How we can overcome loss of biodiversity

What Is Loss Of Biodiversity? Loss of biodiversity refers to the extinction of worldwide animal species or the loss of different kinds of animals in a certain habitat. The vulnerability of biodiversity loss is dependent on environmental factors such as deforestation and waste disposal. Human activities have been contributing the highest to environmental degradation, thus resulting in habitat loss and loss of biodiversity. Even apparently insignificant disturbances in a certain habitat can lead to major disorders in the food chain. Biodiversity loss explains the decrease in the number, genetic variability, and diversity of species, and the biological habitats in a given area. This loss in the variety of life can lead to a decline in the efficiency of the area where the loss has occurred. Millions species are threatened with extinction, many within decades. Several pieces of research even show that if the extinction rate keeps constant like this, the earth will have to face the sixth mass extinction. Earlier mass extinctions on earth wiped out between 60% and 95% of all species. It takes millions of years for environments to overcome such an experience. Importance 0f Biodiversity: Biodiversity is essential for most parts of our lives. Humans value biodiversity for multiple reasons, some utilitarian and some intrinsic. This explains that we value biodiversity for both its advantages and contribution in sustaining the plants and its improvising beauty. Utilitarian qualities incorporate the numerous fundamental requirements people acquire from biodiversities like food, fuel, sanctuary, and medication. Further, biological systems offer critical types of assistance like fertilization, seed dispersal, environment guideline, water sanitization, supplement cycling, and control of pests. Biodiversity additionally holds value for its unrecognizable advantages and unperceived services. The intrinsic worth of biodiversity comprises cultural and religious values. At long last, the worth of biodiversity can likewise be perceived through the viewpoint of the relation between humans and biodiversity, progress toward one another, and the rest of nature. We might esteem biodiversity due to how it shapes our identity, our associations with one another, and normal practices. Loss of Biodiversity Causes:

Land Usage: Land usage comprises various land degradations and alternations like deforestation, urbanization, and farming or agriculture. Agriculture tears down biodiversity by changing normal natural surroundings to intense farming lands and by introducing toxic substances like fertilizers and pesticides, including ozone-depleting gases. Food chains further enhance impacts including energy use, transport, and waste. The immediate impacts of metropolitan development on environmental degradation are surely known: infrastructure development frequently brings about natural habitat eradication and fragmentation. The rise of urbanization drastically decreases biodiversity when huge spaces of the normal environment of species are fragmented. The small natural habitat of living organisms can’t uphold a similar degree of hereditary or ordered variety as they previously could. As indicated by a recent report distributed in Nature Sustainability, more than 17,000 species are in danger of losing territory by 2050 as farming keeps on extending to meet future food needs. Analysts and experts suggest that increased efficiency in farming and agriculture on a large and developing scale can highly assist in preventing biodiversity loss. Pollution: Four ozone-depleting gases that are normally examined and checked are water fume, carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. In the previous 250 years, concentrations of carbon dioxide and methane have expanded, alongside the presentation of anthropogenic discharges like hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride into the climate. These contaminants are released into the atmosphere by the combustion of fossil fuels, deforestation, and farming practices which enhance the impacts of environmental change. As bigger concentrations of greenhouse gases are delivered into the air, this makes the World’s surface temperature increment. Greenhouse gases are capable and equipped for retaining, radiating, and catching warmth from the Sun and into the earth’s atmosphere. Other toxic substances or pollutants that are discharged from the industrial and agricultural sectors are sulfur dioxides and nitrogen oxides. Sulfur dioxide and nitrous oxide amounts have various impacts on aquatic environments, including corrosiveness change, expanded nitrogen and aluminum content, and modifying biogeochemical measures. Furthermore, most impacts are created by accumulation and delayed exposure of these gases in the climate, changing soil and water chemistry. Consequently, sulfur to a great extent contributes to the lake and sea acidification, and nitrogen starts eutrophication of inland and beachfront water bodies that need nitrogen. Nitrogen deposition has adversely influenced terrestrial biological systems, including woodlands, meadows, alpine forests, lowlands, and bogs. The increasing convergence of nitrogen has changed the regular biogeochemical cycle and elevated soil fermentation. Subsequently, various flora and fauna species and biological ecosystems will decline their efficiency coupled with expanded soil acidification, contributing to low forest growth. Moreover, sulfate and nitrate can be leached from the dirt, eliminating basic and essential nutrients like calcium and magnesium, and be exposed to the freshwater, seaside, and marine ecosystems elevating eutrophication. Invasive Species: Invasive species have significant impacts on biodiversity and have adversely affected different environments around the world. Invasive species are immigrant species that have extinct and uprooted local biota, altered species, and food networks, and changed environmental capacities and services. As per the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, invasive species are viewed as one of the top five factors which bring biodiversity loss. In the past 50 years, biological invasions have drastically increased worldwide because of financial globalization, bringing about biodiversity loss. Biological ecosystems that are most vulnerable and defenseless against natural intrusions are waterfront regions, freshwater environments, islands, and regions with a Mediterranean environment and climate. Climate Change: Climate change is any critical prolonged change in the normal pattern, weather due to anthropogenic emissions and activities, or variability in natural patterns. Ecological conditions play a vital part in