturing methane, and other strategies can greatly reduce emissions.

For example, using highly sophisticated systems to reduce virtually all forms of pollution from U.S. pig farms would only increase the price of pork by 2 percent while reducing GHGs and creating many health, water and pollution benefits.

Measures governments can take include regulating farms, providing competitive funding for technology development, and establishing monitoring programs to detect and remediate leakages from digesters.

Reduce emissions from manure left on pasture.

Livestock feces and urine deposited in field’s turns into nitrous oxide, a potent greenhouse gas. This unmanaged manure accounted for 12 percent of agricultural production emissions in 2010. Emerging approaches involve applying chemicals that prevent nitrogen from turning into nitrous oxide, and growing grasses that prevent this process naturally.

 Governments can increase support for research into such chemical and biological nitrification inhibitors and incentivize adoption by farmers.

Reduce emissions from fertilizers by increasing nitrogen use efficiency.

Emissions from fertilizers accounted for around 19 percent of agricultural production emissions in 2010. Globally, crops absorb less than half the nitrogen applied as fertilizer, with the rest emitted to the atmosphere or lost as run off. Increasing nitrogen use efficiency, the percentage of applied nitrogen absorbed by crops, involves improving fertilizers and their management—or the composition of the fertilizers themselves—to increase the rate of nitrogen uptake, thus reducing the amount of fertilizer needed.

Actions governments can take include shifting subsidies from fertilizers to support higher nitrogen use efficiency, implementing regulatory targets for fertilizer companies to develop improved fertilizers, and funding demonstration projects that increase nitrogen use efficiency.

Adopt emissions-reducing rice management and varieties.

Rice paddies contributed at least 10 percent of agricultural production emissions in 2010, primarily in the form of methane. But there are less emissions- and resource-intensive rice production methods. For example, shortening the duration of field flooding can reduce water levels to decrease the growth of methane-producing bacteria. This practice can reduce emissions by up to 90 percent while saving water and increasing rice yields on some farms.  Some rice varieties also generate less methane.

Actions to take include conducting engineering analyses to identify promising opportunities for reducing water levels, rewarding farmers who practice water-efficient farming, investing in breeding programs that shift to lower-methane rice varieties and boosting rice yields.

Increase agricultural energy efficiency and shift to non-fossil energy sources.

Emissions from fossil energy use in agriculture accounted for 24 percent of agricultural production emissions in 2010. The basic opportunities include increasing energy efficiency, which has been only modestly explored in agricultural settings, and switching to solar and wind. Reducing emissions per unit of energy used by 75 percent would reduce the GHG mitigation gap by 8 percent.

Actions to take include integrating low-carbon energy sources and efficiency programs into agriculture programs and using renewable energy in nitrogen fertilizer manufacturing.

Implement realistic options to sequester carbon in soils.

Efforts to mitigate agricultural emissions have primarily focused on sequestering carbon in soils, but recent research suggests this is harder to achieve than previously thought. For example, practices to increase carbon, such as no-till farming, produced little or no carbon increases when measured at deeper soil depths.

 Important strategies include avoiding further loss of carbon from soils by halting conversion of forests, protecting or increasing soil carbon by boosting productivity of grasslands and croplands, increasing agroforestry, and developing innovative strategies for building carbon where soil fertility is critical for food security.

Finally, the challenge of feeding 10 billion people sustainably by 2050 is much harder than people realize. My menu items are not optional—the world must implement all of them to close the food, land and GHG mitigation gaps.

The good news is that; all these menus’ can close the gaps, while delivering co-benefits for farmers, society and human health. It will require a herculean effort and major changes to how we produce and consume food.

The time to #TakeAction and make these important reforms is now. So let’s get started and order everything on my “How to feed the global population sustainably by 2050” menu, and end #hunger once and for all.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Human Trafficking

 The COVID-19 pandemic has not only revealed inequities, it has also exacerbated them. Already-vulnerable populations are bearing the brunt of the health impacts of COVID-19 and also experiencing educational and economic consequences. This amplified impact of COVID-19 on vulnerable populations has important implications for individuals at risk of or exploited in human trafficking.

Human trafficking inflicts a breadth of harms on those exploited, including physical, emotional, and sexual violence. The COVID-19 pandemic has created circumstances that may increase the risk of trafficking, inhibit identification of those who are trafficked and those who survive trafficking, and make it harder to deliver comprehensive services to support survivors’ recovery.

To begin, COVID-19’s impact implicates many of the risk factors for human trafficking. Homelessness and a history of child maltreatment are 2 significant risk factors for trafficking of young people. The economic impact of COVID-19, including widespread job loss, has left many people unable to pay rent. Despite moratoriums on evictions for some, others have been left unprotected. In addition, when moratoriums end, individuals may still be unemployed and unable to pay rent.

These factors heighten the vulnerability of already-struggling families and can result in adults and children ending up homeless. This can leave youth in particular at heightened risk of various forms of exploitation, from survival sex to exploitation in various labor sectors.

Similarly, there is widespread agreement among child advocates that COVID-19 has spurred an increase in child maltreatment. Although reporting is down (primarily because mandatory reporters, including teachers and pediatricians, are not seeing some children), hospital reports of child abuse injuries have increased. The trauma of child maltreatment, increased time on the street, or the combination of both leaves young people at greater risk of human trafficking.

The pandemic appears to be spurring other risks. With school closures, children and adolescents are spending more time online, increasing risks that could lead to trafficking situations. For those already in trafficking situations, COVID-19 has worsened circumstances.

