ArticlePDF Available

Research priorities for global food security under extreme events

July 2022
One Earth 5(7):756-766

DOI:10.1016/j.oneear.2022.06.008

License
CC BY 4.0

Authors:

Ruth Delzeit

University of Basel

Adriana Ignaciuk

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

Christian Levers

Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ & University of British Columbia

Show all 50 authorsHide

Extreme events, such as those caused by climate change, economic or geopolitical shocks, and pest or disease epidemics, threaten global food security. The complexity of causation, as well as the myriad ways that an event, or a sequence of events, creates cascading and systemic impacts, poses significant challenges to food systems research and policy alike. To identify priority food security risks and research opportunities, we asked experts from a range of fields and geographies to describe key threats to global food security over the next two decades and to suggest key research questions and gaps on this topic. Here, we present a prioritization of threats to global food security from extreme events, as well as emerging research questions that highlight the conceptual and practical challenges that exist in designing, adopting, and governing resilient food systems. We hope that these findings help in directing research funding and resources toward food system transformations needed to help society tackle major food system risks and food insecurity under extreme events.

Fig S3 Years of expertise in the declared field from experts contributing to the study. Data were collected in the initial online survey.

…

Figures - uploaded by Jose M. Rodriguez-Llanes

Content may be subject to copyright.

Content uploaded by Jose M. Rodriguez-Llanes

Content may be subject to copyright.

Article

Research priorities for global food security under

extreme events

Graphical abstract

Highlights

dWe asked experts for top threats to global food security from

extreme events

dWe ﬁnd unresolved governance challenges underpin many of

the key threats

dWe also asked experts for top outstanding research priorities

on this topic

dCoordination to design, adopt, and govern resilient food

systems is needed

Authors

Zia Mehrabi, Ruth Delzeit,

Adriana Ignaciuk, ..., Paul C. West,

Hannah Wittman, Liangzhi You

Correspondence

zia.mehrabi@colorado.edu

In brief

Extreme events threaten the production

and supply of food around the world.

They create cascading and systemic

impacts posing signiﬁcant challenges to

food systems research and policy alike.

However, research teams and

policymakers are not tackling these

connections and are developing solutions

in isolation. We bring together experts to

prioritize threats to global food security

from extreme events as well as research.

Our ﬁndings illustrate the importance of

coordinated design, adoption, and

governance of food systems for

resilience.

Mehrabi et al., 2022, One Earth 5, 756–766

July 15, 2022 Crown Copyright ª2022 Published by Elsevier Inc.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2022.06.008 ll

Article

Research priorities for global food security

under extreme events

Zia Mehrabi,

1,2,56,

*Ruth Delzeit,

Adriana Ignaciuk,

Christian Levers,

5,6

Ginni Braich,

Kushank Bajaj,

Araba Amo-Aidoo,

7,8

Weston Anderson,

9,10

Roland A. Balgah,

11,12

Tim G. Benton,

Martin M. Chari,

Erle C. Ellis,

Narcisse Z. Gahi,

Franziska Gaupp,

17,18

Lucas A. Garibaldi,

19,20

James S. Gerber,

Cecile M. Godde,

Ingo Grass,

Tobias Heimann,

Mark Hirons,

Gerrit Hoogenboom,

Meha Jain,

Dana James,

David Makowski,

Blessing Masamha,

Sisi Meng,

Sathaporn Monprapussorn,

Daniel M€

uller,

Andrew Nelson,

(Author list continued on next page)

SUMMARY

Extreme events, such as those caused by climate change, economic or geopolitical shocks, and pest or dis-

ease epidemics, threaten global food security. The complexity of causation, as well as the myriad ways that

an event, or a sequence of events, creates cascading and systemic impacts, poses signiﬁcant challenges to

food systems research and policy alike. To identify priority food security risks and research opportunities, we

asked experts from a range of ﬁelds and geographies to describe key threats to global food security over the

next two decades and to suggest key research questions and gaps on this topic. Here, we present a priori-

tization of threats to global food security from extreme events, as well as emerging research questions that

highlight the conceptual and practical challenges that exist in designing, adopting, and governing resilient

food systems. We hope that these ﬁndings help in directing research funding and resources toward food sys-

tem transformations needed to help society tackle major food system risks and food insecurity under

extreme events.

INTRODUCTION

Extreme events caused by climate change, economic or geopo-

litical shocks, and pest or disease epidemics can induce,

spread, and prolong food insecurity.

1,2

They do this by reducing

farming and ﬁsheries productivity, threatening subsistence, and

disrupting food distribution and public service delivery. Extreme

events can also drive increases in food prices and volatility,

Department of Environmental Studies, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA

Mortenson Center in Global Engineering, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA

University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy

Department of Environmental Geography, Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

Kassel University, Department of Agricultural Engineering, Kassel University, 37213 Witzenhausen, Germany

Kumasi Technical University, Department of Automotive and Agricultural Mechanization, P.O. Box 854, Kumasi, Ghana

Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20740, USA

International Research Institute for Climate and Society, Columbia University, Palisades, NY 10964, USA

(Afﬁliations continued on next page)

SCIENCE FOR SOCIETY Heat waves, ﬂoods, droughts, pest outbreaks and diseases, ﬁnancial crises, and

human conﬂicts are threatening the production and supply of food around the world. These extreme events

are on the rise, and our ability to prepare for them seems limited. Multiple events occurring at the same time

compound the problem. Research teams and policymakers are developing solutions to improve the resil-

ience of food systems, but this is often done in isolation—tackling one problem at a time. In this article we

bring together food system experts to identify the top threats over the next two decades and priority

research questions to address them. We ﬁnd that unresolved governance challenges in international rela-

tions underpin many of the key threats and that coordinated research is needed to help design and adopt

systems of governance for food systems that are resilient to extreme events in the future.

756 One Earth 5, 756–766, July 15, 2022 Crown Copyright ª2022 Published by Elsevier Inc.

This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

OPEN ACCESS

human migration, and political instability. These direct and indi-

rect effects lead to reductions in the availability of, and access to,

healthy and nutritious food.

1–6

The magnitude, extent, and

complexity of the threats posed by extreme events to global

food security can further create cascading and systemic im-

pacts

7,8

that are difﬁcult to predict or plan and prepare for.

Despite the continued focus on research on extreme events

and food security, many key areas remain disconnected. For

example, there has been much research on extreme weather’s

impact on crop yields, but less work on connecting these to sup-

ply chain disruptions.

Similarly, policy on extreme events and

food security has been predominantly focused on isolated

Nathaniel K. Newlands,

Frederik Noack,

MaryLucy Oronje,

Colin Raymond,

Markus Reichstein,

Loren H. Rieseberg,

Jose M. Rodriguez-Llanes,

Todd Rosenstock,

Pedram Rowhani,

Ali Sarhadi,

Ralf Seppelt,

44,45

Balsher S. Sidhu,

Sieglinde Snapp,

Tammara Soma,

Adam H. Sparks,

48,49

Louise Teh,

Michelle Tigchelaar,

Martha M. Vogel,

Paul C. West,

53,54

Hannah Wittman,

and Liangzhi You

College of Technology, The University of Bamenda, Bamenda, Cameroon

Higher Institute of Agriculture and Rural Development, Bamenda University of Science and Technology – BUST, Bamenda, Cameroon

Royal Institute of International Affairs, Chatham House, 10 St James Sq, London SW1Y 4LE, UK

Risk & Vulnerability Science Centre, Faculty of Science & Agriculture, University of Fort Hare, Alice, South Africa

Department of Geography & Environmental Systems, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, 1000 Hilltop Circle, Baltimore, MD 21250,

USA

Universite

´Fe

´lix Houphouet-Boigny, Abidjan, Co

ˆte d’Ivoire

International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Schlossplatz 1, 2361 Laxenburg, Austria

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) , Telegrafenberg, 14473 Potsdam, Germany

Universidad Nacional de Rı

´o Negro, Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecologı

´a y Desarrollo Rural, Rı

´o Negro,

Argentina

Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientı

´ﬁcas yTe

´cnicas, Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecologı

´a y Desarrollo

Rural, Rı

´o Negro, Argentina

Institute on the Environment, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108, USA

Agriculture and Food Business Unit, Commonwealth Scientiﬁc and Industrial Research Organisation, St Lucia, QLD, Australia

Ecology of Tropical Agricultural Systems, Institute of Agricultural Sciences in the Tropics, University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart, Germany

Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW), Kiel, Germany

Environmental Change Institute, School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA

School for Environment and Sustainability, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

UMR MIA 518, Universite

´Paris-Saclay, INRAE, AgroParisTech, Paris, France

Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC), Africa Institute of South Africa (AISA), 134 Pretorius Street, Pretoria, Gauteng, South Africa

Keough School of Global Affairs, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, USA

Department of Geography, Faculty of Social Sciences, Srinakharinwirot University, Bangkok, Thailand

Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), Theodor-Lieser-Str. 2, 06120 Halle (Saale), Germany

Faculty of Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation (ITC), University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Science and Technology Branch, Summerland Research and Development Centre, Summerland, BC,

Canada

Food and Resource Economics Group, the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

Centre for Agriculture and Biosciences International (CABI), 673 Canary Bird, Limuru Road, Muthaiga, Nairobi, Kenya

Jet Propulsion Laboratory/California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA

Max-Planck-Institute for Biogeochemistry, Jena, Germany

Department of Botany and Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

European Commission Joint Research Centre, Ispra, Italy

The Alliance of Bioversity International and International Center for Tropical Agriculture, Rome, Italy

Department of Geography, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK

Lorenz Center, Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA

Helmholtz Institute for Environmental Research (UFZ), Leipzig, Germany

Institute of Geoscience and Geography, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany

Department of Plant, Soil and Microbial Sciences, Center for Global Change and Earth Observations, Michigan State University, East

Lansing, MI, USA

School of Resource and Environmental Management, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada

Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Perth, WA 6000, Australia

University of Southern Queensland, Centre for Crop Health, Toowoomba, QLD 4350, Australia

Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

Center for Ocean Solutions, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA

Man and the Biosphere Programme, Division of Ecological and Earth Sciences, Natural Sciences Sector, UNESCO, Paris, France

Department of Applied Economics, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108, USA

Project Drawdown, 3450 Sacramento Street, San Francisco, CA, USA

International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC, USA

Lead contact

*Correspondence: zia.mehrabi@colorado.edu

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2022.06.008

OPEN ACCESS

Article

One Earth 5, 756–766, July 15, 2022 757

interventions; for example, to deal with acute energy, ﬁnancial, or

trade problems, rather than systemic interventions to improve

long-term resilience to multiple kinds of shocks for multiple na-

tions simultaneously.

While the research community does

study extreme events and global food security, society con-

tinues to experience debilitating impacts on our food systems.

There are two key challenges that present hurdles to effective

action. First is the complexity of causation, that is the range of

hazards and events that may co-occur and the multiple path-

ways by which hazards can create societal risks through expo-

sures and vulnerabilities. Second is widespread scientiﬁc and

political disagreement on the relative efﬁcacy of potential solu-

tions. Both of these factors call for expert elicitation.

11,12

Such

synthesis could help identify problems and solutions that current

data or models may not be able to resolve with an acceptable

level of certainty, ﬁnd areas of consensus, balance viewpoints,

and ultimately help both researchers and funding agencies

best direct their collective energy and resources to help society

tackle these major food system risks.

With ongoing crises affecting food systems—from weather

extremes, to COVID-19, to a range of conﬂicts—a horizon

scan and priority-setting exercise is also timely. Such priority-

setting exercises have been applied to a range of complex is-

sues, such as economic risks

to linkages between climate

change and conﬂict,

climate resilience,

near term climate

impacts,

and conservation,

but not for extreme events

and food security.