determining the capacity, function, and circulation of plants, coupled with various other factors. Changes in long-term natural conditions that can be on the whole cause environmental change are known to colossally affect flora patterns. It is anticipated that climate change will stay one of the significant factors of biodiversity loss in the future. Human activities are triggering the 6th significant mass extinction our Earth has seen, changing the circulation, abundance, and function of many species. Overpopulation: Primary or secondary activities by humans contribute to the loss of biodiversity. The Convention of Biological Diversity expresses that there are both backhanded and direct human factors. A portion of the changed human drivers is demographic, monetary, technological, socio-political, economic and scientific, and social and religious drivers. A portion of the primary human drivers are altering local land use and land cover, species introductions or abandonment, outside inputs, gathering, air, and water contamination, and environmental change. Human action has generously transformed 33% to one-half of the world’s surface. In the following 50 years, it is predicted that people will adversely affect 50-90 percent of land in developing nations. This is a consequence of the rising population and overconsumption of natural reserves. The increasing number of people is, the thing that many consider, the base of the biodiversity loss. Loss of Biodiversity Effects: Ecological Effects: Biodiversity loss also undermines the design and efficient working of the environment. Though all biological ecosystems can adjust to problems related to decreases in biodiversity to some extent, biodiversity loss diminishes an environment’s complexity, as roles once played by numerous interacting species or various interfacing individuals are played by less or none. The impacts of species loss or changes in structure, and the systems by which the impacts manifest themselves, can drastically affect environment properties, biological system types, and pathways of the potential local area change. At elevated levels of extinctions (40 to 60 percent of species), the impacts of biodiversity loss are ranked with other various significant drivers of environmental change, like ozone contamination, corrosive deposition on woodlands, and nutrient contamination. At last, the impacts are likewise seen on human necessities like clean water, air, and food production. Effects on Human Health: Humans rely on biodiversity in their day-to-day lives, in manners that are not generally obvious or recognized. Human wellbeing eventually relies on ecosystem outputs and services (like the accessibility of freshwater, food, and fuel sources) which are essential for adequate human health and productive occupations. Biodiversity loss can have critical direct human health effects if environmental services are at this point not enough to sustain social needs. Moreover, the biological variety of microorganisms and biota gives broad advantages to natural, health, and pharmacological sciences. Critical clinical and pharmacological discoveries are made through a more and wide understanding of the world’s biodiversity. Loss in biodiversity might restrict the discovery of expected medicines for some diseases, illnesses, and medical conditions. Loss 0f Biodiversity Solutions: Government Policies: To alleviate the issue of the loss of biodiversity, governments are bound to give a system that secures the natural diversity of biota. Human greed is interminable, thus, this won’t work without punishing conduct that undermines biodiversity. Government policies are also the cause of deforestation in the Amazon. Education: We must educate people to let them understand the consequences of loss of biodiversity and how crucial is biodiversity for the wellbeing of the environment, planet, and human beings. Education and awareness on the loss of biodiversity should begin very early, likely in primary school so that children can understand the importance of biodiversity and conduct implementation that mitigates the loss of biodiversity in adulthood. Reduce Pollution: Another huge step in mitigating the loss of biodiversity would be to reduce all sorts of pollution. Pollution consequently results in disturbances in the natural environment and our ecosystems react very sensitive to these disturbances. Through pollution and contamination, many ecological habitats are adversely affected. Pollution will increase loss in biodiversity because many biological species cannot adapt efficiently to these contaminated environments and will eventually become extinct. Prevent Invasive Species: We must not forget that invasive species carry a great threat to local organisms. They can transmit many diseases to local species and they may not be adopted to counter them properly. Additionally, invasive species might uproot local species which consequently can lead to the extinction of biodiversity. Afforestation: Planting trees can significantly sustain biodiversity. The major habitat of various animal and bird species is composed of trees. 90% of all organisms species live in rainforests, so if we lose these woodlands, we will likewise lose multiple species which will have negative chain consequences for the entire planet. Finally, every animal and plant has a unique, essential role in nature. We can’t live without nature’s help; and nature can’t live without our help. We must therefore protect our planet’s biodiversity to safeguard the future of our ecosystems, our climate, our health — and our humanity. Let’s agree from today to appreciate and protect the biodiversity around us. Let’s make that the new normal.

Biodiversity is vital to our survival

Biodiversity is the variety of life on Planet Earth, from microscopic genes to entire ecosystems. The Earth’s natural assets are made up of plants, animals, water, land, the atmosphere, and of course, humans. WWF goes on to assert that, “Biodiversity underpins the health of the planet and has a direct impact on all our lives; it supports human and societal needs, including food and nutrition security, energy, development of medicines and pharmaceuticals and freshwater to name but a few. Put simply, reduced biodiversity means millions of people face a future where food supplies are more vulnerable to pests and disease, and where fresh water is in irregular or short supply.” If biodiversity directly impacts our lives in such big ways, then it’s safe to say that conservation efforts don’t just benefit the environment, they benefit us, too. However, it’s no secret that we’ve lost an overwhelming number of species within the last four decades. These species have all but disappeared due to overpopulation, deforestation, consumer