Protecting against exposure to the virus in trafficking situations can be more challenging. In forced labor and commercial sex settings, those who are trafficked may have little access to or choice of whether to wear masks or to insist that others nearby do. And social distancing may be difficult, if not impossible, in these settings. Given the inequitable distribution of COVID-19’s impact, trafficked individuals may also live in neighborhoods with higher rates of infection.

Moreover, COVID-19 makes identification of trafficked individuals and survivors more challenging. School closings have foreclosed opportunities for teachers and other education personnel to identify at-risk or exploited youth. In addition, as COVID-19 has burdened hospitals, and particularly emergency departments, individuals with less significant symptoms have been urged to stay home.

This guidance, which can help hospitals avoid being overwhelmed, can have unintended consequences for many trafficked youth who are uninsured and often rely on emergency departments as their primary source of health care. Delays in seeking care risk both adverse consequences for trafficking survivors’ health and missed opportunities for identifying individuals trapped in trafficking situations.

Even when trafficked individuals present at hospitals, some of the protocols made necessary by COVID-19 present new barriers for health care professionals who aim to build a care relationship with patients. For example, many trafficked youth have experienced significant trauma and have a history of negative experiences with authority figures, leaving them reluctant to trust yet another new adult.

Wearing masks and other personal protective equipment may make it harder for health care professionals to connect with trafficked youth and build the trust that enables them to open up and share what they are experiencing.

When survivors are identified, COVID-19 can affect services. Because of the breadth of harms inflicted on trafficking survivors, they typically need a range of services—physical and mental health care, education and job training, legal services, and more. Shutdowns associated with the pandemic have constrained the ability to deliver the comprehensive, integrated care that survivors need. Moreover, stay-at-home and shelter-in-place orders can increase social isolation, which can adversely affect mental health recovery.

Given the various ways that COVID-19 has affected individuals at risk of and exploited in human trafficking, there is a need for a focused strategy on how to respond to human trafficking during this pandemic. General guidance, such as “if you show symptoms, call your physician,” may be unhelpful to a population in which many are uninsured and do not have a regular health care practitioner.

Although measures must be taken to minimize the risks of COVID-19, we also must recognize that COVID-19 may exacerbate the conditions in which human trafficking can flourish. This is not merely about addressing online exploitation but also about mitigating housing and food insecurity, which push vulnerable individuals into riskier situations. Children experiencing maltreatment must be identified, and that necessitates new strategies for ensuring we reach children who are now isolated.

In care settings, health care professionals must think creatively about how to overcome COVID-19–related barriers to building trust. This step is essential both to providing quality care and to maximizing opportunities to identify trafficking survivors.

We also must adapt services so that we can deliver the comprehensive, integrated services that survivors need and deserve. Prior to the pandemic, many trafficking survivors’ entry point into the health care system was to present with an acute medical problem.

Often it was during that visit that mental health needs were identified. If survivors were interested, they were connected to mental health services. Given this pattern of health care use, an integrated health care model, in which mental health staff and medical staff work side by side with open schedules, was more likely to meet the needs of survivors.

Not only could survivors receive mental health services during a medical visit, but they could also be connected with other important services, including legal services. However, this integrated model has become more difficult to deliver as a result of COVID-19–related business closures or work-from-home policies.

Adaptive strategies, like the increased use of telehealth services, may not work as successfully with trafficking survivors as they have with other populations. Some trafficked youth have lifestyles that make it difficult to attend scheduled telehealth appointments. Also, their living arrangements may not permit the privacy and confidentiality appropriate for patient care, or they may lack necessary computer equipment for telehealth visits.

Language and cultural barriers may add further challenges. Health care entities must think creatively about how to provide the integrated services that trafficked individuals need while working within the constraints of the pandemic.

That means not only addressing immediate health needs but also collaborating with other service providers to ensure trafficking survivors have access to safe housing, are not isolated in abusive situations, and have the support they need.

The impact of COVID-19 on trafficking survivors is significant. The virus has disrupted their lives and support networks while increasing financial stress, food insecurity, interpersonal violence, and grief over the loss of loved ones. In response, it is essential that we develop tailored strategies to meet the needs of individuals at risk of or exploited in human trafficking.

How to Help in Your Community

With all this information, it is understandable if the effects of COVID-19 on human trafficking are a little overwhelming. Since these circumstances are unusual and unfamiliar, it is difficult to predict the psychological effects on victims of the trafficking and porn industries.

There is no conclusive data regarding how either industry is benefiting during these times. In the porn industry, there is no way to guarantee that the women being filmed have given their consent. They may be trafficking victims, either coerced into filming or being filmed without their knowledge.

These experiences are doubtlessly traumatic, and the implications on how the trends within these industries, given the global circumstances, will impact these women’s psychological and emotional health are uncertain.

Thankfully, many websites shared tips on how you can help within your local community during this unprecedented time. Three ways to help vulnerable communities include the support of policies to stabilize existing housing, utilize vouchers, and create job incentives for employers to hire people in communities at living wages. It is important that lawmakers are aware of how supporting the economy in specific ways can support people who are vulnerable.

You can also advocate for landlords to show their support by keeping utilities on and offering “stay evictions”. You can also help to ensure that children who rely on school for meals are fed. In cases of domestic workers, do not expect them to fulfill more than their usual responsibilities, and consider continuing to pay them even if you cannot use their services due to social distancing rules.

Finally, as lockdown measures begin to ease, criminals continue to make huge profits from exploiting their victims. We must increase our global efforts in prevention, investigation, prosecution and conviction of human traffickers

For women and young people affected by trafficking, the global response to the Covid-19 pandemic has created a new set of risks and obstacles - deepening inequalities, worsening instability and creating a perfect storm for people to be re-trafficked or harmed.