Individual groups and organizations typically determine their

own priorities and research gaps, with the consequence that

important interdisciplinary priorities may be overlooked. There

is a need to bring together experts in an attempt to build

consensus on priorities for research and action to mitigate

the effects of extreme events on food insecurity. A key part

of this must be identifying major threats and research gaps

for both knowledge generation and implementation. Filling

such implementation gaps will necessarily require a fuller anal-

ysis of trade-offs in policy making, factors inﬂuencing adoption

of new management practices or technologies, and an assess-

ment of the value of different kinds of knowledge generation,

given different capacities for access and utilization across

different contexts.

Here, to identify priority food system risks and research oppor-

tunities, we surveyed, online and in-person, a group of 69 food

system experts (experimental procedures) spanning a range

of disciplines and subdisciplines, institutional backgrounds

(academia, government and/or international institutions, and

NGOs), levels of seniority (e.g., students, postdoctoral re-

searchers, and various levels of faculty), and geographic focus

(all continents with permanent human habitation) (Figures S1–

S3), on their perceptions of key emerging threats and priority

research questions for global food security in the face of extreme

events. Our results provide a prioritization of threats to global

food security from extreme events, as well as emerging research

questions that highlight the conceptual and practical challenges

that exist in designing, adopting, and governing resilient food

systems. We hope these ﬁndings will broadly aid researchers

and funders to prioritize their research efforts and focus on the

food system transformations needed to deal with the impact of

extreme events on global food security.

RESULTS

Threat perception

We asked each member of our expert panel to describe a single

emerging threat on the horizon—one that they thought would in-

crease global food insecurity in the face of extreme events over

the next two decades (the kind of event and threat, e.g., social,

biological, political, was left to the discretion of each expert).

From 69 submissions, we identiﬁed 32 distinct threats, which

covered a range of intersecting social, economic, environmental,

and geopolitical dimensions. We then asked the experts to rank

each threat along two key dimensions—impact (the impact on

global food security) and probability (the probability of occur-

rence)—following the methods of risk perception commonly

used in economic forecasting.

We conditioned average scores

on individuals to account for some respondents consistently giv-

ing higher or lower scores, a common feature in expert surveys.

We found several cross-cutting themes emerged from the syn-

thesis of the expert elicitation. The ﬁrst theme, compounding

events and cascading risks, encompasses both correlated risk

of disasters across space and time, sectors, and regions,

well as speciﬁc pathways by which a single hazard can cause

a cascade of impacts across food systems.

The second theme,

vulnerability and adaptive capacity, involves factors that predis-

pose communities to losses, or diminishes their ability to cope

with a loss when it occurs.

Finally, cooperation and conﬂict—

itself a key component of vulnerability and adaptive capacity—

was identiﬁed as a third theme, presenting in both acute or

chronic conditions, which can undermine communities’ and na-

tions’ abilities to resist and respond to extreme events when they

occur.

19,20

We explain a selection of such threats below but also

include the full list in Table S1.

Compounding events and cascading risks

Food system exposure to events of a compound nature has

received increasing research attention in recent years

(albeit

with a climate focus), so it is perhaps little surprise that our panel

identiﬁed multiple risks that fell into this category. These

included key compound events in speciﬁc world regions, such

as co-occurring heat waves and droughts in Sub-Saharan

Africa

or combined monsoon and meltwater disruptions in

Asia.

22,23

They also included other globally relevant threats,

such as sequential exposure to hazards throughout cropping

seasons

or across major breadbaskets,

25,26

and co-occurring

heat waves at land and sea affecting food supplies.

27,28

Physical

drivers of these correlated hazards include simple location shifts

in temperature distributions across multiple geographies,

dis-

ruptions to atmospheric circulation patterns, such as El Nin

˜o

Southern Oscillation or the North Atlantic Oscillation

and

ampliﬁed Rossby waves,

as well as the crossing of large-scale

tipping points in climate leading to unprecedented weather re-

gimes on a long-term basis.

Exposure of food systems to

cascading risks was also of increasing concern and included

risk of disruption to critical infrastructure, transport, and public

utility systems,

and disruption of choke points in food supply

chains impacting multiple processes and actors in food systems

simultaneously or in sequence.

Vulnerability and adaptive capacity

Like concerns over the changing nature of compound hazards,

issues related to vulnerability and adaptive capacity of particular

OPEN ACCESS Article

758 One Earth 5, 756–766, July 15, 2022

human populations also received attention. Perennial issues,

such as increased water demand from population growth—im-

pacting access to clean water, groundwater depletion, and

lack of ability to irrigate sustainably—were perceived as top

threats that increase vulnerability and reduce adaptive capacity

to extreme events.

35–37

Similarly, income reversals for the poor

(already happening pre-COVID)

38,39

coupled with price trans-

missions (e.g., global commodity prices causing price spikes in

local markets), especially in import-dependent low- and mid-

dle-income countries,

40,41

were ranked as top threats. Of addi-

tional notable concern was an agricultural development trajec-

tory of increasing industrialization leading to a loss of managed

diversity on farms (crops and livestock), and concentration of

food ﬂows in supply chains and actors

42,43

; as well as biodiver-

sity loss and loss of ecosystem services supporting food and

feed for animal and ﬁsh populations.

Cooperation and conﬂict

Finally, human conﬂict was identiﬁed as a key threat to global

food security, which could continue to increase over the next

two decades. More than 50% of the world’s hungry live in con-

ﬂict regions, and increasing food insecurity within failed states

or in regions with political instability, terrorism, civil unrest,

and/or armed conﬂict was seen as a key threat to global food se-

curity by our panel.

2,45

Of similar concern were migration and

displacement, with associated impacts not only on refugee

and migrant food security and nutrition

but also on interna-

tional cooperation, with important implications for progress on

responding to world hunger

—a concern supported by recent

independent assessments of climate impacts.

Governance

failures and geopolitical resource conﬂict,

resource grabbing

on land and sea by wealthier nations that have depleted their

own resource bases,

increasing polarization of politics within

and between countries, and trade barriers affecting trade and

disaster aid

were all also raised as key threats of concern.

Other

Other top threats included pest and disease outbreaks, and ma-

rine heat waves (one of many emerging threats marine systems

face)—both poorly understood issues with the potential to affect

large cropland or ﬁsheries areas simultaneously and severely.

While fall armyworm and locust outbreaks in Sub-Saharan Africa

in recent years have received media attention,

data on pest

damage and losses at the ﬁeld level are poorly documented

across the world, with assessments themselves relying on expert

elicitation

, models built on sparse or coarse resolution data,

and simpliﬁed assumptions that do not account for the huge di-

versity of damage functions and interactions between different

pests and diseases.

51,52

For marine heat waves, only a few ex-

perts on our team felt qualiﬁed to rank its risk level, but those

who did ranked this threat highly, with the importance of this issue

being supported by a growing literature on this topic.

53–55

Research priorities

In addition to asking experts their perceptions on key threats to

global food security from extreme events, we also asked partic-

ipants to identify top-priority research questions on the topic of

extreme events and food security. We prioritized the initial 179

responses into 50 by asking the panel to rank the submitted

questions along dimensions of research impact and difﬁculty—

how impactful they thought answering the question would be

(i.e., in terms of helping to ensure food security in the face of

extreme events) and how difﬁcult it would be to answer it (i.e.,

resources required, time, existence of baseline data and

methods, requirements for collaboration across geographies,

ﬁelds, organizations). Using this prioritization, we differentiated

research questions into those that were lower effort, i.e., were

high-impact research questions but easier to answer from those

that were higher effort, i.e., high impact but more difﬁcult

to tackle. We then grouped the ﬁnal prioritized questions into

three main emergent themes: better maps and predictions,

farm-level interventions, and food system transformation,aswe

explain below.

Better maps and predictions

The standard basis for identifying risk, forecasting, and respond-

ing to the impact of extreme events on food security is high-qual-

ity data. Creating better maps and predictions that can inform

proactive prevention and timely response before, during, and af-

ter extreme events is crucial. However, the quality, frequency,

and spatial extent of validated on-the-ground data on food secu-

rity have not kept pace with advances in geospatial predictive

analytics tools.

Currently, the world’s foremost standard for

classifying acute food insecurity, the Integrated Food Security

Phase Classiﬁcation, relies heavily on expert judgment.

Sys-

temic issues relate to limited funding for ‘‘boots on the ground’’

and institutionalized survey programs, poor infrastructure, and

low maturity of data governance systems within key nations,

as well as limited programs for grassroots participation in data

generation and decision-making on acute and chronic food se-

curity. This data availability, access, and utilization problem is

exacerbated by logistical challenges that de facto accompany

extreme events, as seen in conﬂict zones and with the movement

restrictions of COVID-19.

2,59

With these critical challenges in

mind, which are related to both data generation and the use of

data products and services, the lists of questions posed by par-

ticipants in this category are given in Table 1. These questions

clearly highlight frontiers for advanced mapping and analytics

and modeling of food systems, while at the same time stressing

the need to explicitly monitor, update, and validate the success

of these new technologies and insights for improving food secu-

rity on the ground. While a few are purely methodological, most

are thematic.

Farm-level interventions

A key focal point for research on food security in the face of

extreme events is at the farm level. This is because, despite be-

ing food producers, many of the world’s farmers, herders,

hunters, and ﬁshers, are themselves food insecure. This brings

a double beneﬁt to research focused on enhancing resilience

to extreme events at the farm level, and in production systems

more generally, not only for global food security through stabiliz-

ing supply, but also for improved livelihoods. However, food pro-

ducers operate in socio-ecological systems that may enable or

restrict their ability to be resilient or adapt to extreme events.

Even when armed with knowledge of resilience-enhancing prac-

tices, socioeconomic constraints or incentives can shape vulner-

ability to extreme events. For example, the presence of well-

functioning insurance markets can encourage farmers to plant

drought-sensitive crops because of moral hazard (where an

actor is incentivized to increase exposure because they do not

bear the full costs of that risk),

while the absence of ﬁnancial

OPEN ACCESS

Article

One Earth 5, 756–766, July 15, 2022 759

markets in combination with liquidity constraints can also pre-

vent farmers from investing in resilient agricultural practices.

One example of the latter mechanism includes slow adoption

rates of drought or ﬂood tolerant varieties or irrigation systems

in many developing countries.

A range of priority research questions are listed in Table 2.

Similar but adapted questions should be explored for popula-

tions involved in non-sedentary agriculture, capture and farming

ﬁsheries, or hunting and foraging activities. A key overall theme is

on farm-level diversiﬁcation, which is critical given that the domi-

nant agricultural development trajectory has been away from

diversiﬁed farming systems and toward reduced biodiversity in

farming landscapes.

Food system transformation

It is widely recognized that system-level interventions are

required to address existing structural constraints in food

Table 1. Priority research questions on extreme events and food security: Better maps and predictions

Better maps and

predictions

lower effort What are the likely impacts of speciﬁc critical infrastructure failures on food security?

What types of extreme events affect which types of farmers?

How many individuals are exposed to extreme weather events through hazards which

occur in domestic versus export partner countries’ production areas?

Which import-dependent countries are most vulnerable to climate shocks in major grain

exporting countries?

To what extent can early warning systems identify and inform people most exposed,

vulnerable, and unable to adapt to food insecurity challenges in the face of extreme events?

How can big data, artiﬁcial intelligence and machine learning best be used to improve

early warning systems?

How can remote sensing technologies best contribute to reducing food insecurity and

better understand increasing extreme events in data-scarce areas?

How will ﬂooding affect food production and food systems in developing countries in

the future?

Where are the geographic hotspots of food production vulnerability to different kinds

of extreme events?

Which regions of intensive rainfed agriculture will be reliant on irrigation due to extreme

reductions in precipitation in the near future?

Are there tipping points in the intensity of extreme events that will cause global food

insufﬁciency?

Is the international food trade system dynamic enough to accommodate compound and

cascading events?