culture, animal exploitation, and other harming sources – all inflicted by mankind. Climate change is also disrupting animal’s natural rhythms and patterns by throwing off signals they use for migration, hibernation, and more. Natural disasters, including increasingly severe storms and weather patterns, constantly threaten animals and their environments worldwide. Further still, human influences harm animal populations through chemicals, pollutants, or changes to their habitats that force them elsewhere or threaten them altogether. It’s been said that at least 10,000 species are lost a year, halving the world’s wildlife population in just the past 40 years. This rapid loss of species we are witnessing today is estimated by experts to be between 1,000 and 10,000 times higher than the natural extinction rate. As increasingly accepted theories have argued — and as the Science papers show— we are now in the midst of the sixth great extinction, the unsettlingly-named Anthropocene, or the age of the humans. It’s important to consider the important part of environmental protection that animals of all kinds play. From pollinating crops and plants, to promoting healthy forests, acting as pest control, and even combating climate change, this is another reason that wildlife conservation is so important for the planet and its people. The importance from insects to mammals and sea creatures, animals of all kinds create a natural harmony and balance, that the Earth inherently relies on as outlined below; Food Security One compelling benefit that comes from wildlife conservation efforts is that it ensures food security. Protecting forests from deforestation and rebuilding forest habitats to preserve biodiversity aids in the carbon-sequestering process, provides new economic opportunities, and guards against erosion. In addition, wildlife conservation promotes agricultural biodiversity, which plays an important role in building a secure, robust, and thriving food system. When agricultural biodiversity is exploited and land is cleared for agriculture, resources and extensive habitat loss take place, as well as undocumented loss of species and massive soil erosion. Research shows this process has negative impacts on nutrition, health and dietary diversity of some groups of society. Public Health Another compelling benefit that comes from wildlife conservation is that these initiatives protect human health. Conservation International reports that “more than 50 percent of modern medicines and more than 90 percent of traditional medicines come from wild plants and animals.” These traditional medicines thereby represent an essential pharmacopeia and body of medical knowledge that cannot be replaced easily by synthetic alternatives. Moreover, a world that promotes healthy ecosystems and biodiversity provide crucial buffers between disease and humans. A number of studies have linked reduced diversity among mammal species and overall decreases in biodiversity to an increase in the transmission of animal-born diseases to humans. In addition to this, healthy ecosystems and biodiversity regulate climate change and mitigate water and air pollution. Creating Opportunity Perhaps the most compelling benefit that comes from wildlife conservation is that it provides us with opportunity, whether it be economically, socially, or culturally. Unsustainable resource extraction industries – such as the clear-cut logging industry, the bushmeat industry, the poaching industry, and the charcoal trade – extend the gap between the poor and the rich and have been linked to civil war and political strife. In conclusion, according to a report published this year by the World Economic Forum, more than half of the world’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (approximately €37 trillion) is highly or moderately dependent on nature. Redirecting even a small proportion of public finance towards tackling biodiversity loss would make a huge difference and bring a significant return on investment. Governments have already done this for climate. Thirty percent of the new seven-year EU budget (which began in January 2021) for example, will aim to tackle climate change. Investing in nature will likewise help to achieve climate targets, with more than 25 percent of emissions removed by intact forests and other ecosystems each year, with potential for additional actions that would result in a further 30 percent of emissions reductions. The COVID-19 outbreak, with its disastrous impacts on societies and economies worldwide, has placed a spotlight on the dire consequences of our broken relationship to nature. The degradation of once-intact places has increased human contacts with wildlife that, combined with the commercial trade in wildlife for human consumption, poses the threat of further zoonotic disease spillover and pandemics. Conserving the world’s last remaining intact ecosystems (and restoring degraded ecosystems) will help us confront the looming global biodiversity crisis while also tackling the threat of climate change and pandemic disease. Finally, Together with climate change, the world is also facing a #biodiversitycrisis, which has failed to capture the same attention. But efforts made by #governments to tackle the #ClimateCrisis show that #action is possible when there is sufficient #political will. By conserving wildlife, we're ensuring that future generations can enjoy our natural world and the incredible species that live within it. Easy Ways to Help the Planet: • Eat less meat: Download Food Monster, the largest plant-based recipe app on the App Store to help reduce your environmental footprint, save animals and get healthy. • Reduce your fast fashion footprint: Take initiative by standing up against fast fashion pollution and supporting sustainable and circular brands that are raising awareness around important issues through recycled zero-waste clothing designed to be returned and remade over and over again. • Sign a petition: Your voice matters! Help turn petitions into victories by signing the latest list of must-sign petitions to help people, animals, and the planet. • Stay informed: Keep up with the latest news and important stories involving animals, the environment, sustainable living, food, health, and human interest topics by subscribing to news newsletter! • Do what you can: Reduce waste, plant trees, eat local, travel responsibly, reuse stuff, say no to single-use plastics, recycle, vote smart, switch to cold water laundry, divest from fossil fuels, save water, shop wisely, donate if you can, grow your own food, volunteer, conserve energy, compost, and don’t forget about the microplastics and microbeads lurking in common household and personal care products.

