Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

A vision for attaining food security

Alison Misselhorn1, Pramod Aggarwal2, Polly Ericksen3, Peter Gregory4,5, Leo Horn-Phathanothai6, John Ingram7 and Keith Wiebe8
Food is fundamental to human wellbeing and development. Increased food production remains a cornerstone strategy in the effort to alleviate global food insecurity. But despite the fact that global food production over the past half century has kept ahead of demand, today around one billion people do not have enough to eat, and a further billion lack adequate nutrition. Food insecurity is facing mounting supply-side and demand-side pressures; key among these are climate change, urbanisation, globalisation, population increases, disease, as well as a number of other factors that are changing patterns of food consumption. Many of the challenges to equitable food access are concentrated in developing countries where environmental pressures including climate change, population growth and other socio-economic issues are concentrated. Together these factors impede peoples access to sufcient, nutritious food; chiey through affecting livelihoods, income and food prices. Food security and human development go hand in hand, and their outcomes are co-determined to a signicant degree. The challenge of food security is multi-scalar and cross-sector in nature. Addressing it will require the work of diverse actors to bring sustained improvements inhuman development and to reduce pressure on the environment. Unless there is investment in future food systems that are similarly cross-level, cross-scale and cross-sector, sustained improvements in human wellbeing together with reduced environmental risks and scarcities will not be achieved. This paper reviews current thinking, and outlines these challenges. It suggests that essential elements in a successfully adaptive and proactive food system include: learning through connectivity between scales to local experience and technologies high levels of interaction between diverse actors and sectors ranging from primary producers to retailers and consumers, and use of frontier technologies.
Addresses 1 Health Economics and HIV and Aids Research Division, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville Campus, Private Bag X54001, Durban 4000, South Africa 2 CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security, International Water Management Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India 3 People, Livestock and the Environment, International Livestock Research Institute, PO Box 30709, Nairobi 00100, Kenya 4 East Malling Research, New Road, East Malling ME19 6BJ, UK 5 Centre for Food Security, School of Agriculture, Policy & Development, University of Reading, RG 6 6AR, UK 6 World Resources Institute, 10 G. St. NE, Washington, DC 20002, United States 7 Environmental Change Institute, Oxford University Centre for the Environment, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QY, United Kingdom 8 Agricultural Development Economics Division (ESA), Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153 Rome, Italy Corresponding author: Misselhorn, Alison (misselhorn@ukzn.ac.za) www.sciencedirect.com Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:717 This review comes from the Open issue Edited by Rik Leemans Available online 13th February 2012 1877-3435/$ see front matter # 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. DOI 10.1016/j.cosust.2012.01.008

Introduction
Food is fundamental to human wellbeing, and human development is central to achieving food security. Yet despite global food production over the past half century keeping ahead of global demand, around one billion people today do not have enough to eat, and a further billion lack adequate nutrition [1]. Continuing population growth over the next 50 years, coupled with other pressures, will raise global food demand still higher [2,3]. Meeting this demand will be complicated by environmental changes (global environmental change GEC) including climate, biodiversity, water availability, land use, tropospheric ozone and other pollutants, and sea level rise [2,4,5]. These changes are themselves caused partly by activities within the food system [6], and in turn the effects of food system feedbacks on the environment are exacerbated by GEC interacting with competition for resources from novel land uses such as production of biofuels [7]. In this paper, we review current thinking to rst identify some challenges facing global food security, and then some key elements that might support a successful food system.8

Why is the need to act so urgent?

In the 63 years since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted, the right of all for access to sufcient, safe and nutritious food is far from becoming a reality [8,9]. The prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years an indicator of severe historical food insecurity clearly underscores this point (Figure 1). Food security has come to denote the availability, access, utilization and
8 The network of actors involved in the supply of, and demand for, food, and their activities and interactions at multiple levels across spatial, temporal, jurisdictional and other scales, together with the networks food security outcomes over time, encapsulate the food system.

Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:717

8 Open issue

Figure 1

Stunting prevalence % under 5 (2000-2008) <= 20 20 - 30 30 - 40 40 - 50 > 50 no data

Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability

Countries experiencing chronic food insecurity, as indicated by a high prevalence of stunting in children aged less than 5 years. Adapted from Ericksen et al. [12].