Which features of early warning systems are essential for them to be effective?

What are the likely future impacts of extreme ocean conditions on coastal communities?

higher effort How resilient are different food system sectors to a range of key perturbations? (Can they

be stress tested?)

To what extent does early warning for high-risk pest outbreaks for Africa improve food

security on the ground?

How will geographies of pests change in the face of climate change?

Can we develop reliable globally dynamic predictions of the stocks and ﬂows of food?

What methods best predict cascading impacts from extreme events across food systems?

How accurate are food security forecasts across different time scales, and do these forecasts

become more accurate by incorporating climate and weather forecasts?

Can we build accurate sub-seasonal models of precipitation in Sub-Saharan Africa, and what

can and cannot be said with the current network of observational weather station data?

What earth system features (e.g., from the atmosphere, ocean, land surface, and cryosphere)

are best at predicting seasonal-scale extremes for key agricultural and populous regions

around the globe?

How does the frequency and intensity of extreme events and their subsequent impact on global

food security (from both land and sea) change under different climate change scenarios and

shared socio-economic pathways?

How can artiﬁcial intelligence best augment predictions of the probabilities of extreme events

and future extreme event occurrence?

How much would a global network of smart farms providing dynamic data (on farm level soil,

water, air, crop changes in response to shocks), help to inform risk reduction for different

production systems?

OPEN ACCESS Article

760 One Earth 5, 756–766, July 15, 2022

systems,

without which the beneﬁts of better maps and predic-

tions and improved evidence synthesis of farm-level interven-

tions for addressing food security in the face of extreme events

will not be realized. Many groups have discussed the issue of

transforming food systems for improved resilience, including

the Committee on World Food Security at the UN, IPES-Food,

International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science

and Technology for Development, and the UN Food Systems

Summit (UNFSS).

63–66

However, the community currently re-

mains divided on how food system resilience can be increased

through the application of speciﬁc solutions, with ongoing con-

cerns about the inequitable distribution of power and resources

in food systems. The majority of research questions pertaining to

this theme (Table 3) were, not surprisingly, deemed more difﬁcult

to answer. However, they address many critical issues, which,

building on the above categories, sit squarely at the intersection

of information generation and availability versus utilization of that

information for improving food security. As such, understanding

ways to close the implementation gap, with a particular focus

on governance, roles of different actors, and the key actions

required, underscores a key research priority for improving

food security under extreme events.

DISCUSSION

Identifying key priorities for researchers and funders can be

greatly aided through crowdsourcing approaches, which

collect the knowledge and wisdom of many, and reduce bias

associated with any particular researcher or group.

While

similar exercises have been undertaken across a range of ﬁelds

and topics, this work presents, as far as we know, the ﬁrst

attempt to compile and build consensus on the major threats

and priorities for research on food security in the face of

extreme events from experts working with diverse backgrounds

and expertise and geographic foci. New panel compositions

and teams may provide different perspectives, particularly

with higher representation of ﬁsheries, livestock, hunting, and

foraging expertise. At the same time we recognize that many

of the issues we identiﬁed are important across these diverse

domains. With these points in mind, our results provide some

clear insights into some of the major issues threatening global

food security from extreme events over the next two decades,

as well as examples of some of the top research questions on

this topic.

Our analysis found that experts perceived threats on corre-

lated risks across geographies and sequential years to be high.

While this topic has previously received attention from a climate

perspective,

our analysis extends this further to a broader

range of hazards. There was signiﬁcant concern that compound

events will continue to lead to reductions in redundancy, and

degrade communities’, regions’, and nations’ abilities to

respond to events when they occur. Furthermore, major socio-

political, geophysical, and climatological changes in Africa and

Asia present key connected and compounding threats to many

of the world’s most food insecure.

Our prioritization also indicated that both scientists and prac-

titioners have a need for more granular data and better maps,

and improved predictive capacity. New methods of analysis

and technologies have allowed for improved advisories, surveil-

lance, monitoring, and humanitarian response,

68,69

but at the

same time a scarcity of ground data and lack of systems for

grassroots data governance, as well as the underutilized

role of forecasting in decision-making (such as timely disburse-

ment of resources that limit the scale of disasters), limits the po-

tential of these technologies. There is a need to ensure that the

design of new tools, data, and information products is inclusive

and coupled with capacity building, improved access and utiliza-

tion, respect for data sovereignty, and evaluation in terms of ul-

timate on the ground impact.

Our ﬁndings support the notion that the pathway to peace

globally remains essential for ensuring global food security

in the face of extreme events. Conﬂict and lack of coopera-

tion—in a variety of manifestations, and at different political

scales—continues to present a major impediment to global

food security and is a key factor that predisposes communities

and nations to disasters following shocks.

3,19

Since the inception

of this project, civil wars in Syria and Yemen have continued to

protract, while several new conﬂicts have arisen, such as the

Ethiopian civil war and the Ukraine-Russia war, all of which

threaten regional and global food security.

Markets play an important role in moderating the impacts of

local shocks,

through mediating access to resources, incentiv-

izing resilient production practices and spreading risk across ge-

ographies. At the same time, markets enhance certain risks that

Table 2. Priority research questions on extreme events and food security: Farm level interventions

Farm level interventions lower effort Which on-farm practices increase resilience to drought, are cost-effective and easily

adopted?

What are the effects of crop diversiﬁcation on pest, drought, and disease resistance?

How much can increasing crop diversity improve smallholders’ adaptive capacity?

How can we best assist food producers in their response to short-term (acute) extreme

events (extreme rainfall, high-intensity storms, extreme temperatures, storm surges, etc.)?

higher effort How context dependent are on-farm resilience practices across the world, and are there

common themes, interventions and technologies that work across multiple locations?

How does the loss of biodiversity make cropping systems more susceptible to

extreme events?

What are the most effective ways to deploy interventions and increase adoption of on-farm

technologies that help reduce the effect of extreme events on food security (e.g., new seed

varieties, new irrigation technologies)?

OPEN ACCESS

Article

One Earth 5, 756–766, July 15, 2022 761

include exposure to risk cascades through interrupted trade and

supply chains, price transmission effects for low-income coun-

tries, loss of food sovereignty, and redundancy, vulnerabilities

that all result from short-term gains inefﬁciency in food supplies

(including ‘‘just-in-time’’ contracting). Markets that fail to price

the cost of the loss of food system resilience lead to increased

systemic risks. Thus, understanding how to better utilize the po-

wer of markets while mitigating the risks they bring to food secu-

rity is critical to minimize the knock-on effects of extreme events

when they do occur.

We found that major threat groupings of conﬂict, compound/

cascading events, and vulnerability and adaptive capacity

emerged from our analysis, which raises two interrelated ques-

tions: Why did these themes emerge? And what underpins

them? Reﬂecting on this, it can be seen that all carry major un-

certainty in terms of effective and timely resolution, all also repre-

sent cross-border issues and their resolution requires tackling

many outstanding problems of international relations. This un-

certainty remains a major challenge. For example, reductions

in the likelihood of compound extreme weather events depend

on the speed at which governments can collectively realize

climate targets. This uncertainty in action on climate change is

in turn exacerbated by war and policy responses, including con-

cerns around short-term energy security. Another key connect-

ing thread is that underpins all these emergent categories of risks

are failures to engender trust and commit to shared values in in-

ternational relations and governance.

An important question that arose during our discussions as a

group concerned the relative value of prioritizing new research

questions, when existing information is not being effectively

used for ensuring food security. Part of the gap between knowl-

edge generation and use results directly from access and utiliza-

tion gaps, themselves representing both hard and soft infrastruc-

ture issues, which differentially inﬂuence communities’ abilities

and capacity to access and use information generated by scien-

tists. At the same time, implementation gaps can also exist

because of institutional or governance silos, jurisdictional con-

straints, resource availability constraints, scientiﬁc literacy, or

political capture by particular actors, which can limit the utiliza-

tion of information even if it is available and accessible.

Several key research priorities, particularly those from the

transformation theme, speak to these issues. We identiﬁed

questions on enablers of social change, mechanisms for building

trust between actors at multiple levels and across contexts, and

levers for balancing power and equity in food systems, as well as

on developing governance frameworks for ensuring resilience to

extreme events. How to translate information and knowledge

into action is clearly itself a key research priority and represents

Table 3. Priority research questions on extreme events and food security: Food system transformation

Food system

transformation

lower effort How does crop diversiﬁcation at the household, community, and regional scales mediate food insecurity

during extreme climate events?

How can food production and supply chains be made robust to disruptions from extreme events affecting

multiple regions, or the same region sequentially?

What climate mitigating steps (e.g., nationally determined contributions, climate-smart agriculture) will also

help provide resilience against extreme events?

What is the effect of agroecological management of food systems on farmer vulnerability to extreme events?

In what ways does insurance enhance or undermine food security in the face of extreme events?

higher effort What does governance for resilient food systems look like?

What are the major obstacles in developing resilience to extreme events in small-scale farming systems?

What are the most effective approaches for enhancing adaptive capacities at local and regional levels?

What are the practical tools and policies for the world’s poor within the scope of limited resourc es, institutions,

infrastructure, capacity, to adapt to extreme events and food insecurity in the near to medium term?

What are some feasible policy (top down) or community (bottom up) pathways for different sectors to enhance

the resilience of food security to extreme events?

What are policies that make farming systems less vulnerable to extreme events, without negatively affecting

other sustainable development goals?

How does land access affect rural vulnerability to extreme events, and what has been the effect, globally, of

land reform efforts on food security and poverty in the face of extreme events?

What policies are required to ensure that efﬁciency gains in food distribution systems enable widespread food

security without harmimg local and regional producers?

How can society help establish complex agricultural ecosystems at the farm, watershed, and community

levels?

What are the major barriers undermining the effective uptake of adaptation strategies and how can the

limitations associated with these barriers be addressed?

What are the key societal adaptations required to deal with synchronous crop failures?

What are the most cost-effective strategies to reduce the impacts of production shocks on food access for the

world’s poor?

What policies prevent extreme events from eroding the capacity of government to protect the food security of

citizens?

OPEN ACCESS Article

762 One Earth 5, 756–766, July 15, 2022

a large knowledge gap. These research questions are highly

complex, demand strong multidisciplinary expertise and ap-

proaches, and require new funding efforts and coordination to

assess which kinds of information hold the most value for

leveraging change. They also require researchers to step beyond

their own silos and place their efforts where they are most

needed to enable such transformations.

Extreme events impact global food security through a multi-

tude of pathways. Some of the threats highlighted here are

recognized by the panel to be ‘‘already happening’’ or ‘‘age-

old issues,’’ but are of magniﬁed importance in the next two de-

cades. In contrast, some of the complex linkages between so-

cial and natural systems identiﬁed here in the context of

extreme events are only just beginning to be made by others.

There is little doubt that COVID-19 and ongoing and emerging

conﬂicts have shed new light on these kinds of problems. We

are all mindful that research and resources in the public and

private sectors are not inﬁnite; at the same time, tackling

some of the highest impact research questions will require sig-

niﬁcant investments of time and money. However, these invest-

ments are needed, as extreme events will continue to threaten

global food security over the near to medium term. As such, we

see it as our responsibility, as practitioners and researchers

with expertise in this area, to join forces and help address these

challenges head-on.

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES

Resource availability

Lead contact

Further information and requests for resources should be directed to and will

be fulﬁlled by the lead contact, Zia Mehrabi (zia.mehrabi@colorado.edu).

Materials availability

No new materials were generated in this study.

Data and code availability

Anonymized versions of data and scripts can be accessed at https://doi.org/

10.5281/zenodo.6785659.

Initial surveys

We used a modiﬁed version of the Delphi technique

to identify threats for

extreme events and food security globally. This horizon scanning method

has been applied successfully in a similar manner to identify emerging issues

for global conservation and biological diversity.