Getting our climate programs and reforms right

As world leaders meet to discuss the growing threat of climate change at #COP27, the global impact of #climate change continues to grow, many of the world's most #vulnerable #communities are facing a fight for their lives– extreme #weather is leaving them with nothing to survive on. More frequent and severe wildfires, storms, and record heatwaves are devastating communities. Studies show that even half a degree of warming can lead to millions more people being impacted and much greater economic damage. Inaction, or inadequate action, will mean more lives lost, mass migration, major economic disruptions and worsening inequality. The growing urgency of the climate crisis and the more favorable economics of climate action together show the dire need and the incredible opportunity for bold climate action. It is increasingly clear that low-carbon and resilient economic growth can be an engine to help revitalize global growth, contribute to poverty reduction, generate jobs and income opportunities, all while vigorously countering growing climate risks. The process of developing and implementing these policies is just as important. A transparent and deliberative process can help identify political and material risks, improve communication between decision-makers and the public, and give agency to socially and economically marginalized groups. Fortunately, there is ample evidence showing that policies that address climate change, developed through inclusive processes, can also deliver immediate benefits to people. We call this people-centered climate action. People-centered climate action does three things: through an inclusive process, it purposefully identifies and unlocks social and economic benefits, it targets these benefits to further equity, and it ensures a just and well-managed transition away from a high-carbon economy. Examples of people-centered climate action include using the revenues from carbon pricing or savings from cuts in fossil fuel subsidies to support low-income or vulnerable communities, employing innovative financing to boost energy access through distributed solar power, and restoring ecosystems in ways that also raise rural incomes. The transition to a low-carbon and climate resilient economy is starting. The finance sector is waking up to the risks of high-carbon and stranded fossil fuel assets, and is rapidly shifting away from them toward green alternatives. Over 700 major businesses have committed to science-based targets for emissions reductions, with many now aiming for net-zero emissions by 2050. Over 100 cities have committed to net-zero targets. Investors are considering how their actions can support, rather than hamper, inclusive development and a just transition. These private sector and sub-national leaders are now calling on national governments to follow their lead. Some governments have committed to mid-century net-zero emission goals, and so far 68 countries have indicated that they will enhance their Paris Agreement targets in 2020. But these countries are mostly smaller economies, often those most vulnerable to climate impacts, and together are responsible for only 8% of global emissions. Leaders of some of the world’s major emitter economies are hesitating at a time when they should instead be accelerating action. Amidst signs of a global economic slow-down, some leaders are falling back on outdated notions that there is a trade-off between climate action, on one hand, and economic and social progress, on the other. Those resisting the low-carbon transition are quick to resurface these notions. But as the global transition to a new climate economy progresses, the political and policy grip of those with vested interests in the old economy, such as the fossil fuel sector, will wane. They will increasingly be counter-balanced by voices from the new climate economy – solar companies, consumer goods companies committed to deforestation-free supply chains, for example. Central to this rising chorus are the youth and voting public demanding climate action. People around the world are also crying out for more equal access to decently paid jobs, for health care and education, and for a better future for their children. The world now stands at a crossroads. We can, and must, deliver both ambitious climate action and better lives for people. And there is no viable alternative: growth and development benefits will only be sustainable if we tackle climate change, and ambitious climate action is only possible if it delivers benefits for people. We must take the leap and, with people firmly at the center, accelerate the transition to the inclusive and sustainable growth story of the 21st century. The Need for Bold and Inclusive Climate Action is More Apparent than Ever Globally, we have made remarkable progress in tackling poverty in recent decades, due in significant part to robust economic growth. Despite population growth, nearly 1.1 billion fewer people live in extreme poverty today than in 1990. But continued progress is being compromised by growing economic inequality in some countries. Today, the world’s 26 wealthiest people own as much in financial assets as the entire poorer half of humanity. While unemployment fell in 2021, most of the world’s 3.3 billion employed people have jobs that do not offer a decent living, economic security or workplace protections. As a result, people are taking to the streets to call for decent jobs, health care and education, and for a better future for their children. At the same time, communities are increasingly facing the devastating impacts of climate change, from increasingly severe and frequent storms to hot and dry conditions that fuel wildfires, droughts, and crippling heatwaves. It is the poorest who are most vulnerable to these impacts, often lacking the resources to adapt or move. They are also often those who have contributed the least greenhouse gas emissions. Climate change is unfair. Poor people tend to live in the areas most vulnerable to climate change. About 14% of people in developing countries live in low-lying coastal zones. Nearly 29% of the world’s population lives in arid regions. These communities are particularly susceptible to droughts and floods. Climate change disproportionately hurts the young and the old, and it exacerbates gender inequity, as women are usually responsible for fetching water and gathering firewood, tasks that climate change makes much harder. The more the world falls behind the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement, the more we will see climate impacts hampering development and economic progress. We have already witnessed about 1 degree Celsius (1.8°F) of global warming, and by 2030, we are likely to have missed our last chance of meeting the 1.5oC goal . For millions of people, a half-degree change in average global temperature rise makes a world of difference. On a planet 1.5 oC warmer, 14% of the population will be exposed to extreme heatwaves at least once every five years. At 2 oC, that rises to 37% of people. Those who have no choice but to face the heat — people who labor outside, people without air conditioning — bear the brunt of this burden. Approximately 820 million people worldwide live in coastal areas less than 10 meters (33 feet) above sea level – more than 10% of the world’s population. Sea level rise has recently accelerated, as the warming ocean expands and polar ice sheets melt. As a result, it is expected that rising seas could impact three times more people by 2050 than previously estimated. With 2oC of warming, farmers, fishing communities and food security will suffer further: maize crop losses