Table 1 Key supply and demand side pressures on global food security. Supply side pressures     Climate change Urbanisation Globalisation Safety and quality including factors such as environmental pollution and pests and diseases  Land use change and competition (e.g. biofuels)     Demand side pressures Population increases Urbanisation Changing demand in food types and levels of processing Disease

 Factors linked with under-development, including poverty, gender inequity, low resource access, poor health, and lack of education

stability of food, universally, over time. Nutritional security is integral to this denition; beyond food being accessible, it must be nutritious and prepared and processed by the body in such a way as to support human health. This in turn is affected by many factors such as water quality, food storage, human disease as well as social dictates of preparation and consumption to name but a few. The many determinants of food and nutrition security mean that the reality of global food security lies at the conuence of multiple pressures, both on the supply and demand sides of food availability, access and utilisation (Table 1).

increasing dietary demands for food in countries where wealth will increase over the next few decades [2].
Climate change

Population pressure

On the demand-side, among the mounting pressures on global food security is rising world population which is estimated to increase by 47%, from 6.1 billion in 2000 to 8.9 billion in 2050 [10]. Much of the growth is expected to be concentrated in Asia and Africa, areas also of high environmental and social vulnerabilities. Southern Africa, for example, is already a net importer of food, but has a population which is set to double to reach nearly 2 billion by the year 2050 [11]. Exacerbating this demand is
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:717

On the supply side, climate change is likely to transform the geography of food production in a way that will disproportionately affect developing world regions: it is estimated that overall agricultural productivity in these areas may decline 921% by 2050, depending on the degree of change modelled [12,13,14,15]. Specically, climate change will lead to changes in average temperatures, and in rainfall amounts and patterns, which will have positive and negative effects on yields and/or change production costs, depending on location. Increases in weather extremes may increase incidence of double droughts or prolonged elevated temperature at critical stages of crop growth. These impacts will be locally devastating and of major concern, particularly if widespread. Livestock and sheries will be affected both directly and indirectly through impacts on grazing and other feed stocks [16,17]. Added to the direct effects climate change has on food security through diminishing food production potential and undermining food availability, are many indirect
www.sciencedirect.com

A vision for attaining food security Misselhorn et al.

effects which, while less well understood, are nevertheless expected to have signicant impacts. These impacts are set to undermine all four pillars of food security availability, access, utilisation and stability and include impacts such as those on micro and macro economies, sanitation systems, drinking water, human susceptibility disease such as malaria and HIV/AIDS, and the nutrient content of foods [18,19,20,21,22,23,24,2531]. Further pressure from climate change on these already-fragile sectors is set to deepen existing human development challenges in developing regions of the world. Not only does climate change affect food security, but human activities related to the production, supply and consumption of food also play a signicant role in changing the environment and the worlds climate (Ingram JSI: A food systems approach to researching food security and its interactions with global environmental change. Food Security, unpublished data) [22,23,32]. These human activities give rise to changes in freshwater quality and quantity, in carbon and nitrogen cycling, in biodiversity, and in land cover and soils. There is thus also concern that meeting societys rising demand for food using current technologies will further degrade the environment which will, in turn, undermine the food systems upon which food security is based.
Multiple constraints to food access

which together disable people from accessing sufcient, nutritious food primarily because of low incomes, high food prices, or both. The link between food prices and numbers of food insecure people is illustrated in the effects of the food price spikes of 2008 and 2011 and the intervening economic recession, and underscores the importance of food being affordable, and of livelihoods being resilient enough to accommodate such stressors [39]. There are many pressures that lead to both higher food prices and the broader vulnerability of livelihoods in a range of different ways, including competing demands for agricultural land and commodities and other resources [7].
Changing patterns of supply and demand: urbanisation and globalisation

Increasing food production remains a cornerstone strategy in the effort to alleviate global food insecurity. However, with more than enough food currently being produced per capita to feed the global population, increased food production alone is clearly inadequate to the task of assuring food security for all. Increasing production, initially though extensication and more recently through intensication, has assured that in 2009/10 approximately 325 kg of grain was produced annually per capita considerably more than the 219 kg of grain needed annually to meet basic caloric requirements of 2100 calories per day per person [33,34,35]. Indeed, food access has been so good for many that increasing levels of obesity had already become a problem worldwide by the close of the last century [36], although the trend is now levelling in the US, at least [37]. Moreover, when considering dimensions of food utilization and nutrition, national and international food markets need to support more than access to sufcient calories. In addition to the 14 essential minerals required to produce healthy crops, humans require at least 11 more and one or more of these are typically absent in the local diets of two-thirds of the human population [38]; for example, 60% of the global population is iron-decient. The mobility of food and its associated nutrients and vitamins is essential to ensure global nutritional needs can be met. The reason ca. 1 billion are food insecure today is due to a range of pressures and failures in the global food systems
www.sciencedirect.com