I call on different governments to respect and promote the rights of trafficked persons and give them a chance to rebuild their lives. Global communities should also work together to ensure that our more vulnerable members are protected as much as possible during this COVID-19 pandemic #EndHumaTrafficking

Kaburu Anthony: Why ending hunger by 2030 is possible

Kaburu Anthony: Why ending hunger by 2030 is possible:  Globally, 795 million people are undernourished, and this number is expected to increase by an additional 2 billion people by 2050. While p...

Why ending hunger by 2030 is possible

 Globally, 795 million people are undernourished, and this number is expected to increase by an additional 2 billion people by 2050. While progress has been made since the early 1990s, when 23.4 percent of the developing world was chronically undernourished, there is still a long way to go.

Today, about one-eighth of those living in developing regions still struggle with hunger, and in places like sub-Saharan Africa, that rate is as high as one in four.2 Hunger is caused, principally, by poverty—and hunger perpetuates the poverty cycle.

The most severe impact of hunger and malnutrition is on children. While parents face reduced productivity and illness, hungry children are at risk of stunting, developmental and educational shortfalls and death. 

It has become painfully clear that we have faltered in our progress towards meeting the U.N. Sustainable Development Goal to eliminate hunger worldwide by 2030. After many years of great progress in reducing global hunger, progress has slowed recently and, in some places, even reversed.

The latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change underscores the urgency: Many of the countries most vulnerable to hunger and conflict now are also the most threatened by increased food insecurity brought on by catastrophic changes in climate.

The goal of ending hunger and malnutrition by 2030 is still within reach, however, if we collectively act to accelerate the progress we have already made.

It’s time to invest in accelerators—the policies, interventions, and innovations that can overcome barriers and speed progress toward ending hunger and malnutrition. They have potential to create transformative opportunities for reducing hunger and malnutrition quickly and sustainably across developing countries.

Bangladesh provides a prime example of how countrywide strategies that employ different combinations of policies and investments to spur growth, provide social protection, and promote healthy diets can accelerate progress. Between 1990 and 2016 the country made some of the fastest and greatest reductions in malnutrition in history, cutting undernourishment and child stunting both roughly in half.

Successive governments in Bangladesh enabled this by creating public policies that stimulated pro-poor economic growth, boosted agricultural production, and launched social safety net programs. Together they provided an environment of improved food availability and opportunities for households to lift themselves out of hunger and malnutrition.

China, Rwanda, Brazil, and Viet Nam have also had similar success by combining policies and investments into a countrywide strategy. Underlying all these stories have been effective institutions and strong leadership.

Interventions that integrate multisectoral approaches and have particular promise include those that leverage linkages between agriculture and nutrition, the multiplying effect of empowering women, and the power of behavior change communications.

Recent research findings clearly show linking agricultural interventions to nutritional goals significantly improves access to nutritious foods and dietary diversity. Including behavior change communications that encourage the adoption of optimal nutrition and child feeding practices with social protection programs significantly boosts the impact these programs can have. Research also suggests interventions that empower women could have a greater impact than those that do not.

These accelerators can be game changers to jumpstart progress.

In addition to policies and programs, innovations and new technologies are making rapid progress more possible and scalable than ever. Biofortification technology, which improves the nutrient value of staple crops, is helping reduce harmful health conditions like anemia and improve cognitive development across the globe, resulting in a more productive and healthy human capital. Lab-grown meats offer potential to deliver cheap and sustainable protein if millions of smallholder farmers can also benefit from these technologies.

The acceleration will not come automatically. Investment in multi-sector policy design, implementation capacity, in people, in data, in innovations and in leadership will be essential.

Investing in the design, refinement, and implementation of effective policies incorporating multisectoral reforms can lead to fast action on not only hunger and malnutrition but also on closely related issues: Poverty, disempowerment, and access to healthcare and education.

Investing in multiple-win technologies—from the lab to the field—can generate a host of solutions for speeding and scaling up progress. Investing in timely, reliable data will allow us to measure progress and build upon successful approaches. Investing in innovative financing for accelerator approaches creates the opportunity to raise additional funds necessary for implementing effective solutions.

But the fullest benefits of these accelerators can only be realized by investing in people and leadership. Without improvements in income, knowledge, and capacity, people cannot fully benefit from the policies, programs, and opportunities to improve their food and nutrition security. We need leaders to create the political will and commitment necessary for tackling this challenge.

As U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres said at the recent Paris Peace Forum, “when nations work together, hope prevails.” The baton is now in the hands of and decisionmakers—at community, national, and global levels—to use this knowledge to invest in multisectoral policies and programs, innovations, and human capital that will drive faster progress.

The challenge of eliminating hunger is formidable, but accelerating our actions can bring us closer to reach the 2030 goal. #ZeroHunger #SDG2 #SDGs

 

Water and Human Survival in Africa

Water is an important resource that supports life on earth. Its availability plays key roles for attaining socio-economic developments globally. It is also a priority toward meeting the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6 that seeks to ensure access to water and sanitation for all. Water is thus an essential resource for balancing the well-being of humans and healthy ecosystems.

The survival of humans and continuing social-economic developments depend on the supply of appropriate water quality and quantity. The relationship between humans and ecosystems is core as people strive to improve their well-being. Ecosystem services are beneficial to all living creatures including humans in a number of ways. Water, for instance, contributes to ecological functions through the provisioning of habitat for aquatic life, including fish that is food for humans.

