Field to Market: What is Sustainable Agriculture?All-Party Parliamentary Group on Science and Technology and AgricultureJune 26, 2012
Fred Luckey, Chairman, Field to Market, The Keystone Alliance for Sustainable Agriculture
1
The Challenges Ahead
2
“Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
(Brundtland Report, 1987)
EconomicDevelopment
Social Responsibility
Environmental Responsibility
Baseline and generally accepted observations and assumptions:
4
Population is growing Economic growth in developing countries is happening People are moving Diets expected to improveFood production will have to increase substantially to meet demandGlobal trade must flow and grow for supply to match demandResources are not infinite, ecosystems biodiversity and the climate must be protected.
5
Already at least 1 billion of the near 7 billion people on the planet malnourishedMillions are over-nourishedLocal focus and interest is a priority for mostThe World is more interconnected than everGlobal views and responses are not aligned – lack of consensusTraditional market based economic systems may, or may not solve the larger issuesInfrastructure is a problem General lack of confidence in governments to find solutionsSupply and demand in balance equal more market volatility Time is shortCollaboration must result in action, not just talk
These are global issues that have to be overcome in an environment where:
6
Demand Driven by Demographics
Source: UN
Challenges for Increased Production
• Developing areas will need to increase production• Breadbasket areas like the U.S. will need to continue
to increase production• All while sustaining environmental, social, and
economic well-being
7
About Field to Market
8
What is Field to Market?
• A collaborative stakeholder group– Producers, agribusinesses, food and retail companies, conservation associations,
universities, and NRCS
• Identifying supply chain strategies to define, measure, and promote continuous improvement for agriculture– Addressing the challenge of increasing demand and limited resources
• Developing and piloting outcomes-based, science-based metrics and tools– Fieldprint Calculator, a free, online tool to help growers analyze their operations
and help the supply chain explain how food is produced– National Report on environmental and socioeconomic trends over time for U.S.
commodity crops
• www.fieldtomarket.org
Field to Market Membership
How We Define Sustainable Agriculture• Meeting the needs of the present while
improving the ability of future generations to meet their own needs– Increasing productivity to meet future food and
fiber demands– Improving the environment– Improving human health– Improving the social and economic well-being of
agricultural communities
Big Ideas• Engage the full supply chain
– Include producers
• Focus on commodities crops– Unique supply chains and traceability issues
• Develop science- and outcomes-based measures– Identify the key indicators for sustainability– Measure broad-scale trends and field-scale outcomes
• Scale and implement metrics for sustainability programs
12
Deliverables: What We Are Doing
National indicators report:
Documentation of overall trends
Supply chain projects:
Direct engagement in continuous improvement
Grower Fieldprints: Individual
opportunities for continuous
improvement
Public data and modelsCollaboratively developed
Outcomes based
The Fieldprint Calculator: Measuring Field Level Outcomes and Identifying Opportunities for Improvement
14
What is the Fieldprint Calculator?• An online education tool for row crop farmers that
indexes their agronomics and practices to a fieldprint• Helps growers evaluate their farming decisions and
compare their sustainability performance
– In the areas of:• Land use• Soil conservation• Soil carbon• Water use• Energy use• Greenhouse gas emissions• Water Quality and Biodiversity in development
– Against:• Their own fields• Their own performance over
time• County, state and national
averages
Fieldprint Calculator Start Page
16
Fieldprint Calculator Summary Page
17
Field to Market Calculator Pilot Projects• Demonstrate use of calculator on
the ground to test utility at the grower level and through the supply chain
• Currently 6 member-led pilots engaging farmers across geographies, crops, and supply chains
• Over approximately 300 farmers engaged
19
The Fieldprint Calculator: Pilots
Pilot Feedback“I’ll tell you, I wish I had this tool when I first started my position here at the District. It’s a great way to get to know growers and local operations and to get a conversation started. I’m making more in-roads with the fieldprinting project, than I have with much of the previous outreach I’ve done. If it’s used as nothing more than an outreach tool, it’s a winner.”