and fishery declines from climate change will be double those expected from 1.5oC of warming. Indonesia’s Low-Carbon Development Initiative A report by the Indonesian government in 2019 assessed the benefits of various economic paths that could deliver low-carbon development for the economy. The analysis found that a development path that could cut greenhouse gas emissions nearly 43% by 2030 would have significant social and economic benefits as well. Compared with business as usual (BAU), in 2045 the benefits of a low-carbon development path would include: • Over 15 million additional jobs, which are greener and better paid • Cutting extreme poverty in half, to 4.2% of the population relative to 2018 • Saving about 40,000 lives every year from reduced air and water pollution • A smaller opportunity gap between women and men, and between Indonesia’s different provinces • Average GDP growth rates of 6% per year, stronger than under BAU from the first year, with an additional $5.4 trillion added to the country’s GDP by 2045. The Indonesian government is now incorporating the results of this analysis into its next 5-year economic development plan from 2020-24 and into provincial development plans. Climate Action can Deliver Social and Economic Benefits With careful design and implementation, inclusive climate policies can contribute to higher incomes and living standards, more and better jobs, and more resources for governments to provide public goods and services. Other benefits include improved services and infrastructure for deprived populations, cleaner air and water, better health, and protection from the loss of life and livelihoods that accompanies extreme weather. Research by the New Climate Economy finds that bold climate action can deliver at least $26 trillion in net global economic benefits through 2030, compared to business as usual, as well as a range of employment, health, and other benefits. The social and economic benefits of climate mitigation policies include: • Higher income and living standards. Clean infrastructure investment is a springboard for rapid gains in incomes, poverty reduction and energy access, especially in developing countries, as well as gains in global equity. Rapid innovation and the growing cost-competitiveness of clean energy make it possible to quickly expand infrastructure for energy access without increasing air pollution. Efficiency gains in energy and materials use drive productivity growth, the most important long-term driver of income growth. Adopting the most efficient technologies can lead to large cost savings and translate into lower prices for consumers. • Employment gains. Cutting carbon emissions increases jobs in green industries while decreasing jobs in high-carbon ones. In 2018, the renewable energy sector employed at least 11 million people worldwide, and is the fastest-growing source of jobs in several countries. Transitioning to a low-carbon economy could deliver up to 65 million new low-carbon jobs by 2030, more than offsetting a decline of 28 million in high-carbon sectors. Such a significant restructuring of labor markets requires strong labor protections to ensure these jobs are decent and pay appropriate wages. Countries will need to implement strong proactive policies to assist and help reskill workers in declining sectors and support economic diversification in highly affected communities. • Massive gains in public health. Burning fossil fuels creates harmful indoor and outdoor air pollution. The global welfare costs of air pollution were estimated to be about $3 trillion in 2015. Doubling renewables in the global energy mix by 2030 could save up to 4 million lives. Since people with lower incomes are typically more exposed to local air pollution, they may benefit more from its reduction, a gain for social equity. Moving to plant-based diets, which are less carbon intensive, could also yield large public health benefits, particularly in developed and emerging economies where high levels of meat and dairy consumption contribute to poor health outcomes, including high rates of heart disease. People-Centered Climate Action is Possible Solving the climate crisis in an unequal world will require people-centered climate action: policies that unlock the potential social benefits of climate action; policies that address the needs of low-income and disadvantaged groups and enhance social equity; policies that ensure a well-managed and socially just transition. With these attributes, people-centered climate action can gain the public support and political buy-in required to make significant and lasting change. Climate action that exacerbates inequalities, on the other hand, will not succeed. Opportunities for People-Centered Climate Mitigation This section identifies opportunities for people-centered climate action in the key sectors of energy, cities, and food and land use. Putting a Price on Carbon and Recycling the Revenues to Enhance Equity Carbon pricing and fossil fuel subsidy reform are among the most effective ways to encourage households, businesses and infrastructure providers to use efficient, low-carbon energy. Both policies can bolster government fiscal balances. Carbon pricing programs are already in place or scheduled to start soon in 76 countries and subnational regions globally. Existing carbon pricing programs raised about $75 billion in government revenues in 2021. Applied more broadly, carbon pricing and fossil fuel subsidy reform could raise $2.8 trillion per year in government revenues in 2030. How these revenues are used can have important repercussions on the distributive effects of carbon pricing. Carbon pricing can have a regressive impact on income distribution, unless designed with a redistributive approach that recycles revenues back to people — through public programs, tax credits or direct payments. Where it is not, concerns about the distributional impacts of fuel prices or fossil fuel subsidy reforms can lead to major social unrest. The underlying motivation is not the policies themselves, but the fact that people simply cannot live on today’s wage levels. Other countries also show that well-designed reforms can benefit poor and vulnerable groups. When Indonesia reduced its fossil fuel subsidies in 2005 and 2008 it established a system of cash transfers to 19 million poor and near-poor households to offset higher energy prices. More than two-thirds of the total benefits went to the poorest 40% of the population, and cash transfer recipients showed improved education, health and employment outcomes. Revenues from carbon pricing can also help to fund a just transition for fossil fuel workers. The International Monetary Fund recently found that providing fair unemployment benefits, retraining and relocation opportunities to coal workers could cost less than 2% of the revenues from a $50/ton carbon tax in China, India, the UK and the U.S. Finally, country experience is bolstering confidence that carbon pricing is compatible with economic growth. Sweden implemented a carbon tax in 1991, which has now reached $150 per ton of CO2, while remaining a highly prosperous and still growing developed economy. California has grown somewhat faster than the overall U.S. economy since launching its cap-and-trade program in 2012. British Columbia has similarly outpaced growth in most of the rest of Canada since adopting a carbon tax in 2008. 