Water also provides ecosystem services that include freshwater supply, regulatory functions such as dilution and water purification, and fulfilling cultural necessities (e.g., water for traditional, esthetic, or medicinal and spiritual purposes). The benefits derived from ecosystem services are available to humans, regardless of where they live or where the services are generated. For example, urban dwellers enjoy river ecosystem service benefits including fishing for food or growing trees along the river banks, which can be used as timber to build houses or as firewood for cooking.

Ensuring sustainable management of aquatic ecosystems for improved food security is therefore important. This is especially true in urban areas where human activities may pollute distant ecosystems through effluent discharges caused by industrial and domestic or mining activities. Human activities can pollute water bodies and impact socio-economic developments negatively. Any changes in water quality can affect short- or long-term food security goals if aquatic resources are not properly managed.

Water and human survival

This section seeks to highlight the basic human need for water and track the global water distribution and its importance in food security. Water is a basic unit of life and an essential nutrient that is required in amounts that exceed the body’s ability to produce it. Like all nutrients, water performs different functions in the body. Water is an essential component of cells, tissues, and organs required for digestion, absorption, and dissolution and as a carrier for nutrients, eliminating waste products; temperature regulation; and as a lubricant and shock absorber.

To achieve all these functions, total body water must be approximately 60% of body weight in males and 50% of body weight in females. The water distribution is up to 60% intracellular (this amount is lower in females due to larger amounts of subcutaneous tissue and smaller muscle mass) and 20% in extracellular space. The extracellular fluid compartment comprises fluid in blood, interstitial fluid, bone, connective tissue, and transcellular fluid. Variation in water intake depends on human health, weight, and human physical performance.

Human survival can be achieved with minimum water requirement where water lost through normal activities gets replenished. The average adult body naturally loses almost 2–3 L of water daily which must be replenished to function on a day-to-day basis. This loss occurs mainly via urine, perspiration, feces, and exhaled air.

The amount of body water that gets lost depends on individual and environmental factors. These factors are affected by the climate a person lives in, his or her age, physical activity level, and kidney function. To regulate the body’s water levels, the water input must balance water output through metabolic processes (0.3 L/day), fluid intake triggered by thirst (1.5 L/day), and solid foods triggered by appetite (approximates 0.7 L/day). Too little or too much water in the body can lead to less-than-optimal body function.

Early stages of decreased water intake in the form of dehydration can lead to difficulty in concentrating, headache, and sleepiness. Decreased water intake has also been associated with bladder and lower urinary tract cancer and increased risk of colorectal cancer as well as kidney stone formation. Taking too much water can also put an unnecessary burden on the cardiovascular system and the kidneys and can cause a drop in the concentration of electrolytes in cells causing harm in the long run.

While water may be a renewable resource, it is unfortunate that there is only a finite amount and there are no substitutes. Without clean and safe water, human survival cannot be achieved. This has a great impact on the global burden of disease, health, education, and economic productivity of populations.

Water challenges affecting human survival

Water is an important component in a number of human functions, hygiene, and the overall maintenance of health. At the most basic level, water service must meet consumption and hygiene needs and sustain good health at household level. Millions of the world’s poorest people, however, die each year from preventable diseases due to poor hygiene, lack of clean drinking water, and lack of proper sanitation facilities.

The reality is that water and sanitation are weakly integrated into countries’ poverty reduction strategies. Many national governments are failing to put in place the policies and finances needed to accelerate progress toward achieving clean water and adequate sanitation.

In many rural communities, lakes, dams, and stream that are the main sources of water run dry for long periods, forcing people to use unsafe water sources. For the 2.1 billion people who lack access to clean water, they can only afford to get a measly 5 L a day and fail to meet the recommended basic minimum of 20 L a day required for human health, economic, and social development. This is a far cry from the 200 L a day per person that people from rich countries consume on average in a day.

A report on global distribution of the global drinking water services in 2015 found that 71% of the global population (5.2 billion people) had access to a safely managed drinking water service. The report further found that sub-Saharan Africa was the region with the lowest number of people with access to safe drinking water located on their premises. Only Australia and New Zealand had 100% access, where all of the population had basic services (including basic drinking water, sanitation, and hygiene) in their households.

The same report estimated that two-third of the total global population was living in water-stressed areas that experience water scarcity for at least 1 month in a year in 2015. Of the two-third, 844 million people lacked basic drinking water service and 263 million people were reported to be spending over 30 minutes per round trip to collect water from an improved water source.

Still, 159 million people were reported to collect drinking water directly from surface water sources and over half of these people were living in sub-Saharan Africa. These people share their domestic water sources with animals. A large fraction of the people that live in extremely vulnerable situations of water scarcity all year-round are found in Libya, Somalia, Pakistan, Morocco, Niger, and Jordan where 50–90% of the country’s population lives under those circumstances.

Global distribution of water

An estimated three fifth of the earth’s surface is covered by water, which makes up a total volume of almost 35 million km3. Of the available amount, only 200,000 km3 (1%) of this is fresh water that is usable by humans. This is the water that is expected to fulfill the demands of the increasing global population, meet the food production needs using the limited amount of arable land, and sustain industrialization.

Historically, people looked for location to set up their livelihoods near water supplies such as river bases that could provide drinking water and carry off waste. Over time, areas close to water sources became populated by industries and agricultural holdings which use water for irrigation and also to power industries.