We also used expert elicita-

tion and a priority-setting exercise to identify priority research questions for

extreme events and food security. This method, or variations of it, have

been applied to identify top research questions in a range of research ﬁelds

and contexts.

We surveyed experts on top threats and priority research questions by (1)

circulating a request to participate within our professional networks with an

initial online survey and, following this (2) an in person workshop session on

‘‘Extreme Events and Food Security’’ at the ‘‘Extreme Events—Building

Climate Resilient Societies’’ conference, which was funded by the VW Foun-

dation and held over November 9–11, 2019 in Hannover, Germany. We asked

for open-format text answers to the following question:

Describe an emerging threat on the horizon, which could increase food

insecurity in the face of extreme events over the next two decades.

Participants were given 100 words to describe one threat and asked to add

references and supporting sources. As part of these same initial submission

rounds, we also asked participants to identify up to three responses to the

question:

Identify a top priority research question on the topic of extreme events

and food security.

In the ﬁrst round of expert elicitation via the online survey and workshop, we

received 69 replies (69 threats, 179 questions) from participants covering a

wide range of expertise, institutional background (academia, government, or

supranational institutions, and NGOs), seniority (Ph.D. students, PostDocs,

and various levels of Professors and Lecturers), and geographic focus (all con-

tinents were covered, with a particular emphasis on Africa and Asia). This

experience can be seen in Figures S1–S3, which show the details of partici-

pants’ area of expertise, years of experience, and geographic research focus

as collected on the initial online survey.

Workshop

During the in-person workshop, we collected all the online and in person sub-

missions and undertook a pilot ranking exercise of the responses. Here, we

separated the threats and questions into preliminary themes and asked two

to three experts that self-identiﬁed with each theme to review the list, under-

take a pilot ranking exercise to test the prioritization methodology, to identify

any extensively broad or duplicate questions that should be eliminated and

to make any other suggestions.

After the workshop, a moderator removed threats and questions ﬂagged as

obvious duplicates or being too broad, and reworded others for clarity, result-

ing in 32 threats and 147 questions that were sent out to the full group of con-

tributors in a second online survey. We did not remove ‘‘low-quality research

questions.’’

While we recognize this may have resulted in some questions

being of perceived higher research quality than others (e.g., having both theo-

retical and empirical components, sufﬁcient granularity, not being double bar-

relled), we wished to maintain, as much as possible, the diversity of different

ideas and sources submitted for full consultation.

Prioritization

We compiled these revised lists into a second set of online surveys for priori-

tization. We invited the full list of experts (n = 69), to rank the list of reﬁned

threats and research questions, each presented in their own survey, in which

items were presented in randomized order per participant. Participants were

asked to rank each item (whether a threat of research question) on simple Lik-

ert scales (high to low; 1 to 5, with non-anchored intervals). For threats, these

scales included impact (What is the impact of this threat on global food secu-

rity?) and probability (What is the probability of this threat occurring?). For

research questions, these scales included impact (How much impact do you

think the research question will have if answered?), difﬁculty (What difﬁculty

level does this research question have?), and expertise (What is your level of

expertise in the topic area of this question?). In total, we received n = 30 and

n = 29 responses for threat and research question prioritization surveys,

respectively. We piloted each survey before sending it out to conﬁrm the esti-

mated time for the survey, and to ensure it was navigable and that the FAQ

was clear.

We then used hierarchical cumulative link models

to estimate the modes of

the Likert scales, and probabilities of those modes, for each threat and

research question, and for each response (e.g., impact,probabilit y for threats,

and impact and difﬁculty for research questions) conditioned on individuals

(which were treated as random intercepts). For research questions we also

conditioned mode probability estimates on expertise level (treated as ﬁxed in-

tercepts) to account for higher likelihood of individuals giving higher priority for

questions related to their own ﬁelds.

We then ranked each outcome on the concatenation of the mode and prob-

ability (e.g., if for impact a selection of threats had modes of 5, 5, 4, and prob-

abilities of those modes 0.8, 0.6, 0.9, their concatenation would be 5.08, 5.06,

4.09; and we would rank them in order 1, 2, 3 from most to least impactful). For

identifying top threats (most impactful and highest probability of occurrence)

we simply computed the mean rank of impact and probability ranks, and

ranked those mean ranks (these ranks are shown in Table S1). For identifying

top research questions, we identiﬁed the top-ranking 50 questions in terms of

impact and then split them into higher- and lower-hanging questions based on

a simple percentile split in ranks of difﬁculty.

We then collated the ﬁnal threats and research questions into emergent

themes post prioritization and added examples into a ﬁrst manuscript draft.

We shared this manuscript draft with the full list of contributing experts (n=

69) for review and allowed experts to submit suggestions and thoughts, as

well as textual edits to the ﬁnal lists.

OPEN ACCESS

Article

One Earth 5, 756–766, July 15, 2022 763

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

Supplemental information can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

oneear.2022.06.008.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors would like to thank the VolkswagenStiftung for supporting the

2019 Herrenh€

auser Conference Extreme Events—Building Climate Resilient

Societies (https://climate-extremes-emergent-risks.org/hkextremes2019/).

We would also like to thank the additional experts, beyond those listed as au-

thors, who took the time to anonymously contribute to this work during the

midst of the COVID-19 pandemic; as well as three anonymous reviewers,

and Mijke Rhemtulla for advice on analysis. T.S. was supported by a grant

(435-2019-0155) from Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of

Canada. N.K.N. was supported by grant J-001387.001.11 from the Canadian

Agricultural Partnership (CAP) Program of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.

D. Makowski was supported by grant 16-CONV-0003 (ANR CLAND). M.M.C.

was supported by the Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry. B.M. was

supported by the Volkswagen Foundation—Conferences & Symposia. C.L.

was supported by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation

programme under the Marie Sk1odowska-Curie grant agreement 796451

(FFSize). W.A. was supported by the Earth Institute Postdoctoral Fellow ship.

C.R. was supported by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of

Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Admin-

istration (80NM0018D0004). J.M.R.-L. was supported by the RESIFOOD proj-

ect of the European Commission Joint Research Centre. L.Y. was supported

by OneCGIAR ClimBER Initiative. The views expressed in this publicatio n

are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reﬂect the views or policies

of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Z.M., R.D., and A.I. conceived of the study. Z.M. and R.D. coordinated the

workshop. Z.M., C.L., and K.B. created and coordinated the online surveys.

Z.M. and G.B. conducted the analysis. Z.M. coordinated the writing. All au-

thors participated in the study and contributed to writing.

DECLARATION OF INTERESTS

The authors declare no competing interests.

Received: November 16, 2021

Revised: February 3, 2022

Accepted: June 20, 2022

Published: July 15, 2022

REFERENCES

1. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2021). The

impact of disasters and crises on agriculture and food security. https://

www.fao.org/documents/card/en/c/cb3673en/.

2. World Food Programme (2021). Global report on food crises. https://www.

wfp.org/publications/global-report-food-crises-2021.

3. UNCTAD (2020). Trade wars are huge threats to food security. https://

unctad.org/news/trade-wars-are-huge-threats-food-security.

4. Tadesse, G., Algieri, B., Kalkuhl, M., and von Braun, J. (2014). Drivers and

triggers of international food price spikes and volatility. Food Pol. 47,

117–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2013.08.014.

5. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, International

Fund for Agricultural Development, International Organization for

Migration, & World Food Programme (2018). The linkages between migra-

tion, agriculture, food security and rural development: technical report.

https://www.fao.org/documents/card/en/c/CA0922EN/.

6. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2021). The State

of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2021: transforming food sys-

tems for food security, improved nutrition and affordable healthy diets

for all. https://www.fao.org/publications/soﬁ/2021/en/.

7. Reichstein, M., Riede, F., and Frank, D. (2021). More ﬂoods, ﬁres and cy-

clones — plan for domino effects on sustainability goals. Nature 592,

347–349. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-00927-x.

8. Challinor, A., and Benton, T.G. (2021). International dimensions. In The

Third UK Climate Change Risk Assessment Technical Report, R.A.

Betts, A.B. Haward, and K.V. Pearson, eds. (Prepared for the Climate

Change Committee).

9. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2021). The resil-

ience of domestic transport networks in the context of food security –

a multi-country analysis. https://www.fao.org/documents/card/en/c/

cb7757en/.

10. Fan, S., Pandya-Lorch, R., Yosef, S., Fritschel, H., and Zseleczky, L.

(2014). The way forward for building resilience. In Resilience for Food

and Nutrition Security, Chapter 21, S. Fan, R. Pandya-Lorch, and S.

Yosef, eds. (International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)),

pp. 195–206.

11. Morgan, M.G. (2014). Use (and abuse) of expert elicitation in support of de-

cision making for public policy. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111, 7176–

7184. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319946111.

12. Quiggin, D., Townend, R., and Benton, T. (2021). What near-term climat e

impacts should worry us most? Chatham House – international Affairs

Think Tank. https://www.chathamhouse.org/2021/10/what-near-term-

climate-impacts-should-worry-us-most.

13. World Economic Forum (2021). The global risks report 2021. https://www.

weforum.org/reports/the-global-risks-report-2021/.

14. Mach, K.J., Kraan, C.M., Adger, W.N., Buhaug, H., Burke, M., Fearon,

J.D., Field, C.B., Hendrix, C.S., Maystadt, J.-F., O’Loughlin, J., et al.

(2019). Climate as a risk factor for armed conﬂict. Nature 571, 193–197.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1300-6.

15. Beauchamp, E., Hirons, M., Brown, K., and Milner-Gulland, E.J. (2020).

Twenty priorities for future social-ecological research on climate resil-

ience. Environ. Res. Lett. 15, 105006. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-

9326/abb157.

16. Sutherland, W.J., Butchart, S.H.M., Connor, B., Culshaw, C., Dicks, L.V.,

Dinsdale, J., Doran, H., Entwistle, A.C., Fleishman, E., Gibbons, D.W.,

et al. (2018). A 2018 horizon scan of emerging issues for global conserva-

tion and biological diversity. Trends Ecol. Evol. 33, 47–58. https://doi.org/

10.1016/j.tree.2017.11.006.

17. Zscheischler, J., Martius, O., Westra, S., Bevacqua, E., Raymond, C.,

Horton, R.M., van den Hurk, B., AghaKouchak, A., Je

´ze

´quel, A.,

Mahecha, M.D., et al. (2020). A typology of compound weather and

climate events. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 1, 333–347. https://doi.org/10.

1038/s43017-020-0060-z.

18. C.B. Field, V. Barros, T.F. Stocker, D. Qin, D.J. Dokken, K.L. Ebi, M.D.

Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, G.-K. Plattner, and S.K. Allen, et al., eds.

(2012). Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance

Climate Change Adaptation: Special Report of the Intergovernmental

Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) https://www.ipcc.ch/report/managing-

the-risks-of-extreme-events-and-disasters-to-advance-climate-change-

adaptation/.

19. World Food Programme (2020). Hunger, conﬂict, and improving the pros-

pects for peace fact sheet. https://www.wfp.org/publications/hunger-

conﬂict-and-improving-prospects-peace-fact-sheet-2020.

20. Committee on Climate Change (2016). UK climate change risk assessment

2017 evidence report. https://www.theccc.org.uk/uk-climate-change-

risk-assessment-2017/.

21. World Meteorological Organization (2019). State of the climate in Africa

2019. https://library.wmo.int/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=21778.

22. Qin, Y., Abatzoglou, J.T., Siebert, S., Huning, L.S., AghaKouchak, A.,

Mankin, J.S., Hong, C., Tong, D., Davis, S.J., and Mueller, N.D. (2020).

Agricultural risks from changing snowmelt. Nat. Clim. Change 10,

459–465. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-0746-8.