1. Energy Progress in clean energy technologies is transforming our ability to expand access to electricity in ways that also limit air pollution and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. This progress is also rapidly reducing costs. Since 2010, solar panel costs have fallen by 85% and wind power by 49%, making clean energy cost-competitive with coal, and increasingly with natural gas, in many regions. It would now be cheaper to replace three-quarters of existing U.S. coal plants with wind and solar power than to keep them operating with coal. And with falling costs and new developments around battery storage technologies, and integration into the grid, solutions to the variable supply of renewables are emerging. However, even the more advanced G7 economies on average produce 19% of their electricity from coal, and they provide at least $100 billion per year in subsidies to the coal, oil and gas industries—slowing the market-driven transition. It is time for policymakers and investors to focus on clean energy solutions and stop subsidizing coal. Despite policy barriers, the deployment of renewables, and the accompanying jobs, is accelerating in many regions of the world. In the U.S. alone, clean energy employs nearly 3.3 million people, outnumbering jobs in the fossil fuel industry 3 to 1. However, these are not always good jobs with decent wages, benefits and rights at work. Governments and employers need to do more to ensure job quality. Some already are. The Pledge for a Just Transition to Decent Jobs encourages renewable energy developers, producers and buyers to commit to employment standards including social dialogue, labor standards of the International Labor Organization (ILO) and social protection for their employees and those of their contractors. Enel, Ørsted, Autodesk, Safaricom and Unilever are among the companies that have signed the pledge. In the Philippines, the Green Jobs Act of 2016 included provisions on workers’ rights and fair incomes to protect workers in green industries. Distributed renewable energy systems are quickly creating new opportunities for energy access in developing countries. For instance, in 2017 off-grid solutions provided electricity access to 152 million people, up from 20 million in 2011. Off-grid solar home systems are spreading quickly in some places, offering affordable access to limited amounts of electricity. For example, in many African countries commercial companies are using a “pay-as-you-go” model to rent solar home systems to consumers who use their mobile phones to make payments until they own the system. M-KOPA, one of the biggest companies, estimates that each household saves $650 in avoided kerosene costs over the first four years. Some clean energy opportunities have spurred an increase in women’s participation in the energy sector. In Nigeria, Tanzania and Uganda, the women-led social enterprise Solar Sister has built a network of over 2,500 women entrepreneurs that provide clean energy services to more than 350,000 people. 2. Cities Around 900 million people worldwide live in slums, without adequate access to water, sanitation, power and other infrastructure services. They are often located in far-flung locations exposed to natural hazards. Compact, connected and clean cities can support inclusive growth and broad-based improvements in quality of life, with major benefits for economic productivity and emissions reduction. New analysis conducted for the Coalition for Urban Transitions shows that implementing low-carbon measures in cities could support 87 million jobs in 2030 in sectors such as clean energy and public transport. Furthermore, low-carbon measures in cities could deliver over half the emission reductions needed to keep global temperature rise below 2°C. Agglomeration economies mean that the productivity of workers and businesses is higher in larger, more densely populated cities, particularly those with good public transport networks that enable people to easily reach jobs and services. Greater compactness allows cities to provide infrastructure and services more cost-effectively. In sub-Saharan Africa, for example, the capital costs of providing piped water, flush toilets, power and landline telephones average $325 per person in the highest-density cities, but $665 in medium-density cities and up to $2,837 in remote rural areas. It is estimated that the low-carbon investments needed to reduce urban emissions by 90% could collectively pay for themselves and then generate a stream of savings worth $23.9 trillion by 2050 in today’s terms. Higher urban density can also reduce greenhouse gas emissions by cutting transport and residential energy consumption. A recent analysis of 120 cities finds that, after controlling for per capita income, a 10% increase in urban density correlates with a 2% decrease in per capita carbon emissions. Urban planning and infrastructure policies play a key role in promoting productive urbanization. In their absence, market failures and bad policies, in particular failures to provide critical public goods, often contribute to unmanaged sprawl, lowered economic productivity, growth of slums, over-reliance on private motor vehicles, severe congestion, local air pollution, inefficient energy use, high greenhouse gas emissions, and other negative spillovers. Urban infrastructure policies that provide for efficient mass public transit systems play a major role in averting many of these dysfunctions, as well as improving social equity by providing low-cost travel for the poor. In Medellín, Colombia, a cable car system installed in the mid-2000s provided new transport options for slum dwellers living in favelas surrounding the city. The cable car was used by about 30,000 favela residents daily, enabling access to job or education opportunities in the city, while cutting travel times by an hour on average. It contributed to massive declines in violent crime and murders. In Lagos, Nigeria, a low-cost Bus Rapid Transit system carries 200,000 passengers a day, who enjoy shorter travel times and reduced fares compared to travel on private minibuses. Road congestion and traffic accidents along the route are down, and CO2 emissions have fallen by 13% since 2008. Similarly in Bogotá, Colombia, the construction of a Bus Rapid Transit system benefited poor residents the most, with poor commuters saving 18 minutes per trip and average $0.50 in daily savings (8-12% of the average daily income for Bogotá’s low-income population). To “lift all boats” national governments need to proactively plan for a just urban transition, which requires far-sighted collaboration with local governments. For national leaders, creating such cities would yield short-term political dividends and secure long-term national prosperity. 3. Food and Land Use Improving agricultural practices and land use is a critical aspect of the interrelated challenges of feeding the world, ensuring sustainable rural livelihoods, and addressing climate change. 