Distribution of piped water is realized as a sign of progress toward achieving the SDGs. Industrialized countries (20%) have managed to achieve piped water coverage in 85% of their entire household. The poor countries, however, have only managed limited piped water coverage with only 25% of all their households having access. Industrialized countries have been better able to achieve water security compared to poor countries and this is evident from the average water usage data of 200 L per person per day in rich countries compared to the 5 L per person per day in poor countries.

Factors that contribute to high water scarcity levels include areas with a high population density, areas with irrigated agriculture, and areas with very low natural water availability. Geographically, water scarcity can be found in in the world’s arid areas with low water availability like the Sahara, Taklamakan, Gobi, and central Australian deserts.

Water scarcity has also been found to be intense in areas with high population density and irrigation intensity. Globally, these areas are found near river basins and include the Ganges basin in India, the Limpopo basin in Southern Africa, and the Murray-Darling basin in Australia.

Distribution by sectors shows that water use is spread between domestic, agriculture, and industry sectors. Agriculture accounts for over 70% of freshwater use  and industry water use accounts for 20% globally. In spite of this, it is believed that there is enough water in the world for domestic, agriculture, and industry purposes; the only problem is how this water is distributed especially to the poor who are systematically excluded from the distribution.

Water use varies significantly by sector across the world. How do these three sectors use fresh water?

Agriculture

As discussed above, water use varies considerably across the world especially between the poor and rich. Agriculture is the biggest user of fresh water with Africa and Asia, accounting for the largest users under this sector with an estimated 85–90% of all freshwater. Future demands for water for agriculture are threatened by climate change, technological development, and urbanization. The challenge is to produce more food to meet the growing population demands using less water and other resource inputs in an environmentally friendly manner. Low-income countries’ average agriculture usage is estimated at 90%; 79% for middle income and only 41% in high incomes countries.

Industry

Industrial water use includes all the water used for manufacturing, energy generation, and other industrial activities such as dilution, steam generation, washing, and cooling of manufacturing equipment. Globally, an estimated 20% of total available fresh water is used for industrial purposes. Within the industrial sector, hydropower and nuclear power generation uses 57–69% and the thermal power generation uses 0.5–3%. Industries also pose a threat to fresh water because of the amount of wastewater it produces, its mobility, and loading of industrial pollutants and their potential impacts on water resources, human health, and the environment. High-income countries tend to use the largest portion of water on industries (17%), with low-income countries using the least with an average 2%.

Domestic

Domestic water is the most visible form of water and it shows the problem that exists in the distribution of fresh water between the rich and the poor. People in developed countries consume almost up to 10 times more water daily than those in developing countries. In developed countries, where large cities have centralized water supply and an efficient canal system, domestic consumption averages 200 L per person per day.

In developing countries within Asia, Africa, and Latin America regions, consumption in cities and towns is between 50 and 100 L per person per day, and in the water scarce areas within these regions, the amounts can be as low as 5 L per person per day. Countries with the largest population, China followed by India, have the highest water use globally.

The change in water distribution will have a serious implication on people’s health and well-being, especially for people living in high population density areas, areas with irrigated agriculture, and areas with very low natural water availability. These are the estimated 1.8–2.9 billion people who experience severe water scarcity for at least 4–6 months per year and the 500 million people face severe water scarcity all year round.

The distribution of water between sectors is expected to change over the coming years as a result of population growth, increased water scarcity, and drought due to climate change. Water use for irrigation and other water using sectors of the economy are expected to experience extreme competition which will place more burden on food security.

Water in food security

Water forms an essential part in national food security. To attain food security, there must be an acceptable quantity and quality of water for health, livelihoods, ecosystems, and production. Any sustainable attainment of food safety and security for a fast-growing population requires thoughtful decisions to develop and manage water resources.

Food security and safety are key development agenda items in most developing regions (Global Panel on Agriculture and Food Systems for Nutrition, 2016). Global research and funding have been prioritized and channeled toward fighting against food insecurity. Although substantial progress globally is evident, the same cannot be said for some of the African regions. Sub-Saharan Africa continues to have less access to sufficient quantity and quality food for proper health and growth. The report also classified the sub-Saharan countries as food insecure, with limited access to safe food within their population.

Despite the global food security achievements realized in recent years, food security and limited access to food safety still remain as challenges in Africa. Water scarcity and irregular rainfall distribution are proving to be an impediment to Africa’s efforts to ensure food security. Agriculture production systems, which are the backbone of food security, are also adjusting to tightening water availability by reducing freshwater use especially in the African region. This has resulted in the emergence of new diets that are sensitive to the significant influences of water and land use.

As the water challenge for agricultural production in Africa increases, it is expected that the share of irrigated agriculture in global water use could rise by over 30% by 2030. Total global water demand could double by 2050. The increased competition for scarce water and land resources increases concerns about where the additional food will come from. The challenges are further exacerbated by climatic changes that cause irregularities in water availability across the African landscape.

Water requirements in agriculture vary significantly not only in terms of quantity, but also in terms of quality and timing depending on food type. This is very significant especially when it comes to staple foods such as maize, rice, and wheat that are critical in food security of many countries in Africa. Some of these countries have increased awareness toward conserving their national water supply by opting for virtual water trade—importing food from outside the country in the effort to conserve water resources and maintain food security. Other countries have shifted food production within the agriculture sector focusing more on planting water-efficient crops.

Apart from water being important in production, it also plays a huge role in food processing, transformation, and preparation adding to the competition against industrial and domestic water use. Even though food processing uses much less water than primary production, this part of the food system requires water that is of high-quality standards and that does not pose any health and safety risks on both human and ecosystem health.