OPEN ACCESS Article

764 One Earth 5, 756–766, July 15, 2022

23. Borah, P.J., Venugopal, V., Sukhatme, J., Muddebihal, P., and Goswami,

B.N. (2020). Indian monsoon derailed by a North Atlantic wavetrain.

Science 370, 1335–1338. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aay6043.

24. The Global Food Security programme, UK (2017). Environmental tipping

points and food system dynamics: main Report. https://www.

foodsecurity.ac.uk/publications/environmental-tipping-points-food-system-

dynamics-executive-summary.pdf.

25. Mehrabi, Z. (2020). Food system collapse. Nat. Clim. Change 10, 16–17.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0643-1.

26. Gaupp, F., Hall, J., Hochrainer-Stigler, S., and Dadson, S. (2020).

Changing risks of simultaneous global breadbasket failure. Nat. Clim.

Change 10, 54–57. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0600-z.

27. Thiault, L., Mora, C., Cinner, J.E., Cheung, W.W.L., Graham, N.A.J.,

Januchowski-Hartley, F.A., Mouillot, D., Sumaila, U.R., and Claudet, J.

Escaping the perfect storm of simultaneous climate change impacts on

agriculture and marine ﬁsheries. Sci. Adv. 5, eaaw9976, 10.1126/

sciadv.aaw9976.

28. Fro

¨licher, T.L., and Laufko

¨tter, C. (2018). Emerging risks from marine heat

waves. Nat. Commun. 9, 650. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-

03163-6.

29. Sarhadi, A., Ausı

´n, M.C., Wiper, M.P., Touma, D., and Diffenbaugh, N.S.

(2018). Multidimensional risk in a nonstationary climate: Joint probability

of increasingly severe warm and dry conditions. Sci. Adv. 4, eaau3487.

https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aau3487.

30. Anderson, W.B., Seager, R., Baethgen, W., Cane, M., and You, L. (2019).

Synchronous crop failures and climate-forced production variability. Sci.

Adv. 5, eaaw1976. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaw1976.

31. Kornhuber, K., Coumou, D., Vogel, E., Lesk, C., Donges, J.F., Lehmann, J.,

and Horton, R.M. (2020). Ampliﬁed Rossby waves enhance risk of concur-

rent heatwaves in major breadbasket regions. Nat. Clim. Change 10,

48–53. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0637-z.

32. Lenton, T.M., Rockstro

¨m, J., Gaffney, O., Rahmstorf, S., Richardson, K.,

Steffen, W., and Schellnhuber, H.J. (2019). Climate tipping points — too

risky to bet against. Nature 575, 592–595. https://doi.org/10.1038/

d41586-019-03595-0.

33. Gannon, K.E., Conway, D., Pardoe, J., Ndiyoi, M., Batisani, N., Odada, E.,

Olago, D., Opere, A., Kgosietsile, S., Nyambe, M., et al. (2018). Business

experience of ﬂoods and drought-related water and electricity supply

disruption in three cities in sub-Saharan Africa during the 2015/2016 El

Nin

˜o. Glob. Sustain. 1, e14. https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2018.14.

34. Bailey, R., and Wellesly, L. (2017). Chokepoints and Vulnerabilities in

Global Food Trade (Chatham House). https://www.chathamhouse.org/

2017/06/chokepoints-and-vulnerabilities-global-food-trade.

35. Mekonnen, M.M., and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2016). Four billion people facing se-

vere water scarcity. Sci. Adv. 2, e1500323. https://doi.org/10.1126/

sciadv.1500323.

36. Immerzeel, W.W., Lutz, A.F., Andrade, M., Bahl, A., Biemans, H., Bolch, T.,

Hyde, S., Brumby, S., Davies, B.J., Elmore, A.C., et al. (2020). Importance

and vulnerability of the world’s water towers. Nature 577, 364–369. https://

doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1822-y.

37. Famiglietti, J.S. (2014). The global groundwater crisis. Nat. Clim. Change

4, 945–948. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2425.

38. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2020). The state

of food security and nutrition in the world 2020. https://www.fao.org/

family-farming/detail/en/c/1308354/.

39. (2021). Updated estimates of the impact of COVID-19 on global poverty:

looking back at 2020 and the outlook for 2021. https://blogs.worldbank.

org/opendata/updated-estimates-impact-covid-19-global-poverty-looking-

back-2020-and-outlook-2021.

40. Bekkers, E., Brockmeier, M., Francois, J., and Yang, F. (2017). Local food

prices and international price transmission. World Dev. 96, 216–230.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.03.008.

41. World Food Programme (2020). COVID-19 will double number of people

facing food crises unless swift action is taken. https://www.wfp.org/

news/covid-19-will-double-number-people-facing-food-crises-unless-

swift-action-taken.

42. Ricciardi, V., Mehrabi, Z., Wittman, H., James, D., and Ramankutty, N.

(2021). Higher yields and more biodiversity on smaller farms. Nat.

Sustain. 4, 651–657. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00699-2.

43. Ramankutty, N., Mehrabi, Z., Waha, K., Jarvis, L., Kremen, C., Herrero, M.,

and Rieseberg, L.H. (2018). Trends in global agricultural land use: implica-

tions for environmental health and food security. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 69,

789–815. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-arplant-042817-040256.

44. Dı

´az, S., Settele, J., Brondı

´zio, E.S., Ngo, H.T., Agard, J., Arneth, A.,

Balvanera, P., Brauman, K.A., Butchart, S.H.M., Chan, K.M.A., et al.

(2019). Pervasive human-driven decline of life on Earth points to the

need for transformative change. Science 366, eaax3100. https://doi.org/

10.1126/science.aax3100.

45. Anderson, W., Taylor, C., McDermid, S., Ilboudo-Ne

´bie

´, E., Seager, R.,

Schlenker, W., Cottier, F., de Sherbinin, A., Mendeloff, D., and Markey,

K. (2021). Violent conﬂict exacerbated drought-related food insecurity be-

tween 2009 and 2019 in sub-Saharan Africa. Nat. Food 2, 603–615.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00327-4.

46. World Food Programme (2020). Populations at risk: implications of

COVID-19 for hunger, migration and displacement. https://www.wfp.

org/publications/populations-risk-implications-covid-19-hunger-migration-

displacement-2020.

47. Zhou, J., and Dellmuth, L.M. (2020). The Geopolitics of Food Security:

Barriers to the Sustainable Development Goal of Zero Hunger (Stockholm

International Peace Institute). https://www.sipri.org/publications/2020/sipri-

insights-peace-and-security/geopolitics-food-security-barriers-sustainable-

development-goal-zero-hunger.

48. M€

uller, M.F., Penny, G., Niles, M.T., Ricciardi, V., Chiarelli, D.D., Davis,

K.F., Dell’Angelo, J., D’Odorico, P., Rosa, L., Rulli, M.C., and Mueller,

N.D. (2021). Impact of transnational land acquisitions on local food secu-

rity and dietary diversity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 118. e2020535118.

https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2020535118.

49. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2022). Fall army-

worm, food chain crisis. https://www.fao.org/food-chain-crisis/how-we-

work/plant-protection/fallarmyworm/en/.

50. Savary, S., Willocquet, L., Pethybridge, S.J., Esker, P., McRoberts, N., and

Nelson, A. (2019). The global burden of pathogens and pests on major

food crops. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3, 430–439. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-

018-0793-y.

51. Deutsch, C.A., Tewksbury, J.J., Tigchelaar, M., Battisti, D.S., Merrill, S.C.,

Huey, R.B., and Naylor, R.L. (2018). Increase in crop losses to insect pests

in a warming climate. Science 361, 916–919. https://doi.org/10.1126/sci-

ence.aat3466.

52. Chaloner, T.M., Gurr, S.J., and Bebber, D.P. (2021). Plant pathogen infec-

tion risk tracks global crop yields under climate change. Nat. Clim. Change

11, 710–715. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01104-8.

53. Webb, R.S., and Werner, F.E. (2018). Explaining extreme ocean conditions

impacting living marine resources. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 99, S7–S10.

https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-17-0265.1.

54. Smale, D.A., Wernberg, T., Oliver, E.C.J., Thomsen, M., Harvey, B.P.,

Straub, S.C., Burrows, M.T., Alexander, L.V., Benthuysen, J.A., Donat,

M.G., et al. (2019). Marine heatwaves threaten global biodiversity and

the provision of ecosystem services. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 306–312.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0412-1.

55. Cheung, W.W.L., Fro

¨licher, T.L., Lam, V.W.Y., Oyinlola, M.A.,

Reygondeau, G., Sumaila, U.R., Tai, T.C., Teh, L.C.L., and Wabnitz,

C.C.C. (2021). Marine high temperature extremes amplify the impacts of

climate change on ﬁsh and ﬁsheries. Sci. Adv. 7, abh0895. https://doi.

org/10.1126/sciadv.abh0895.

56. Wang, D., Kraay, A., and Andree, B.P.J. (2020). Modeling food crises:

looking at a complex problem through two lenses. https://blogs.

worldbank.org/developmenttalk/modeling-food-crises-looking-complex-

problem-through-two-lenses.

OPEN ACCESS

Article

One Earth 5, 756–766, July 15, 2022 765

57. Maxwell, D., and Hailey, P. (2020). The Politics of Information and Analysis

in Famines and Extreme Emergencies: Findings from Six Case Studies

(Feinstein International Center, Tufts University). https://ﬁc.tufts.edu/

publication-item/politics-of-information-and-analysis-in-famines-and-

extreme-emergencies-synthesis/.

58. World Development Report 2021: Data for Better Lives. World Bank.

https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/wdr2021.

59. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2021). The state

of food and agriculture. https://www.fao.org/policy-support/tools-and-

publications/resources-details/en/c/1457191/.

60. Annan, F., and Schlenker, W. (2015). Federal crop insurance and the disin-

centive to adapt to extreme heat. Am. Econ. Rev. 105, 262–266. https://

doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20151031.

61. Karlan, D., Osei, R.D., Osei-Akoto, I., and Udry, C. (2014). Agricultural de-

cisions after relaxing credit and risk constraints. Q. J. Econ. 129, 597–652.

https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qju002.

62. Webb, P., Benton, T.G., Beddington, J., Flynn, D., Kelly, N.M., and

Thomas, S.M. (2020). The urgency of food system transformation is now

irrefutable. Nat. Food 1, 584–585. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-020-

00161-0.

63. IPES & ETC Group (2021). Long food movement: transforming food sys-

tems by 2045. https://www.ipes-food.org/pages/LongFoodMovement.

64. Committee on World Food Security (2015). 44th session: making a differ-

ence in food security and nutrition. http://www.fao.org/3/na703en/

na703en.pdf.

65. Webb, P., Flynn, D.J., Kelly, N.M., and Thomas, S.M. (2020). The Transition

Steps Needed to Transform Our Food Systems. https://www.glopan.org/

the-transition-steps-needed-to-transform-our-food-systems/.

66. IAASTD 2009. Agriculture at a crossroads. Global Report. Island Press.

67. Surowiecki, J. (2004). The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many Are Smarter

than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business, Economies,

Societies, and Nations (Doubleday & Co).

68. World Food Programme (WFP) (2022). AI for good. https://aiforgood.itu.

int/about/un-ai-actions/wfp/.

69. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2022). AI for good. https://

aiforgood.itu.int/about/un-ai-actions/fao/.

70. United Nations University (2021). Interconnected Disaster Risks Report.

71. Rowe, G., and Wright, G. (1999). The Delphi technique as a forecasting

tool: issues and analysis. Int. J. Forecast. 15, 353–375. https://doi.org/

10.1016/s0169-2070(99)00018-7.

72. Sutherland, W.J., Fleishman, E., Mascia, M.B., Pretty, J., and Rudd, M.A.

(2011). Methods for collaboratively identifying research priorities and

emerging issues in science and policy. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2, 238–247.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-210x.2010.00083.x.