820 million people are malnourished and regularly go hungry. More than two-thirds of the global poor (more than 500 million people) live in rural areas, where they often experience inequitable access to land and resources, and poor access to markets — which can lead to heavy losses of produce before it’s even sold. By 2050, the world will need to feed nearly 10 billion people. The difference between the amount of food produced in 2022 and the amount needed to feed nearly 10 billion people is estimated at 7,400 trillion calories. That’s a 56% increase from what we produced in 2021. But we simply cannot use 56% more land. Instead, we must sustainably increase productivity on current agricultural land to avoid further expansion into natural areas. A recent report from the Food and Land Use Coalition suggests that key improvements in food and land use systems could indeed improve global food security, while at the same time leading to doubled rural income growth and over 120 million new jobs in poor rural communities. Total economic gains from transforming food and land-use systems could reach $5.7 trillion a year by 2030, linked to reduced greenhouse gas emissions, preservation of natural capital, improved human health, and gains in agricultural productivity and food distribution systems. So-called “climate-smart agriculture”’ covers a myriad of old and new production systems, including holistic landscape farming and techniques ranging from intercropping and integrated crop-livestock management to improved water, soil and nutrient management. Done effectively, climate-smart agriculture can lead to higher productivity that creates better jobs and income for farmers, mitigates greenhouse gas emissions, and increases climate resilience. Farmers in Niger, for example, have adopted improved landscape management approaches, greatly increasing tree and shrub cover on cropland by interplanting nitrogen-fixing trees and allowing roots and stumps to regenerate. The strategy has substantially increased productivity on 5 million hectares (12.4 million acres) of land, restored at least 250,000 hectares (617,763 acres) of severely degraded land, and provided food for 2.5 million people. Higher productivity on existing lands reduces the pressure to clear forests. Forests generate multiple social and economic benefits, including improved soil quality, habitat for biodiversity, and regulation of local and global climates. Forests support a variety of industries, from fiber production to ecotourism. Protecting forests can go hand-in-hand with protecting people. In Bolivia, Brazil and Colombia, areas managed by indigenous people with secure land rights had two to three times less annual deforestation from 2000-2012 than similar areas of those countries not managed by indigenous people. A shift to healthy plant-based diets can also have enormous benefits for people and also for the climate. Shifting the diets of populations who consume high amounts of animal-based foods toward plant-based foods could result in global health-related cost savings of almost $1 trillion per year by 2050, as well as avoiding future emissions related to changing land use by 37—168 gigatons of equivalent Co2 (GtCO2e). Now is the Time to Finance the Low-Carbon and Climate Resilient Transition Climate action will require new and different investments. In many cases, these will yield significant returns. For instance, a recent report from the Global Commission on Adaptation found that investments of $1.8 trillion globally in five areas from 2022 to 2030 could generate $7.1 trillion in total net benefits. Similarly, renewable energy often requires higher up-front investments compared with fossil fuel power, but these costs can be offset by savings on fuel. Many governments are concerned, however, that large-scale climate action should not unsustainably increase public debt or contribute to macroeconomic instability. One underappreciated factor that finance ministers should consider is that real interest rates on long-term government debt have been falling for decades and are now near zero or negative in many developed countries. Analysis of the structural reasons behind this suggest that low interest rates may persist. As a result, the fiscal and welfare costs of government borrowing may be significantly lower than previously thought. Governments may be able to invest public funds in climate action in ways that are fiscally sustainable and that stimulate private investment. But many developing countries do not have access to these very low real interest rates. Multilateral development banks and other international agencies can help to mobilize and channel low-cost finance to developing countries and ensure all governments have the means to implement urgently needed climate action. As countries develop their own strong, low-carbon and climate resilient economic growth plans — as Indonesia is doing through its Low Carbon Development Initiative — these should guide the investment plans for the country, with multilateral, bilateral and private finance channeled to support them. Opportunities for People-Centered Climate Adaptation Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is essential to avert the threat of catastrophic climate change. Yet historic emissions have locked in some global warming and climate change is exacting large human and economic costs through heatwaves, floods, drought, storms and other extreme weather events. Recent analysis by the Global Commission on Adaptation indicates that an investment of $1.8 trillion between 2022/23 and 2030 could yield benefits of $7.1 trillion over this period. These benefits include avoided losses to farmers’ livelihoods, to workers’ jobs and wages; avoided damage to homes, businesses and infrastructure; and avoided deaths, trauma and illness. Climate adaptation can especially benefit the poor, who tend to live in areas more exposed to natural hazards like landslides or flooding. The social gains of adaptation will be greater and more equitable if poor and vulnerable populations participate in the planning and design of public policies, contributing unique local knowledge and voicing their specific needs. Five areas of action should be prioritized to strengthen the resilience of our communities and systems to climate change and, in some cases, also contribute to reducing emissions: 1. Strengthen early-warning systems Flooding affects 250 million people each year, with around 84% of floods occurring in developing countries. Floods cause an average of 5,000-6,000 deaths annually and overall economic costs from deaths and direct and indirect economic damages have been estimated to exceed $70 billion per year, with over 80% of these costs in developing countries. Meteorological early-warning systems, alongside critical infrastructure (e.g., roads and bridges used for evacuation), and environmental buffers (e.g., mangrove forests that protect coasts from storm surges) can mitigate much of the damage from natural disasters. Early warning of an approaching flood gives people time to move to safer ground, allows authorities to help the most vulnerable, and enables businesses to protect property and infrastructure. Studies suggest that a 24-hour warning can reduce asset damage from floods by around 30%, and a 48-hour warning by up to 50%. Investments to upgrade early-warning systems, especially in developing countries, are expected to have a high benefit-cost ratio: a $10 billion investment would yield benefits of around $100 billion between 2022/23 to 2030. In Bangladesh, better early warning systems — combined with civic awareness campaigns, cyclone shelters, strengthening buildings and improving post-disaster recovery — have dramatically reduced deaths from cyclones: 300,000 people died from Cyclone Bhola in 1970, but only a few in the entire country died from Cyclone Fani recently. 2. Protect mangrove forests Mangrove forests extend along 700,000 kilometers (roughly 435 ,000 miles) of coastline in 123 countries, forming a natural seawall that limits damage from flooding. Worldwide, mangroves reduce the cost of damage to property from coastal flooding by over $80 billion per year, while reducing the number of people affected by coastal floods by 18 million. Other services provided by mangroves include the provision of raw materials and food for coastal communities, nurseries for offshore fisheries, and recreation opportunities. The benefits of mangrove preservation significantly outweigh the value of forgone opportunities such as aquaculture. 