There is also a drive toward introducing water-use efficiency, reducing pollution impacts from processing industries. Poor quality water used in food processing can lead to food-borne disease such as diarrhea and other diseases that contribute to malnutrition. The unsafe food creates a vicious circle of diseases affecting particularly the more vulnerable populations that include children, the elderly, and the sick.

Priority must be given to encouraging greater efficiency of water use and the development of integrated water management plans. The shortage of food production due to water scarcity calls the need to manage every water drop to attain food security and food safety in Africa. This raises awareness that water for agricultural production is a pressing issue.

It has been noted that agricultural developments require a consistent and sustainable provision of large quantities of good quality water for food security. The present situation is a clear sign that previous potential solutions to solving Africa’s food insecurity have not received the most needed attention when defining development goals on the continent. Societies depend on water availability to meet a wide range of needs including water for irrigation, domestic, and industrial use.

Poverty and water are inextricably intertwined. Food security cannot be achieved without tackling water issues since lack of safe water underpins food insecurity. Countries continue to invest in the protection and management of water resources to continue deriving benefits for improved living standards. Undoubtedly, major water investments in agriculture are necessary toward meeting food production needs. Crucial role players are needed to put together efforts to conserve water for a food secure world.

Water scarcity impacts on food security

Many Africans depend on aquatic and riparian plants and animals as an important source of food for both humans and livestock. These include fish, shellfish, bait, edible plants, and grazing. In addition, some areas such as wetlands and floodplains across Africa may be used for the cultivation of food crops. In this way, these riparian areas contribute to food security and livelihoods. These services are of particular importance to poor communities.

Nonetheless, the provision of reliable sources of water whether for small-scale water for food processing or large-scale water for irrigation is necessary to move beyond subsistence farming toward a more food secure continent. The availability of water allows farmers to continue growing crops of high value such as vegetables, which are highly sensitive to water stress periods.

Although quality of water is crucial for peoples’ nutrition and water availability for food security in developing countries, water investments have been rapidly declining. While irrigation has a high potential for environmental damages or disturbances, it has contributed positively to poverty eradication. Irrigated agriculture has benefited both rural and urban poor by lowering food prices. The availability of water for irrigation means less people fall below the poverty line, and that poor communities, women in particular, also benefit greatly from irrigation as a major source of water for most of their domestic uses, fishing, small and/or informal businesses.

Nonetheless, small-scale water availability can impact on food security positively. The availability of water for small-scale harvesting has a huge effect on incomes and food security in developing and poorest communities. Major water investments will have more drastic and positive impacts on the poorest communities, where the majority of people live on less than US$1 on a daily basis.

Existing challenges between water availability, quality, and sustainable agriculture linkages must be explored and be made explicit in planning potential agriculture-based strategies for improving food security. The need for fresh clean water is, however, threatened by the changing quantity and quality of the freshwater resources on which people depend for survival. The need for clean water is also linked to adequate sanitation and improved health. Proper sanitation helps to protect water sources from bacterial, viral, and protozoal agents that cause water-related diseases. The concern for many is how can water quality be attained?

Water quality management

As much as water is an essential component of life, it is a hotbed for carriers of many diseases caused by consuming unclean water. Access to safe drinking-water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) services is an important element of food security and has a positive impact on nutrition. A number of approaches are used to assess water pollution effects on the ecosystems which have a direct contribution to food security and nutrition.

A common approach is to use chemical indicators to measure the concentration of chemicals or toxicants within a water body using either water samples or direct in-stream measurement of the water source using water samples as (chemical indicators). If the chemicals within the water are in exceedance with acceptable limits, that water system is regarded as polluted and not fit for human consumption. Biomonitoring can also be used to assess water quality by examining the presence or absence of certain species or organisms in a water body.

Another approach that is used to assess water pollution is ecotoxicology. An investigation is conducted to examine responses of insects, fish, and other invertebrates to a chemical or stressor as biological indicators of water quality. Thus, polluted aquatic systems may not adequately support the provision of fish and insects as food for humans. Similarly, necessary microbes that support plant growth in soils may not thrive in polluted environments, thereby affecting food security.

Without good quality water, the lives of millions of people especially young children are at risk of dying from preventable diseases caused by poor water, and a lack of sanitation and hygiene. There is a growing interest to better understand and measure the effect of programs and approaches not only directed toward improving water management in agriculture and food production but also to include integrated approach to implementing safe water and adequate sanitation. Approaches and practices for ongoing efforts to better link WASH and nutrition programs integrating WASH into food security and nutrition programs are discussed in the following section.

Water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) programs and food security

The World Health Organization report defines drinking water as water with acceptable quality in terms of its chemical, bacteriological, and physical parameters for safe human consumption. Estimates indicate that about 80% of all sicknesses and diseases on a global scale are linked to consumption of unclean and unsafe water and poor sanitation.

However, the quality of any water is influenced by both natural and human factors. Without human influences, water quality would be determined by natural factors and/or processes such as bedrock minerals, deposition of dust, natural leaching of soil minerals and organic matter, and biological processes, among others. Water quality is determined by using water quality guidelines or standards to make a comparison between the physical and chemical characteristics of water samples. The guidelines and standards are developed to ensure the safe consumption of water and protection of ecosystems.

Africa with its soaring human population continues to experience a decline in water quality. Adequate water, sanitation, and hygiene are essential components for reducing poverty, illness, and death and bring about an improved socio-economic development. Poor WASH programs expose people to water-borne diseases, resulting in death and disabilities in certain cases. The United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF) report revealed that the absence of toilets results in the contamination of water resources, while a lack of clean water impedes on basic hygiene. However, increasing WASH programs have led to increased access to adequate drinking water sources and improved sanitation globally since 1990.