– Jared Foster, Van Buren Conservation District/Paw-Paw pilot
Field to Market Pilot:Completing The Supply Chain
21
Inputs Ag
Production Aggregation
Intermediate Processing
Food Processing
Distribution Consumption
SeedFertilizer
Grower
Process:• Establish a representative grower database
• 22 growers representing 35-40% of Crete corn grind (40,000 acres)• Additional participation and support of:
• National Resource and Conservation Service (NRCS) • National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) • Nebraska Corn Board• University of Nebraska Extension Service
•Collect data from farm production of corn.
Objective: • Using FTM tools and resources to complete the carbon and water footprints for
Kellogg’s Frosted Flakes supply chain by capturing the grower link and to collect the necessary data to raise the Fieldprint Calculator to a higher level of functionality
22
Nebraska Corn Pilot: - Collaboration
Energy Use Efficiency
23
Irrigation Water Use Efficiency
24
0.0
50.0
100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
300.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
7 13 19 2 20 9 10 11 15 5 3 4 8 14 17 1 6 16 22 12 18
Water Applied (left axis) Irrigated Yield per Acre (right axis)
(Inches of irrigation water) (Bushels)
Irrigated Corn Crete Nebraska, 2009
Grower ID
Irrigated Corn 2009, Crete Nebraska – Average Field Print and Grower ID No. 1
25
Grower ID - 1 ScoreLand Use 89Soil Conservation 154Irrigation Water 71Energy 101Greenhouse Gases 103Soil Carbon 200
Nebraska Food Chain Pilot: Greenhouse Gas Emissions & Water Usage
26
Inputs Ag
Production Aggregation
Intermediate Processing
Food Processing
Distribution Consumption
SeedFertilizer
Grower
Total 2009 Greenhouse Gas Emissions = 62,533 Short TonsTotal 2009 Water Usage = 695,913,852 Gal
4,764 Short Tons GHG 5,420,270 Gal Water
53,594 Short Tons GHG232,145,565 Gal Water
3,062 Short Tons GHG 458,348,017 Gal Water
Accelerating Better Practice Adoption
2727
Today Tomorrow
Oats Corn Beans Wheat Rice
SustainabilityPerformance Curve
PerformanceShift
Field To Market Pilots
But…How do we know the curve is moving?
National Indicators:
The Sustainability Story of U.S. Agriculture
28
National Indicators Report
• Outcomes based• Practice/technology neutral• Transparent and credible science• On-farm production outcomes within a
grower’s controlCriteria
• Crops: corn, cotton, potatoes, rice, soybeans, and wheat (2012)
• Indicators : land use, soil use, irrigation water, energy use, green house gas emissions in socio-economic added in 2012
• Analyzed publicly available data ,1980-2011; U.S. national-scale indicators
• Peer reviewed
Data & Method
s
2012 Preliminary Results*: Environmental Indicators*To be published July, 2012; do not cite or publish in advance of July 12, 2012
• All six crops demonstrated progress in resource use/impact per unit of production on all five environmental indicators. • Improvements in efficiency were driven, at least in
part, by improvements in yield for all crops.• Efficiency per unit of production helps track
resource uses vs. production/demand concerns
30
2012 Preliminary Results*: Environmental Indicators*To be published July, 2012; do not cite or publish in advance of July 12, 2012
• Absolute resource use/impact increased for some crops on some indicators.– Due in part to overall increases in production
• Many factors and caveats to consider• Total use does not equal total impact• Impact often occurs on the local level• Cumulative use across all crops may reveal trade-offs due to
shifting of planting patterns
31
2012 Preliminary Results*: Environmental Indicators*To be published July, 2012; do not cite or publish in advance of July 12, 2012
• Recent trends generally consistent with overall 30 year
trends– Some exceptions:
• Soil erosion (total, per acre, and per unit of production) improved nearly universally for these crops.
• More recent trends show increases in total soil erosion (due to increased production) and leveling off of per acre soil erosion.