73. Pretty, J., Sutherland, W.J., Ashby, J., Auburn, J., Baulcombe, D., Bell, M.,

Bentley, J., Bickersteth, S., Brown, K., Burke, J., et al. (2010). The top 100

questions of importance to the future of global agriculture. Int. J. Agric.

Sustain. 8, 219–236. https://doi.org/10.3763/ijas.2010.0534.

74. Agresti, A. (2013). Categorical Data Analysis (John Wiley & Sons Inc).

OPEN ACCESS Article

766 One Earth 5, 756–766, July 15, 2022

One Earth, Volume 5

Supplemental information

Research priorities for global food security

under extreme events

Zia Mehrabi, Ruth Delzeit, Adriana Ignaciuk, Christian Levers, Ginni Braich, Kushank

Bajaj, Araba Amo-Aidoo, Weston Anderson, Roland A. Balgah, Tim G. Benton, Martin

M. Chari, Erle C. Ellis, Narcisse Z. Gahi, Franziska Gaupp, Lucas A. Garibaldi, James S.

Gerber, Cecile M. Godde, Ingo Grass, Tobias Heimann, Mark Hirons, Gerrit

Hoogenboom, Meha Jain, Dana James, David Makowski, Blessing Masamha, Sisi

Meng, Sathaporn Monprapussorn, Daniel Müller, Andrew Nelson, Nathaniel K.

Newlands, Frederik Noack, MaryLucy Oronje, Colin Raymond, Markus

Reichstein, Loren H. Rieseberg, Jose M. Rodriguez-Llanes, Todd Rosenstock, Pedram

Rowhani, Ali Sarhadi, Ralf Seppelt, Balsher S. Sidhu, Sieglinde Snapp, Tammara

Soma, Adam H. Sparks, Louise Teh, Michelle Tigchelaar, Martha M. Vogel, Paul C.

West, Hannah Wittman, and Liangzhi You

One Earth, Volume 5

Supplemental information

Research priorities for global food security under extreme events

Zia Mehrabi, Ruth Delzeit, Adriana Ignaciuk, Christian Levers, Ginni Braich, Kushank

Bajaj, Araba Amo-Aidoo, Weston Anderson, Roland A. Balgah, Tim G.

Benton, Martin M. Chari, Erle C. Ellis, Narcisse Z. Gahi, Franziska Gaupp, Lucas A.

Garibaldi, James S. Gerber, Cecile M. Godde, Ingo Grass, Tobias Heimann, Mark

Hirons, Gerrit Hoogenboom, Meha Jain, Dana James, David Makowski, Blessing

Masamha, Sisi Meng, Sathaporn Monprapussorn, Daniel Müller, Andrew

Nelson, Nathaniel K. Newlands, Frederik Noack, MaryLucy Oronje, Colin

Raymond, Markus Reichstein, Loren H. Rieseberg, Jose M. Rodriguez-Llanes, Todd

Rosenstock, Pedram Rowhani, Ali Sarhadi, Ralf Seppelt, Balsher S. Sidhu, Sieglinde

Snapp, Tammara Soma, Adam H. Sparks, Louise Teh, Michelle Tigchelaar, Martha M.

Vogel, Paul C. West, Hannah Wittman, and Liangzhi You

Supplemental Figures

Figure S1 Geographic expertise of experts contributing to the study. Note, experts

were allowed to declare more than one focal geography. Data were collected in the

initial online survey (see Experimental Procedures).

Fig S2 Field of expertise from experts contributing to the study. Note, these were self

declared, and some experts declared more than one area of expertise. “Other”

includes a range of of additional experts foci not shown, in philosophy, ethics, rural

sociology, conflict science, humanitarian response, plant genomics, livestock systems,

crop modeling, coastal hazards, environmental monitoring, drought management,

urban food systems, gender analysis, landscape ecology, phytosanitation, human

nutrition, socio-ecological systems, enterprise management, research performance

evaluation, and impact assessment. Data were collected in the initial online survey.

Fig S3 Years of expertise in the declared field from experts contributing to the study.

Data were collected in the initial online survey.

Supplemental Tables

Table S1. List of threats ranked and prioritized in this study. See main text for

additional context and discussion.

Title

Class

Text

Rank

(Impact)

Rank

(Probability)

Mean

Rank

Increased water

demand

Vulnerability/

adaptive

capacity

Combination of rising water demand as

well as low innovation in ways of growing

food with limited amounts of water, will lead

to further water insecurity in the face of

climate extremes, particularly in irrigation

dependent production systems, which will

be ampliﬁed by population growth,

urbanization, and the over-reliance on non-

renewable resources, especially

groundwater.

1.5

Drought & heat

waves in SSA

Compound

events

Losses to crop production by droughts and

heat waves in Sub-Saharan Africa resulting

in signiﬁcant increases in food insecurity in

the region.

1.5

Collapse of

ecosystem

services

Vulnerability/

adaptive

capacity

The co-occurrence of extreme events,

biodiversity loss, and ecosystem service

collapse with negative eﬀects on food

production, food prices, and ultimately food

security, through loss of essential services

such as water regulation, pollination and

pest control, and supporting food and feed

for ﬁsh and animal populations.

Marine heat waves

Other

Heat waves and other extreme events

negatively impacting marine resources

through changes in their abundance and

distribution, especially impacting coastal

systems, and dependent communities in

small and low income countries.

5.5

Income inequality

Vulnerability/

adaptive

capacity

Production losses and associated price

spikes not accompanied by rapid income

growth for the poor putting the most

vulnerable communities at even greater risk

to food insecurity through increased

poverty limited access.

7.5

Political instability

and migration

Co-operation/

conﬂict

Extremes events ampliﬁying food insecurity

from, as well as increasing, conﬂict,

terrorism, and migration/displacement

within and between nations.

7.5

Pest and disease

outbreaks

Other

More frequent and severe weather,

combined with long term climate change

impacts on novel pest distriutions, will lead

to increasing pest pressure, more severe

outbreaks, and a breakdown in genetic

resistance, which will result in signiﬁcant

crop losses and health threats for humans

and animals.

8.5

Monsoon &

meltwater

disruption in Asia

Compound

events

Major disruptions of monsoon patterns and

alterations of meltwater ﬂow patterns in

major river basins negatively aﬀecting

agricultural production due to missing

irrigation water in Asia, and impeding food

security for billions dependent on these

water resources.

Price shocks and

volatility

Vulnerability/

adaptive

capacity

Extreme events inducing global food price

shocks, which will aﬀect middle and low

income countries the most. The strong

global market integration of these countries

make them vulnerable for price ﬂuctuations

transmitted to their local markets and

oftentimes these countries lack the

capacity to protect their local markets (e.g.

because of trade agreements, lack of

storage facilities).

9.5

Low agricultural

diversity

Vulnerability/

adaptive

capacity

An increasing simpliﬁcation of global

agricultural systems through monoculture

cropping and livestock genetics, will make

these systems highly dependent on

agrochemical inputs and more vulnerable

to a range of climatic risks, evolution of

pesticide resistance, fuel price volatility,

and epidemics.

12.5

Climate tipping

points

Compound

events

The crossing of large-scale tipping points in

climate will lead to fundamentally diﬀerent

climate regimes and unprecedented

weather regimes on a long-term basis.

Exceeding those tipping points will have

also negative feedback eﬀects by

accelerating and intensifying climate

change and extreme weather events.

12.5

Title

Class

Text

Rank

(Impact)

Rank

(Probability)

Mean

Rank

Adaptive tipping

points

Compound

events

An increase in extreme events frequency

and severity leading to continued and time

compounded losses to agricultural

productivity across sequential cropping

cycles, exacerbating and accelerating

impacts of individual events, and reducing

farm level resiliency and adaptive capacity.

Unpredictable

weather changes

Other

Major shifts in weather patterns such as

storms and rainfall and temperature

extremes disproportionally aﬀecting rural

communities. Aggravated by changes in

climate teleconnection patterns, rendering

existing agricultural knowledge of

seasonality less useful.

15.5

Compound heat

waves on land

Compound

events

Compound heat waves in space and/or

time will aggravate individual heat-related

impacts on food production. Simultaneous

production shocks from multiple heat

waves across agricultural regions have the

potential to increase global food prices and

food insecurity.

16.5

Breadbasket

failure

Compound

events

Multiple breadbasket failures, resulting from

co-occuring climate extreme events, pests,

and diseases as well as the lack of

buﬀering capacity of global markets, will

lead to long-term stability of food and

nutrient provisioning.

16.5

Breeding failures

Vulnerability/

adaptive

capacity

Diﬃculties to breed tolerance to heat stress

because of physiological constraints and

because the interaction of genetics and

environmental factors on plant responses

under extremely high temperatures is

largely unknown.

Compound heat

waves on land and

sea

Compound

events

Co-occurring heat waves on land and sea

as the result of shifting mean climates and

higher probability of extreme land and sea

temperatures leading to both loss of crop

yields and available ﬁsh catch, leading to a

double whammy of food supply shortages.

17.5

Resource conﬂict

Co-operation/

conﬂict

Resource grabbing on land and sea by

powerful countries that have exploited their

own resource base, and governance

failures to control this activity, amplifying

the impact of extreme events for the most

vulnerable by reducing their capacity to

grow, hunt, or access food.

17.5

Title

Class

Text

Rank

(Impact)

Rank

(Probability)

Mean

Rank

Trade barriers

Co-operation/

conﬂict

The increasing number and strength of

trade barriers by many industrialized and

BRIC countries aﬀecting both open trade

and disaster aid needed for resilience to

shocks to major breadbaskets failures due

to extreme events.

Increase in civil

unrest

Co-operation/

conﬂict

Production losses and reduced resource

bases and rising food prices as the result of

extreme events increasing riots, civil unrest

and armed conﬂict, especially in failed/

unstable states.

18.5

Loss of

subsistence

capacity

Vulnerability/

adaptive

capacity

The interplay between the scale transition

to less farmers operating larger farms and

reduction in subsistence farming, with

increased market dependency for food, will

lead to high exposure and food insecurity in

the face of extreme events, especially for

underprivileged and poorer communities.

Loss of food

sovereignty

Vulnerability/

adaptive

capacity

The continued rise in corporate control of

the food system and the inability to

institutionalize and enforce The Right to

Food will severely aﬀect the livelihoods of

low-income communities and hinder their

access to healthy food in the face of

extreme events.

19.5

Critical

infrastructure

disruption

Compound

events

Damage to critical infrastructure and public

utility systems, leaving millions of

households aﬀected by minor

inconveniences (such as power outages of

short duration) to more severe disruptions

(such as extended loss of utilities and

public services for days and weeks, and

the long-term shut-down of bridges, roads,

and other transportation networks), with

signiﬁcant disruptive impacts on food

insecurity.

Multiple supply

chain failures

Compound

events

The correlated risk of extreme events

throughout supply chains leading to

simultaneous stressors on the production,

stocking, transport, storage, and retail

components of agricultural systems. This is

particularly problematic if 'choke points' are

aﬀected.

22.5

Climate skepticism

Co-operation/

conﬂict

An increase in climate skepticism hindering

timely and eﬀective implementation of

adaption and mitigation strategies.

22.5

Title

Class

Text

Rank

(Impact)

Rank

(Probability)

Mean

Rank

Workforce heat

stress

Other

Extreme heat and other climatic factors

having adverse health impacts on farmers

and crop workers, and negatively impacting

food security both through productivity

losses, and for the workers themselves

through income loss or health detriments

(e.g. from heat exposure or nocturnal

working hours) .

Ageing farming

populations

Vulnerability/

adaptive

capacity

A growing age of farmers in agriculture and

the lack of successors from younger

generations creating severe diﬃculties for

adaption to extreme events.