To explore how WASH programs could improve the water and sanitation conditions for poor and developing countries across Africa, it is important to define hygiene and sanitation. WASH programs are vital for helping people avoid contaminating water sources, which in turn improves their access and the overall food safety and security.

WASH programs also help to improve water quality for adequate food production due to their design nature, whereby communities work together to disseminate WASH information for a more collaborative program and implementation. Here, practitioners work together with communities and local authorities to deliver the components of the WASH program on-site. This is complemented by practitioners revisiting the communities or distributing surveys for monitoring and evaluation purpose. Therefore, WASH program approaches have the potential to improve food security within the poor and developing African countries.

Effects of water pollution on food security

Water pollution is the building up of one or more substances in water to an extent that they cause water-related problems for people and animals. It is a complex problem that is underpinned by many causes, which makes it difficult to solve. Increasing human population continues to exert immense pressure on the world’s water resources. Both urbanization and industrial revolutions have exacerbated water pollution through effluent and untreated wastewater discharges.

Irrigated agriculture has resulted in increased salinity of freshwater bodies as salts are flushed out from soils. When farmers fertilize their fields or control insects using herbicides, the chemicals used get washed away as salts through surface run-off into nearby water systems. Toxic chemicals released into the atmosphere by industries can also enter into water systems as acid rain.

An increase in water salinity negatively impacts on the survival of aquatic macroinvertebrates, while some crops become intolerant to high soil salinities if thresholds are exceeded. As a consequence, soil productivity is affected and can lead to low crop production and food insecurity. It is therefore clear that low crop production is not only an issue in semi-arid regions but also areas that receive plenteous rainfall.

Poor quality of water has a direct impact on food security, with metals detected in some edible food in China, posing a high health-related risk to consumers. If pollution effects are properly monitored using the approaches outlined above, Africa can produce quality food for its citizens. However, the UNICEF report outlines the importance of educating people on water quality issues as another approach to solving water pollution.

Further, strict environmental laws are necessary to minimize water pollution. For example, environmental reports indicate that the “polluter pays” principle is effective in tackling pollution. The polluter principle makes it less expensive for humans to behave in an environmental cautious and/or responsible manner. It is sad, to note, however, that some countries considered to have the best water laws in Africa and beyond, such as South Africa, are still struggling to deal with historical water quality issues that subsequently impact on their food security. Further, unstable countries due to political reasons such as Libya would greatly be affected by food insecurities considering their dry nature. The water quality of both countries is discussed in the following sections.

South Africa: a country with poor water quality

South Africa has sufficient water to meet all the needs of the country until the year 2025 and beyond. However, the country is faced with challenges related to water quality, which impedes on food production to meet people’s demand for food. Poor water quality renders water unusable. Changes in agricultural practices and the expansion of urban settlements have a serious effect on the quality of water. Furthermore, acid mine drainage (AMD), pesticides from agricultural practices, unmonitored sewerage systems, domestic water usage like washing clothes on the river and dumping waste in water sources in some areas of the country, and salinization from the weathering of minerals all pollute water. Once water is polluted, it may be difficult and extremely expensive to redress, particularly in the case of underground water, which may affect agricultural production in terms of excessive salts on the soil and usable water for food production. It is thus important to note that good water quality would be suitable for food production to ensure food security.

Libya: a country in a political crisis

Libya has a rapid growing demand for freshwater availability while the water supply is limited. The issue of severe water deficits as a result of nonending water demands in Libya has become more problematic for the increasing population under low rainfall, which is a result of climate change. Furthermore, the country has been experiencing high rates of pollution and depletion due to water resource unavailability. This has had major impacts on Libya’s economy and social and environmental resistance capacity.

Considering that Libya is one of the driest countries on a global scale with high temperatures, meeting and maintaining acceptable living standards for the future is extremely difficult, especially in relation to food security. Food sufficiency remains uncertain in Libya due to its political instability coupled with poor water quality and soaring human population. The country is likely to experience severe and most devastating situations and high risks of food insecurity and malnutrition with current political instabilities.

Water and food safety

This section discusses the relationship between water and food safety. Water is seen as an essential component in the food chain, starting from production, processing, and eventually consumption. In addition, water pollution has historically impacted on food safety, which constitutes an important threat to human health, food, and nutritional security. In most sub-Sahara African countries, food safety problems vary in nature, severity, and extent. These challenges are often exacerbated by the effect of climate change and natural disasters such as floods and hurricanes, whereby food may become contaminated by surface water that has itself been contaminated by sewage and wastewaters. It is well documented that flood waters often pick up large quantities of wastes and pathogenic bacteria from farms, sewer systems, latrines, and septic tanks. Overcrowding of the survivors after disasters may aggravate the situation, particularly if sanitary conditions are poor.

Any breakdown in vital services, such as water supply or electricity, also adversely affects the quality of food. In the absence of electricity, cold storage may be more difficult, if not impossible, and foods may be subject to bacterial growth. This may be obtained at any stage of the food chain, from production to consumption. Lack of safe drinking water and sanitation hampers the hygienic preparation of food and increases the risk of food contamination.

Food safety has become a constant global concern apart from affecting human health; factors such as international trade and food security are also influenced. Consequently, most research institutions, healthcare institutions, and governments of several African countries have conducted comprehensive studies on the effect of water on food safety in various production chains. According to a recent study, the main water issues that affect food safety in low income countries include bacterial pathogens, followed by pesticide residues and healthy diet. Although the reported evidence of food-borne disease is still limited, the known incidences of food borne disease in low income countries such as sub-Saharan African largely emanate from three major sources, namely biological hazards and chemical and physical contamination.