Urbanisation is a robust trend on a global level and in developing countries for the foreseeable future. In the century spanning 19502050 the relative shares of urban and rural populations in the world are likely to have ipped from roughly 30:70 to 70:30, and most of this growth will be in developing countries [40]. Urbanisation brings highly dynamic changes to food systems some potentially positive, and others potentially threatening. Rapid urbanization has been associated with poverty, crime, overburdening of social services, public health risks linked to poor sanitation, and water and air pollution and, particularly in developing countries, increases in child malnutrition [41]. The strong relationship between disease, food insecurity, and HIV and AIDS potentially has further far-reaching impacts on food systems in urban settings, which bear the concentration of the HIV pandemic [42]. Globalisation is also changing food security dynamics; the increasing integration of world economy and culture may have led to increases in average incomes worldwide, but it has also led to greater disparities between the wealthy and the poor [43,44]. Intensifying this is the unequal spread of technical advances in transport and communication systems, as well as increased economies of scale in industry and transport and the food system more widely. Globalisation has also led to an increase in volatility of global food prices as idiosyncratic economic shocks can affect the whole global food system, and can be exacerbated by speculative forces able to trade at the global level. At the individual and household levels, food price instability further damages vulnerable livelihoods. At broader scales, this can lock regions and countries into low human development pathways [45]. Further, food price volatility makes it difcult for producers to plan and smooth out the shocks in the absence of insurance markets. Food trade mechanisms will play making sure food is available, and be consistent with local markets towards international agricultural an important role in food aid will need to and needs. Progress trade that enhances

Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:717

10 Open issue

food security is slow, and a critical need is for internationally non-competitive small-scale agricultural producers and subsistence farmers in developing countries to be protected while trade in agriculture is being liberalized [46].

poorest and most vulnerable will require transformation of societies and economies. Gender inequity is a key challenge to human development as well as to food security. Across the developing world, women are central to rural economies. At the same time, however, women consistently have less access than men to productive resources and opportunities. For example, almost 70 percent of employed women in Southern Asia and more than 60 percent of employed women in sub-Saharan Africa work in agriculture [50]. A recent FAO report [50] noted that if women had the same access as men to agricultural inputs in the developing world, farm yields could increase by 2030 percent, raising total agricultural output in developing countries by 2.54 percent, and potentially lifting 100150 million people out of hunger. Economic growth driven by the agricultural sector would reduce both poverty and inequality. According to the World Bank, welfare gains from economic growth originating in the agricultural sector are substantially higher for households in the poorest deciles. In a sample of 42 developing countries over 19812000, an increase of 1% of GDP growth from the agricultural sector, led to increased expenditures in the three poorest deciles of more than 2.5 times the growth that originated in the rest of the economy [51]. More recent studies have conrmed this regularity [52]. To meet the challenge of increasing food supply to feed an extra 2.3 billion people by 2050 and to satisfy changing diets will entail opening new agricultural frontiers (mainly in developing regions) and increasing agricultural productivity closing the yield gap in South Asia and Africa. In many developing countries, including those at greater risk of climatic extremes that affect food security, there is a large gap between potential farm yields and actual yields harvested. For example, the Indian national average yields of rice and wheat crops are less than 4 t ha1 today, whereas climatic factors in the region allow a potential yields of 10 and 8 t ha1, respectively [53] indicating large yield gaps. Such yield gaps exist in all crops and across all ecosystems and bridging them could ensure meeting increased food demands of the future. A fragile seed sector, poor technology dissemination mechanisms, the lack of adequate capital for inputs such as fertilizers, poor markets and inadequate infrastructure are the key reasons for such yield gaps [54]. Reducing even some of the yield gap could strengthen the food security in a region. Therefore, production of an increased quantity of food to meet the growing population and income-led demand in the face of decreasing availability of quality land and irrigation water is a big challenge for the agriculture and overall human development. Population, environmental and climate trends and the policy responses they will engender will alter the landscape for food security and human development, and
www.sciencedirect.com

Why is a cross-sectoral approach necessary?