3. Improve dryland crop production Dryland farming refers to farming that relies entirely on rainfall, undertaken in relatively dry areas of the world. Drylands cover 41% of the earth’s surface and are home to 30% of the human population, including the majority of the world’s poor. Dryland agriculture typically produces low and variable yields, because of low and erratic rainfall, high temperatures, poor soil quality and land degradation, especially in developing countries. In sub-Saharan Africa, crop productivity per unit of water consumed is only 20-40% of the world average. Climate change will likely exacerbate the challenges of dryland farming in sub-Saharan Africa, with even higher temperatures, more erratic rainfall, and more extreme weather events reducing yields by 10-15%. Investments to increase the adoption of modern farming technologies and practices optimized for dryland conditions could significantly help poor smallholder farmers in developing areas better adapt to climate change, increasing incomes and slashing poverty. Methods include greater uptake of new crop varieties that provide higher yields with limited water, improved soil management, and more efficient water management. Such interventions could boost cereal yields in sub-Saharan Africa by 70-140%. Globally, investing $150 billion in dryland agricultural productivity from 2022/23 to 2030 could generate net economic benefits of over $850 billion. 4. Manage water resources The impacts of climate change are channeled primarily through the water cycle. Improved water management can help countries better adapt to water scarcity and more variable supply. Water service providers have traditionally relied on “gray” or built infrastructure, such as dams and water treatment plants. Today the water management sector draws increasingly on “green” infrastructure such as forests, farms and floodplains that can increase the quantity and quality of water downstream. The returns for investing in water resource management can be substantial, especially for green infrastructure. New York City’s efforts to protect its watershed have cost $1.5 billion since the 1990s but have averted the need to build new water treatment facilities costing $8 billion, yielding a benefit-cost ratio of 5:1. Green infrastructure is likely to have substantial co-benefits, including carbon sequestration, reduced air pollution and improved health, healthier ecosystems and recreation opportunities. Better planning and incentives could dramatically improve the efficiency of water use. The World Bank estimates that by 2050, policy reforms in water resource management could increase developing regions’ GDP by 8–20% relative to a business-as-usual scenario. A participatory approach can ensure that individual people and families benefit. In Togo, the government and civil society organizations engaged local women and youth in developing an ecosystem-based project to revitalize water reservoirs and build climate resilience. The project improved crop yields and created new livelihood opportunities like market gardening, fisheries and brick construction, all stemming from greater water availability and security. 5. Build resilient infrastructure Any disruptions to power, transport, water and other infrastructure systems exact heavy costs on households and businesses. The economic damages to households and businesses in low- and middle-income countries from disruptions of power, transport and water systems are estimated at $391-647 billion annually. In 2007, Tropical Storm Sidr knocked out the entire power grid of Bangladesh, leaving the country’s population without power for up to a week and causing $1.7 billion of economic losses. In Tanzania, firms suffer losses equal to 1.8% of GDP annually due to power, transport and water disruptions, of which 40% are caused by rain and floods. Improving the resilience of infrastructure requires action at several levels. Physical assets such as roads, power lines and bridges need strengthening to resist natural hazards. Recent studies estimate that improving the climate resilience of new infrastructure assets typically costs 2-5% of the total cost of the assets. The cost of such investments would be about $1.1 trillion from 2022/23 to 2030. The benefits include both avoided damage to physical infrastructure and avoided costs of infrastructure disruptions for households and businesses. The present value of such benefits over the lifetime of this resilient infrastructure is estimated at around $5 trillion, giving a 5:1 ratio of benefits to costs. A New Decade Demands a New Approach Policymaking can be painstaking and slow. Good policymaking can be even slower. The trials of the process often cause ministers and decision-makers to rely too heavily on input from interest groups with enough power and access to make their voices heard. In many cases, these vested interests have pushed back against climate action and in favor of the status quo. As the transition progresses, the political and policy grip of the fossil fuel industry and others blocking change will wane. To succeed, the global transition to a new climate economy needs to be people-centered and offer the prospect of a fairer world. If it does, more and more people will see their future in it and will support change. We have not seen the end of the social unrest that erupted in 2019. But 2022/23 provides leaders with a unique opportunity to train their gaze and focus on social benefits, enhanced equity and a just transition, as countries revise their climate plans and scale up implementation. We know how to develop smart climate programs and policy reforms that improve people’s lives and livelihoods immediately, while safeguarding development gains and economic growth into the future. We can, and must, get these #programs and reforms right. The people are watching.

My crucial guide on a hunger free world

Last night, close to one billion people went to sleep hungry. The share of the world's hungry is highest in sub-Saharan Africa. These countries have been affected by adverse weather conditions linked to El Niño, along with the increased number of violent conflicts, face rising food insecurity from disrupted food production and, consequently, increasing levels of undernourishment of its people. The devastating effects of conflicts have been severe in countries such as Nigeria, South Sudan, Yemen, Syria and Somalia, where more than 20 million people face severe food insecurity. In addition to the detrimental effect conflicts have on the severity of food insecurity, there is a growing concern in these countries on the conflicts which are triggered by the presence of food insecurity and malnutrition. In the last ten years, humanitarian assistance and spending needs have grown by almost 130 percent, with only approximately 40 percent covering needs in the food and agriculture subsectors. The surge in humanitarian needs, as well as the potential for agricultural development and rural resilience-building to provide a buffer against crises -- highlights the need for a new way of responding to the food security challenges. But 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. 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. Fighting hunger is a global mission and #ZeroHunger is also one of the main #SustainableDevelopmentGoals (SDGs). Achieving this requires strong determination and commitment from individual nations. Formulating policies that support better agricultural investments, providing agriculture subsidies and incentives, promoting child and women health care, prioritising nutrition programmes, and boosting the production and consumption of climate resilient native nutritional crops are some of the elementary practices that will be crucial in defeating hunger and creating a zero hunger world by 2030.