Biological water contaminants

Water and food contaminated by microorganisms are major contributing factors for the emerging diarrheal diseases in the developing countries, and over 1 billion children under the age of 5 years are affected worldwide. The high prevalence of deaths related to food and water contamination in developing countries could be attributed to several factors. For example, in many African countries, milk and dairy production constitute an important source of livelihoods for most peasant and smallholder farmers. Furthermore, animal production has become part of agricultural diversification strategy for most African countries in an attempt to ensure food security. The intensification of animal production has also generated a considerable impact on the environment considering the fact that milk provides suitable condition for the growth of different kinds of microorganisms, and microbial hazards are the most important concern within the dairy industry.

Biological agents associated with water contamination that have an impact on food safety include enteric pathogens such as bacteria, viruses, and protozoa. A study conducted in North-West Province of South Africa reported that multi-drug resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains were detected in samples of raw, bulk, and pasteurized milk. Other common biological contaminants are Escherichia coli. The E. coli bacteria belong to the intestinal microbiota of humans and animals and are generally not harmful. Certain E. coli strains, however, harbor virulence factors and can cause intestinal and extra-intestinal diseases. For example, Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli zoonotic bacteria have globally been associated with various foods of animal origin, especially beef and sheep meat.

Apart from animal product contamination, biological contaminants may also occur in crop products. Foodborne outbreaks from fruit and vegetable produce have caused economic loss, food wastage and loss confidence regarding the safety of fresh produce from most African countries. Studies on the safety of fresh produce have identified water as one of the key risk factors that contribute to contamination of the farm produce. Indeed, studies have shown that most foodborne diseases are caused by consumption of fresh, perishable foods sold in informal markets.

Chemical hazards

Generally, mycotoxins, heavy metals, and over-application of fertilizers and pesticides are considered to be the most important chemical factors impacting on food safety in most developing countries including the African region. In nature, thousands of mycotoxins occur but only a few of them present significant food safety challenges.

Mycotoxins are secondary metabolites mainly produced by fungal species from the Aspergillus, Penicillium, and Fusarium genera. They often develop during production, harvest, and storage of grains and nuts in the presence of water. In the food production process, mycotoxins are among the most potent mutagenic and carcinogenic substances known. Ingestion of mycotoxins poses chronic health risks such as hepatotoxicity, genotoxicity, suppression of immunity, estrogenicity, nephrotoxicity, teratogenicity, and carcinogenic effects.

The adverse health effects of mycotoxins are compounded by the fact that they are not completely eliminated during food processing operations and can contaminate finished processed food products. The presence of mycotoxins, particularly the aflatoxins, has generated a lot of interest in the food products from African countries. The work by Maxwell (1998) evaluated the presence of aflatoxins in human body fluids and tissues in relation to child health in the tropics. The findings showed that in Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, and Sierra Leone, 25% of cord blood samples contained aflatoxins, ranging from 7 ng/L to 65 μg/L. The major classes of aflatoxins that were identified in the African countries include B1 and M1.

Chemical structures of aflatoxins prevalent in African countries.

Heavy metals have also contributed negatively to the food safety status in most African countries. As such, human exposure to heavy metals in Africa has become a major health risk and has received the attention of national and international environmentalists. Rapid population growth, increasing urbanization, and the increasing appearance of slums and townships as a consequence of poor planning coupled with increasing industrial activities are some of the major factors that have contributed to the accumulation of heavy metals in food products. Africa has large deposits of mineral resources, and mining activities have increased with poor environmental regulations and compliance. Thus, heavy metals have constituted agents of toxic pollution of water, air, soil, and food products.

An environmental assessment report by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) released in 2011, showed that drinking water, air, and agricultural soil in 10 communities from southeastern Nigeria contained over 900 times permissible levels of hydrocarbon and heavy metals. The report further indicated that heavy metal pollution is a continental public health challenge in the sub-Saharan African region. Another study conducted in the Democratic Republic of Congo showed a 43-fold increase in the urinary concentration of cadmium, cobalt, lead, and uranium in human subjects including children living in mining areas compared to controls.

The increase in the levels of the heavy metals was largely attributed to ingestion of contaminated food products and water with toxic chemical compounds. The increasing negative effects on food safety from water and soil pollution have, therefore, potentially put more people at risk of carcinogenic diseases, particularly in food producing areas.

Conclusion

Water is the most vital natural resource on the planet that many life forms depend on for survival. This article has shown how population growth, competition for water across sectors, and the exposure to infectious agents or toxic chemicals pose a serious threat to water security, food security, and human existence. There is increased pressure on all sectors to minimize water use by considering more efficient use of water and alternative sources of water.

This is only possible if the normative criteria of the human right to safe drinking water which are accessibility, availability, and quality are enforced to ensure that all current and foreseeable water demands highlighted under SDG 6 are met. Little promising progress has been achieved, but much work still has to be done to make water sustainability a reality before the SDG target date of 2030.

The present status of water potential in Africa suggests that synergies that adopt sharing of expertise, experiences, knowledge, analytical capabilities, and optimizing mechanisms for greater food safety assurance and awareness by looking at both chemical and microbial hazards in foods should be promoted in the continent. #WaterAccess #Sustainability #SDG6 #SDGS #AfricaWaterSolutions #SustainableCommunities