32
2012 Preliminary Soybean Results*Resources per bushel *To be published July, 2012; do not cite or publish in advance of July 12, 2012
33
0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.02.2
5 Yr. Avg. 1980 - 845 Yr. Avg. 1987 - 915 Yr. Avg. 1997 - 015 Yr. Avg. 2007 - 11
Land Use
GreenhouseGases
Energy
Soil Erosion
Irrigation Water Applied
Index of Per Bushel Resource Impacts to Produce Soybeans(United States, Year 2000 = 1)
Note: Data are presented in index form, where the year
2000 = 1 and a 0.1 point change is equal to a 10% difference.Index values allow for comparison of change across multiple dimensions with differing units of measure.
Year 2000 * Unit - per BushelLand Use 0.027 Planted AcresSoil Erosion 0.131 TonsIrrigation Water Applied 0.766 Acre InchesEnergy 70,669 BtusGreenhouse Gases 15.1 Pounds CO2e* Five-year average 1996 - 2000
2012 Preliminary Rice Results* *To be published July, 2012; do not cite or publish in advance of July 12, 2012
34
Resource Area Indicator
Trend Direction
Entire Period
Compound Annual
Total Production ↑ 53 1.4
Cwt per Acre ↑ 53 1.4
Total Planted Acres ↑ 9 0.3
Acres per Cwt ↓ (35) (1.4)
Total Tons ↑ 9 0.3
Tons per Acre ↓ (0) (0.0)
Tons per Cwt ↓ (34) (1.3)
Total Volume ↓ (18) (0.6)
Volume per Irrigated Acre ↓ (25) (0.9)
Volume per Cwt ↓ (53) (2.4)
Total Btu ↑ 6 0.2
Btu per Acre ↓ (3) (0.1)
Btu per Cwt ↓ (38) (1.5)
Total Pounds ↑ 5 0.2
Pounds per Acre ↓ (4) (0.1)
Pounds per Cwt ↓ (38) (1.5)
Rice Summary of Results: Trends in U.S. Production, Resource Use / Impact, 1980-2011
Percent Change*1980-2011
GHG Emissions
(CO2 Equivalents)
Crop Yield
Land Use
Soil Erosion
Irrigation Water Applied
Energy Use
The Path Forward:Opportunities for Collaboration
35
Where You Stand Depends Upon Where You Sit
36
Historically 2050
Too Late
Agribusiness
Government
NGOs
Growers
Food Processors/Retailers
Academia
Consumer
The Only Path Forward Is A Common Path
37
Agribusiness
Government
NGOs
Growers
Food Retailers
Academia
Consumer
FTM
NISA
TSC
SAI
SFL
SISC
CGF
Yesterday Today Tomorrow
International Adoption• Canada• Brazil• Argentina• Spain
38
Summary
39
U.S. Producers Have a Great Story to Tell• Efficiency gains over time, along with increased
production• Continued challenges ahead for meeting increased
demand within limits of natural resources and social and economic needs
• With the collaboration of U.S. farmers, tools and metrics are emerging to help track and communicate progress and identify opportunities for continued improvement
40
In Summary
41
• Imperative we produce more with the resources we have now• Zero sum game if we do not do so sustainably• Supply shocks are inevitable• Food shortages = political / economic / civil instability• Economics matter• Time is not on our side• Market volatility is likely to increase as a natural outcome• Collaboration and action are the first order of business• Not just government responsibility – it is ours as well• Imperative we imbed sustainability deeply into our strategic thinking
Path Forward• Acknowledge preferences• Respect differences• Listen• Learn• Exert leadership • Move ahead together
Microsoft
43
Questions/Contact Information• Fred Luckey, Chairman
– (314) 409-7822; [email protected]
• Julie Shapiro, Facilitator– 970-513-5830; [email protected]
• Field to Market Website – Fieldprint Calculator – 2012 National Report (July)– http://www.fieldtomarket.org
Questions?
44