25.5

Agricultural

intensiﬁcation

Vulnerability/

adaptive

capacity

Global trends of intensifying agricultural

systems by conventional means (i.e.

optimized for increased yields and calories)

further increasing their susceptibility to

climate extreme events.

Loss of human co-

operation

Co-operation/

conﬂict

Further polarization of politics across a

range of scales will lead to increasingly

competitive rather than collaborative forms

of governance between communities and

countries, undermining co-operation at

diﬀerent levels in society.

27.5

Increased gender

inequality

Vulnerability/

adaptive

capacity

Extreme events leading to exacerbation of

existing gender inequality, which will entail

substantial negative impacts for food

security given womens key roles in

agricultural production, and food provision

within households.

27.5

Destabilization of

pollution sources

Compound

events

Threats from nuclear or other major

industrial/pollution sources that are

susceptible to extreme events severely

damaging terrestrial, marine, and other

aquatic resources simultaneously.

Agricultural

investment failures

Vulnerability/

adaptive

capacity

Diminished agricultural investments

resulting in negative consequences for the

creation of globally sustainable and resilient

food systems.

30.5

Title

Class

Text

Rank

(Impact)

Rank

(Probability)

Mean

Rank

Exploring the scope of ecosystem services in diverse farming systems for sustainable agriculture: A review

Article

Full-text available

Apr 2025

Ecosystem services (ES) are fundamental to promoting agricultural sustainability, playing a vital role in enhancing resilience and productivity within agricultural ecosystems. This review critically examines the interactions between biodiversity, farming practices and ES delivery, presenting a novel synthesis of their roles in sustainable agriculture. Unlike existing literature focussing on isolated ES or individual farming paradigms, this review integrates insights from multiple agricultural paradigms, including organic, regenerative and conventional systems. It provides a comparative assessment of their effects on biodiversity and ecosystem functionality. It also emphasizes the role of agricultural biodiversity as a nexus for enhancing ecosystem services. This review is structured into four main sections. It begins by classifying key ecosystem services relevant to agricultural systems, underscoring their importance for environmental sustainability. Second, it investigates various farming systems, with a particular focus on the role of biodiversity in enhancing ecosystem services. Third, it conducts a comparative assessment of diverse farming systems follows, evaluating their impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem functionality to inform evidence-based strategies for enhancing ES. This review bridges gaps in existing research by highlighting synergies and proposing strategies to optimize diverse farming systems. These efforts aim to enhance ecosystem services and contribute to sustainable agricultural landscapes.

Transdisciplinary coordination is essential for advancing agricultural modeling with machine learning

Article

Full-text available

Apr 2025

A systemic, multidimensional and territorialized framework for assessing the adaptation potential of sustainable agrifood transitions: theoretical guidelines and exploratory insights from the metropolitan region of Chile

Article

Full-text available

Apr 2025

Introduction The urgency of responding to climate change poses new challenges for agrifood systems, both to make them more sustainable and neutral in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, meet carbon neutrality commitments, and promote their adaptation to a changing climate, while also promoting territorial resilience. In this context, fostering the transformation of traditional agriculture toward innovative models that promote the development and adoption of innovative and ecologically sustainable and resilient adaptation measures, mechanisms and processes becomes extremely urgent. Growing interest has been emerging around approaches and experiences to develop and assess barriers and opportunities for ‘sustainable’ agrifood transitions (‘SAT’). Despite these developments, there is still a lack of an integrated and territorialized analytical framework to account for the potential of SAT to respond to the risks and challenges associated with climate change. In view of this, this paper proposes an analytical framework that hopes to integrate the previous advances around a robust, systemic, multisectoral and context-sensitive observation of the potential of SAT as a strategy to address climate change risks. Methods This framework articulates around four complementary analytical lenses: the ‘risk’ lens addresses the ‘potential’ need for adaptation (why do we need SAT?); the ‘resilience’ lens focuses on how SAT may reduce risk (what do SAT do?); the third, ‘sociotechnical transitions’, looks at potential opportunities and barriers for the adoption and scaling up of these practices (how can SAT occur?); finally, the socio-technical “imaginaries” lens sheds light on the perceptions, expectations and visions behind the SAT (what are they for?). These analytical frameworks will be exemplified through incipient research that applies these observation lenses with the Metropolitan Region of Santiago de Chile as a case study. Results and discussion This exploratory approach allows to illustrate the observation framework and generating initial hypotheses about the territory under study. This favors a more holistic and systemic view of food security and the different elements that can generate risks to it, or promote its resilience, from a systemic and territorial approach, helping to understand why the SAT are necessary and how they can become potential strategies to promote food security in a context of climate change.

Spatiotemporal Variability and Drivers of Cropland Non-Agricultural Conversion Across Mountainous County Types: Evidence from the Qian-Gui Karst Region, China

Article

Full-text available

Apr 2025

The accelerating conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses poses critical threats to food security and sustainable land management, particularly in ecologically fragile karst mountainous regions. This study investigated the spatiotemporal patterns and driving mechanisms of cropland non-agricultural conversion (CNAC) in the Qian-Gui karst region (Guangxi and Guizhou, China) from 2000 to 2020, employing land use datasets and socioeconomic indicators through geographically weighted regression (GWR) modeling. The results showed that (1) from 2000 to 2020, the CNAC rate in the Qian-Guizhou karst mountainous region reached 2.03%. The area of CNAC increased by 14.60 × 10⁴ hm², increasing 1.74 times in 2010–2020 compared to 2000–2010, showing a trend of rapid growth. Specifically, the growth rate of the CNAC area was the highest in apparent mountainous (110.36%) and quasi-mountainous counties (100.5%), followed by semi-mountainous counties (95.28%), while entirely mountainous (40.89%) and pure hilly counties (37.68%) experienced the lowest growth, revealing distinct regional disparities. (2) Spatially, CNAC exhibited a pattern of “high in the north and south, low in the central region”, and the overall level of CNAC displayed significant regional imbalances, with extreme grades distributed in provincial capitals, high and medium grades concentrated in prefecture-level city districts, and light and low grades mainly located in counties and districts (accounting for more than 55.56% of the total number of research units in the two time periods). (3) There was significant spatial heterogeneity in the driving effect of factors influencing CNAC. Agricultural output and population density showed the strongest positive correlations; effectively irrigated areas exhibited a growing influence over time (except for pure hilly counties); rocky desertification areas exerted a strengthened influence on CNAC in pure hilly counties, while their impact was relatively lower in other regions compared to other indicators. Therefore, when formulating policies to protect farmland, it is essential to take into account the specific conditions of different types of counties in mountainous areas and adopt management measures tailored to these regional characteristics.

Machine Learning Algorithms as State-of-the-Art Tools for Prediction of Climatic Conditions: With Focus on Global Land Temperatures

Preprint

Full-text available

Mar 2025

Wanyama Thomas James

Temperatures in various places are drastically increasing or reducing. Skyrocketing land temperatures are expected to change the frequency and intensity of current land temperature extremes. Determining the evolving trends in land temperatures is thus immeasurable. Most importantly, global land temperatures can be forecasted using machine learning algorithms. In our study, polynomial regression and artificial neural networks were used to predict global land temperatures for the next 100 years. Scenario analysis was also done using business-as-usual, moderate mitigation, and aggressive mitigation approaches. All data visualizations of the historical data, predicted data, and data from scenario analysis were done with the aid of MATLAB R2024a. Predictions from polynomial regression revealed that a rapid increase in global land temperatures was to occur from 2012 to 2032 while a rapid increase in global land temperatures was predicted to occur from 2012 to 2032 followed by a gentle rise from 2032 to 2100 based on the artificial neural networks’ prediction. The results of the scenario analysis revealed a dire need for aggressive mitigation to be adopted and implemented as soon as possible. Despite the predictions made by the two algorithms, predictions by artificial neural networks were more reliable compared to those obtained from polynomial regression.

Evaluating Ecosystem and Agronomic Services Provided by Companion Cropping in Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.)

Article

Full-text available

Mar 2025

Hemp, Cannabis sativa L., was legalized in the United States in the 2018 Farm Bill for industrial production. While growing has boomed, profitable agronomic practices lag behind in the infant industry. Growers are specifically interested in weed and pest management strategies that do not impact yield or quality, as there are few herbicide and pesticide options for hemp, and they want agronomic practices to be sustainable or regenerative. Our research assesses the utility of companion cropping to address these needs. Companion cropping is a cultural management tactic within farming systems in which a secondary crop is planted with the main crop, offering an array of potential benefits and ecosystem services. Some of the possible benefits of companion cropping within hemp systems include weed control, additional food sources and habitat for beneficial insects, pest deterrence, increased crop productivity, soil health, and environmental resilience against stresses. To determine which companion crops are most suitable within cannabidiol (CBD) hemp production, we have analyzed the effects of intercropping five companions (basil, dill, cilantro, sage, and marigold, against a blank control) on: (i) companion plant yield and profit, (ii) weed competition, (iii) insect diversity, (iv) hemp biomass yield, and (vi) cannabinoid content. Results show that companion crops differentially and significantly impact weed cover and insect diversity, but do not significantly impact yield or cannabinoid content, with marigold and basil being the most promising. This means that growers can choose companion crops that fit their farm and equipment best without having to worry about a negative impact to quality and yield. Future studies will focus on implementation of companion cropping through on farm trials, an exciting and necessary next step to a sustainable future for cannabis production.

Challenges and opportunities in leveraging an existing systematic evidence database for mitigating hazards to the global food system

Article

Full-text available

Mar 2025

The global food system, essential for delivering nutritional security to a growing population, is highly vulnerable to diverse hazards. This study investigates the feasibility of leveraging an existing systematic database, specifically the Conservation Evidence database, for mitigating environmental hazards impacting the food system. By focusing on human–wildlife conflict as a case study, we explored the database’s potential to inform hazard mitigation strategies. Our analysis revealed significant geographical and taxonomic gaps, varied intervention strategies and differences in study designs across regions. We identified key challenges, such as the need for comprehensive tagging and filtering features, integration of non-academic data and broader stakeholder engagement. The findings underscore the complexity of adapting conservation databases for food system applications but highlight the potential benefits of a free-to-access, systematic, evidence-based approach focusing on food production hazard mitigation. Future work should focus on developing a dedicated food system hazard database, leveraging automation and machine learning to enhance data extraction and application efficacy, ultimately improving global food security and sustainability.

Ocean acidity extremes retard shell formation of bivalve larvae: Insights from transcriptomics and lipidomics

Article

Jun 2025
COMP BIOCHEM PHYS D

In view of climate change and human activities, ocean acidity extreme (OAX) events have been increasingly reported worldwide over the last decades, which possibly retard the growth and development of marine organisms, particularly at their early life-history stages (e.g., embryos or larvae). Thus, understanding whether they can adjust to the sudden increase in seawater acidity has drawn growing attention. Using a commercially and ecologically important bivalve species (Ruditapes philippinarum) with a widespread distribution in the world, we assessed the impact of OAX on its embryonic and larval development as well as expressions of functional genes and lipids to indicate physiological and cellular performance. We found that embryonic development and larval shell formation were inhibited by OAX mainly due to the downregulation of key genes responsible for the uptake of calcium ions from ambient seawater (e.g., NCX, VGCC and SERCA) and the reduced production of bicarbonate ions through the catalytic action of carbonic anhydrase. In addition, a major remodelling in membrane lipids (e.g., PC, PE, PG, PI and PS) indicated that OAX impacted the fluidity and stability of cell membrane, hindering the uptake of calcification substrates. The depletion in energy reserves, such as triacylglycerol, can also account for the impairment in larval shell formation under OAX conditions. By integrating transcriptomics and lipidomics, our findings illustrate a novel molecular mechanism underlying the detrimental effect of OAX on larval development and hence population maintenance of marine organisms, which can have profound implications for sustaining ecosystem stability and aquaculture management.

