Political scientist Sparsha Saha from Harvard University joins us to challenge the status quo in meat politics. How can a sector so vital be so overlooked? Sparsha shares groundbreaking insights, exposing the unusual political dynamics surrounding animal welfare and the unexpected urban-rural divide on climate policies related to meat consumption. We grapple with the low prioritization of food and water in political discourse and the urgent need for heightened awareness in tackling ecological crises.

Our conversation takes a deep dive into the path toward building inclusive strategies in the plant-based and regenerative agriculture sectors. By bridging gaps across ethical and expertise boundaries, we uncover how collaboration can drive meaningful social progress. Sparsha and I discuss the public's yearning for genuine moral leadership on critical issues like food and water, and consider how emerging leaders, particularly younger ones, could resonate with people's fundamental needs. Furthermore, we examine how cultural expressions, especially music, can capture our deep-rooted connection to the land.

We turn the spotlight on the pressing challenges and potential solutions within the global food systems. Recent crises, from food shortages to geopolitical tensions like the Ukraine war, have emphasized the vulnerability of these systems. Sustainable practices such as regenerative agriculture and mindful water usage in farming are more essential than ever. We also introduce the "eat less but better" concept, advocating for reduced animal product consumption to enhance biodiversity and sustainability. Sparsha and I underscore the socio-economic struggles faced by vulnerable communities dependent on unsustainable food systems, urging systemic policy changes to foster security and equity.

Send us a text

The least productive 10-20% of producers are causing 60-80% of the environmental impacts but only produce 5% of the food. Incentivizing these farmers and ranchers to change can significantly improve the sustainability of our food systems with minimum impact on global food production.

Today I am joined by Jason Clay from WWF who focuses on working with the private sector to improve supply chain management especially addressing habitat, biodiversity, soil health, irrigation, effluent, and green house gases. Jason leads the Markets Institute to improve sustainability in internationally traded food and soft commodities, known as Codex Planetarius.

We need to move away from looking at averages. With the largest 10 commodites we are finding there are three to five production systems globally and the difference between the most damaging decile and most sustainable decile is 10x. Between any two of the 5 production systems it can be 50 or 100x. Huge reduction in the environmental footprint of these systems can be achieved by addressing the bottom.

The culture of eating animal protein is engrained in millions of years of evolution. With over 400 million Chinese people raised from poverty this century and a further 1 billion Indians being taken out of poverty the increased demand for animal proteins is not going to disappear.

Send us a text

The 350 million hectares of global irrigation consume 3-4 Mississippi’s worth of fresh water every day. This volume of fresh water used for Irrigation is continuing to increase, especially across the global south, exacerbating the challenge of how we produce more food with less water. Today we are joined by Bruce Lankford, who has been working on Water and Irrigation Policy across the developed and developing worlds for over 30 years.

In a recent blog post Bruce wrote about how Irrigation is colonising water and is being colonised; on research and teaching gaps in irrigation. He concluded that because many consultants, analysts, researchers, research projects, funders and decision-makers are not fully interrogating irrigation as a complex system, irrigation is colonising freshwater, and it is being technically, conceptually and financially colonised.

Send us a text

Economics, markets, and policy all have significant impacts on human behavior and decision making. Nick Parker is an environmental economics professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the Hoover Institution who has been studying the human interaction with wolves, and especially the indirect effects wolves have on environments they live, to examine if it was possible for wolves to actually benefit humans and reduce threats to human lives and property. He found that the reintroduction of wolves into Wisconsin and other US States led to a 25% decrease in deer vehicle collisions. The research suggests that two thirds of this reduction is due to how wolves change deer behaviour rather than just eating deer. The wolves prefer to travel along strait corridors such as roads, creeks, and railway lines leading to fewer deer in the vicinity of roads. The benefits from wolves was found to be 63 to one when the costs associated with human mortality, injuries, and damage to vehicles was compared to the compensation payments the state was making to ranchers for livestock predation.