CY-Bench: A comprehensive benchmark dataset for sub-national crop yield forecasting

Preprint

Full-text available

Mar 2025

In-season, pre-harvest crop yield forecasts are essential for enhancing transparency in commodity markets and improving food security. They play a key role in increasing resilience to climate change and extreme events and thus contribute to the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal 2 of zero hunger. Pre-harvest crop yield forecasting is a complex task, as several interacting factors contribute to yield formation, including in-season weather variability, extreme events, long-term climate change, soil, pests, diseases and farm management decisions. Several modeling approaches have been employed to capture complex interactions among such predictors and crop yields. Prior research for in-season, pre-harvest crop yield forecasting has primarily been case-study based, which makes it difficult to compare modeling approaches and measure progress systematically. To address this gap, we introduce CY-Bench (Crop Yield Benchmark), a comprehensive dataset and benchmark to forecast maize and wheat yields at a global scale. CY-Bench was conceptualized and developed within the Machine Learning team of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgML) in collaboration with agronomists, climate scientists, and machine learning researchers. It features publicly available sub-national yield statistics and relevant predictors—such as weather data, soil characteristics, and remote sensing indicators—that have been pre-processed, standardized, and harmonized across spatio-temporal scales. With CY-Bench, we aim to: (i) establish a standardized framework for developing and evaluating data-driven models across diverse farming systems in more than 25 countries across six continents; (ii) enable robust and reproducible model comparisons that address real-world operational challenges; (iii) provide an openly accessible dataset to the earth system science and machine learning communities, facilitating research on time series forecasting, domain adaptation, and online learning. The dataset (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11502142, (Paudel et al., 2025a)) and accompanying code (https://github.com/WUR-AI/AgML-CY-Bench, (Paudel et al., 2025b))) are openly available to support the continuous development of advanced data driven models for crop yield forecasting to enhance decision-making on food security.

Sports nutrition as an example of effective implementation of innovative trends in nutrition: personalization and digitalization (literature review)

Article

Feb 2025

The nutritional status in an athlete depends on the individual genetic characteristics of the body, the level of physical and psycho-emotional stress, and a balanced diet with the inclusion of specialized food products and dietary supplements. The development of big data analytics and artificial intelligence can contribute to the development of nutritional recommendations at the individual or stratified level. The purpose of the review is to analyze and summarize research papers devoted to the possibilities of using digital technologies, deep machine learning techniques, and artificial intelligence in the field of sports nutrition to ensure a personalized approach to improving professional success. There were studied papers published in 2004–2024 in domestic and foreign electronic databases: Web of Science, Scopus, eLIBRARY.RU, Russian State Library, library collection of the Federal State Budgetary Scientific Institution “Federal Research Center of Nutrition and Biotechnology”. The potential for AI-based technologies in sports nutrition is extremely diverse: dietary assessment, recognition and tracking of food diversity, predictive modelling of athletic performance and non-communicable diseases, and selection of personalized diets. To ensure sustainable growth in the coverage of digital products and technologies, further directions for their application in sports medicine should be aimed at improving the quality and standardization of data and reducing algorithmic bias.

The Transition Steps Needed to Transform Our Food Systems

Chapter

Full-text available

Jan 2023

Contemporary food systems are unable to keep up with the food and nutritional demands of the world’s population and are unsustainable. The situation is set to worsen in the future due population growth and climate change, increasing competition for land, water, and other natural resources, and emerging diseases, conflict, and economic volatility. Government policymakers, donors, businesses, non-governmental organisations, and civil society should be encouraged to adopt a radical approach to transforming contemporary food systems. This chapter chalks out a practical plan for specific transition steps needed for the transformation of food systems. It lays out steps that can be taken at the international level, by national governments, civil societies, companies operating in the food system, and donors. It is emphasised that food systems need to move beyond addressing hunger to address all forms of malnutrition. Consumer demand needs to be harnessed as a significant driver of change. Food systems must become fully environmentally sustainable, thereby operating within planetary boundaries, and no one must be left behind during the transition. The transition needs to deliver transformed food systems capable of operating at two speeds, i.e., responding to immediate needs and short-term shocks, but also able to address the long-term restructuring of food systems needed to respond to climate change, population growth and urbanisation. The choices faced by these stakeholders may be confsidered by setting new priorities and principles to guide transition choices, placing poor and marginalised people at the heart of the transition, tackling trade-offs and compromises head on, ensuring that the transition process is appropriately resourced, and incentivising and supporting the actions.

A P P L I E D E C O L O G Y Marine high temperature extremes amplify the impacts of climate change on fish and fisheries

Article

Full-text available

Oct 2021

Extreme temperature events have occurred in all ocean basins in the past two decades with detrimental impacts on marine biodiversity, ecosystem functions, and services. However, global impacts of temperature extremes on fish stocks, fisheries, and dependent people have not been quantified. Using an integrated climate-biodiversity-fisheries-economic impact model, we project that, on average, when an annual high temperature extreme occurs in an exclusive economic zone, 77% of exploited fishes and invertebrates therein will decrease in biomass while maximum catch potential will drop by 6%, adding to the decadal-scale mean impacts under climate change. The net negative impacts of high temperature extremes on fish stocks are projected to cause losses in fisheries revenues and livelihoods in most maritime countries, creating shocks to fisheries social-ecological systems particularly in climate-vulnerable areas. Our study highlights the need for rapid adaptation responses to extreme temperatures in addition to carbon mitigation to support sustainable ocean development.

Violent conflict exacerbated drought-related food insecurity between 2009 and 2019 in sub-Saharan Africa

Article

Full-text available

Aug 2021

Conflict, drought and locusts are leading concerns for African food security but the relative importance and spatiotemporal scale of crises resulting from each hazard is poorly characterized. Here we use continuous, subnational data to demonstrate that the rise of food insecurity across sub-Saharan Africa that began in 2014 is attributable to an increase in violent conflict, particularly in South Sudan and Nigeria. Although drought remains a leading trigger of food crises, the prevalence of drought-related crises did not increase from 2009 to 2018. When exposed to drought, pastoralists experienced more widespread, severe and long-lasting food crises than people living in agricultural zones. Food insecurity remained elevated in pastoral regions for 2 years following a drought, while agricultural regions returned to pre-drought food-security levels in ~12 months. The few confirmed famines during the 2009–2018 period coincided with both conflict and drought, while locusts had little effect on food security during this period. Subnational data indicate that the increasing frequency of food-security crises since 2014 is more attributable to conflict in South Sudan and Nigeria than to drought or locust swarms, with pastoralists remaining more vulnerable to drought than those in agricultural zones.

Plant pathogen infection risk tracks global crop yields under climate change

Article

Full-text available

Aug 2021
Nat. Clim. Change.

Global food security is strongly determined by crop production. Climate change-induced losses to production can occur directly or indirectly, including via the distributions and impacts of plant pathogens. However, the likely changes in pathogen pressure in relation to global crop production are poorly understood. Here we show that temperature-dependent infection risk, r(T), for 80 fungal and oomycete crop pathogens will track projected yield changes in 12 crops over the twenty-first century. For most crops, both yields and r(T) are likely to increase at high latitudes. In contrast, the tropics will see little or no productivity gains, and r(T) is likely to decline. In addition, the United States, Europe and China may experience major changes in pathogen assemblages. The benefits of yield gains may therefore be tempered by the greater burden of crop protection due to increased disease and unfamiliar pathogens. The authors model the impact of future temperature changes on infection risk for 12 major crops from 80 fungal and oomycete plant pathogens. They find increased risk, as well as crop yield, at higher latitudes and predict major shifts in pathogen assemblages in the United States, Europe and China.

Higher yields and more biodiversity on smaller farms

Article

Full-text available

Mar 2021

Small farms constitute most of the world’s farms and are a central focus of sustainable agricultural development. However, the relationship between farm size and production, profitability, biodiversity and greenhouse gas emissions remains contested. Here, we synthesize current knowledge through an evidence review and meta-analysis and show that smaller farms, on average, have higher yields and harbour greater crop and non-crop biodiversity at the farm and landscape scales than do larger farms. We find little conclusive evidence for differences in resource-use efficiency, greenhouse gas emission intensity and profits. Our findings highlight the importance of farm size in mediating some environmental and social outcomes relevant to sustainable development. We identify a series of research priorities to inform land- and market-based policies that affect smallholders globally.

Impact of transnational land acquisitions on local food security and dietary diversity

Article

Full-text available

Jan 2021

Significance Foreign investors have acquired vast tracts of land globally since the early 2000s, yet the food security implications of this phenomenon are poorly understood. The ability to close crop yield gaps through commercial agriculture must be weighed against local impacts on food access. We combine agricultural, remote sensing, and household survey data with georeferenced information on land deals to examine their implications on food production and access. Results point to a paradox where land deals simultaneously contribute to closing the global yield gap by increasing crop production, while threatening local food security by redirecting key dietary nutrients toward the export market. This trade-off between food production and food security calls into question the sustainability of current land investment practices.

THE GEOPOLITICS OF FOOD SECURITY: BARRIERS TO THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOAL OF ZERO HUNGER

Technical Report

Full-text available

Nov 2020

Assessing the prospects for Zero Hunger—Sustainable Development Goal 2—requires an understanding of food security that goes beyond developmental or humanitarian issues, to include linkages with geopolitics. Geopolitical challenges cut across areas such as natural resources, trade, armed conflict and climate change where unilateralism and zero-sum approaches to security directly hamper efforts to eradicate hunger and undermine the frameworks that govern those efforts. Competition for agricultural resources can be both a cause and a consequence of geo- political rivalry. International trade, while essential for food security, also creates vulnerabilities through supply disruptions—sometimes politically motivated. Armed conflict is a driver of food insecurity, which can itself feed into social unrest and violence. Climate change interacts with all three phenomena, reshaping both the physical landscape and political calculus. These overlapping linkages require further integrated policy engagement and analysis.

Twenty priorities for future social-ecological research on climate resilience

Article

Full-text available

Oct 2020
ENVIRON RES LETT

Faced with the global climate crisis and the inevitability of future climate shocks, enhancing social-ecological resilience has become an urgent area for research and policy internationally. Research to better understand the impacts of, and response to, climate shocks is critical to improve the resilience and well-being of affected people and places. This paper builds on the findings of a focus collection on this topic to provide a concluding and forward-looking perspective on the future of social-ecological research on climate resilience. Drawing on an expert workshop to identify research gaps, we distinguish 20 priorities for future research on climate resilience. These span four key themes: Systems and Scales, Governance and Knowledge, Climate Resilience and Development, and Sectoral Concerns. Given the need and urgency for evidence-based policies to address the climate crisis, the analysis considers the importance of understanding how findings on social-ecological resilience are used in policy, rather than solely focusing on how it is generated. Many of the priorities emphasise the governance systems within which climate research is produced, understood and used. We further reflect on the state of current evidence generation processes, emphasising that the involvement of a wider range of voices in the design, implementation and dissemination of climate resilience research is critical to developing the efficient and fair interventions it is meant to support.

More floods, fires and cyclones — plan for domino effects on sustainability goals

Article

Apr 2021

Without new models, better metrics and more investment, cascades of extreme events could derail the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Without new models, better metrics and more investment, cascades of extreme events could derail the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.

Indian monsoon derailed by a North Atlantic wavetrain

Article

Dec 2020

Season of the drought The Indian monsoon is a critical source of water for hundreds of millions of people, and when it fails to deliver its normal quantity of rain, enormous human, economic, and ecological costs can be incurred. Monsoon droughts are not always seasonal, however. Borah et al. found that nearly half of all monsoonal droughts were subseasonal and characterized by a steep decline in late-season rainfall. Moreover, this type of subseasonal drought appears to be related to a distinct cold anomaly in the North Atlantic Ocean, raising the possibility that monsoon droughts may be more predictable. Science , this issue p. 1335