However, the impact of wolves and deer populations on communities is actually far more complex than just vehicle collisions and predation of livestock. Deer also eat farmers crops, damage gardens, and damage timber, and they can spread Lyme disease. So deer vehicle collisions are only one aspect of the damages caused by over abundance of deer. Wolves also help control subservient predators like coyotes and foxes and and compete with mountain lions and bear. In the US the number one cause of livestock damage is from coyotes. Large deer populations can also provide economic benefits through hunting. All these indirect effects also feeds into the cost benefit analysis question.

Economics is a powerful tool for optimizing natural resource use and it is possible to set up a system where those who benefit compensate those who bear the cost.

“Is it possible to set up a system that those who benefit compensate those who bear the cost. Because, as an economist, I think that's the that's the gold standard for determining the optimal level of any natural resource use that's both the asset and a liability. Like wildlife is the asset and a liability. Some people want more, some people want less. Those who want more should pay for it, and those who bear the cost should be compensated in some way.”

The big challenge is that policy frequently focuses on the direct effects with little consideration of the indirect effects. Nick Parkers’s study on impact of wolves on deer vehicle collisions shows that for policies to be effective the whole system needs to be understood as the secondary, and tertiary effects and how these can be more important than the primary effect.

“If you want long term resource conservation and sustainability, we need policies that cause users of those resources to treat them like they're the owner. Now we might not want to convey ownership, and might not be practical or politically feasible, or even socially desirable, for individuals and groups to own every natural resource. But if we have have policies that encourage them to act as if they own it, then the incentives are going to be lined for long term.”

You can listen to my conversation with Nick parker here.

Nick Parker is the Ilene and Morton Harris Senior Fellow (adjunct) and the Hoover Institution and the Anderson-Bascom Professor of Applied Economics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Send us a text

Low- and middle-income countries house 76% of the global cattle herd, and by 2050 will be home to 8 billion people. They are the projected epicenter of both increased animal source food demand, and livestock-related emissions. The most promising approach to address this demand while limiting greenhouse gas emissions is to improve the efficiency of livestock production systems in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia through interventions in genetics, feeding and health. Boosting livestock productivity can improve both food security and producer incomes. Alternative proteins may play a limited role in addressing projected demand, but currently most companies are located in high-income countries Moreover, given the multifaceted roles that ruminants play in global agri-food systems, the social, economic and economic trade-offs associated with replacing meat and milk with alternative proteins must be evaluated holistically.

Today we are joined by Alison Van Eenennaam from UC Davis who is leading the
animal Genomics and Biotechnology Program is to provide research and education on the use of animal genomics and biotechnology in livestock production systems.

Alison recently wrote this paper outlining the challenges alternative proteins face in meeting the increased demand across the Global South.

Send us a text

Our food systems are orders of magnitude more complex than other sectors of our economy so how can tools such as Artificial intelligence help farmers across the world make better decisions to improve the sustainability and productivity of our food systems.

Today we are joined by Aidan Connolly a animal agtech entrepreneur, investor, and author of The Future of Agriculture who has spend his career working on agricultural innovation.

Send us a text

Today Ash Cloud is partnering with CSIRO to bring you Andy Sheppard, the Chief Research Scientist Biosecurity at CSIRO where he leads efforts to protect Australia, it’s neighbours, and trading partners from plant, animal and human pests and disease threats. Building local and global partnerships to understand the biology of the threats across their native and invaded range so intervention opportnities can be implemented is a key part of his work. Andy is also the Co-Executive Director of Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and CSIRO Catalysing Australia's Biosecurity Initiative.

You can listen to our conversation here.

Send us a text

The US military has recognized climate change as a national security threat for decades our guest today, Sherri Goodman, has been credited with educating a generation of US military officers and government officials about the complex interactions between climate change and national security. She is Secretary General of the International Military Council on Climate & Security and the author of Threat Multiplier: Climate, Military Leadership, and the Fight for Global Security.

I recently spoke with Sherri about her 30 odd years experience working on the nexus of climate and security, including the risks posed by climate change and the many indirect ways they can be manifested, the challenges in changing the mindset at DoD around how they think about climate change, what can be learned from her experience, and opportunities to intervene.

You can listen to our conversation here.

Send us a text