A predominant feature of 21st century food systems is that they are inherently cross-level and cross-scale [47]. Moreover, they are dependent on both biogeochemical and socioeconomic processes. GEC impacts on the food system therefore interact with socioeconomic dynamics (such as poverty, gender inequality, food price increases), and their interaction gives rise to a potential perfect storm of food insecurity in vulnerable areas. Core to the concept of sustainability is thus recognition of the deeply inter-locking nature of economic, social and environmental systems, which calls for integrated and multi-disciplinary analyses and cross-sectoral and crossscale approaches to decision-making. This will form a critical underpinning of integrated responses to addressing the challenges of food insecurity and human poverty, and to supporting sustainable and resilient livelihoods for current and future generations. As noted above, anticipated impacts of GEC, and especially climate change, are likely to be felt most in countries and regions also least socio-economically equipped for adaptive responses. Of particular signicance is that many areas where HIV and AIDS are concentrated are also areas in which food production is anticipated to be most affected by climate change [26,48]. The negative reciprocal relationship between HIV/AIDS and food insecurity further fuels this food insecurity system [49]. The food system is inextricably linked not only to ecosystems, energy and water, but also to health and wellbeing [2]. A fragmented approach to international policy on key global sustainability issues will not deliver the necessary changes needed. This is particularly important in the context of the socio-economic conditions which impede continuous and secure access to nutritious food, rather than in shortfalls in food production per se [1].

A vision for 2050

Food security and human development

Food security and human development go hand in hand, and their outcomes are co-determined to a signicant degree (e.g. through income poverty) and mutually reinforcing in their various dimensions (e.g. healthnutrition, povertyhunger and so on) [11]. This link between human development and food security has been well argued, for example, for Africa. Since most of the anticipated population increase will be in developing countries and concentrated in the lower income population groups, and given the coinciding environmental challenges in these regions described above, the challenge of ensuring continuous and secure access to nutritious food for the
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:717

A vision for attaining food security Misselhorn et al. 11

render considerations of sustainability central to efforts to improve food security and advance human development. This point is echoed by the UN Secretary Generals High Level Task Force on the Global Food Security Crisis which acknowledges the interlinked nature of these challenges [55]. With current emphasis on sustainable development and the free market economy, efciency in decision making and in comprehending the impact of GEC on regions becomes increasingly important. Economic, social and environmental costs associated with different levels and modes of production are increasingly becoming important elements in the decision-making process. Explicit consideration of these elements and their possible trade-offs requires a knowledge base of several disciplines of agricultural research, as well as continuous interaction between a wide range of stakeholders.
Towards a Green Economy

A Green Economy is one in which the system of economic activities for all sectors result in sustainable improvements in human wellbeing and equity, without exposing future generations to environmental risks and scarcities [56]. Such an economy presents real and profound opportunities for development and poverty reduction. It is inherently pro-poor in as far as it protects and enhances the resources and assets on which the poor depend the most, thus addressing the structural causes of persistent poverty. Capitalizing on these opportunities will require appropriate policy and institutional responses. In addition to averting climate disaster, efforts to address climate change will potentially provide developing countries growth opportunities through access to new technology, and nancing for leapfrogging towards industrial upgrading and economic modernization. The benets are greatest in the longer term, as developing countries would, by greening their economies, expand their space for growth and development in what is likely to be an increasingly carbon-constrained world. Two key arguments emerge: rst, the creation of real opportunities for the poor will be critical to the implementation and success of a Green Economy; secondly, ultimately, the Green Economy provides the only viable option for development and poverty reduction in a warming and carbon-constrained world. Thus poverty reduction and the greening of the economy are complementary, not competing goals. However, there are also signicant costs involved in the transition to a Green Economy as well as potential conicts and trade-offs that need to be managed. While it addresses some of the root causes of poverty big challenges remain in ensuring that the process of transition towards a Green Economy is managed in a way that is sensitive to the needs and concerns of the poor and vulnerable.
www.sciencedirect.com

The debates focusing on opportunities and risks to food security arising from biofuel production highlight the need for integrated, cross-sectoral assessments of costs and benets in a Green Economy. Biofuel production in developing countries offers an alternative energy source to national and international markets, as well as economic opportunities. At the same time, although production may offer livelihood opportunities to some at the local level, economic benets need to be banked in such a way that welfare gains are made and national food security is not compromised through lowered food production and/or higher food prices due to resource competition [7,57,58,59]. Economic growth and increased energy demand link the energy and agriculture sectors ever more closely, and this requires ever-closer coordination not only between agricultural and energy policy but also environment, trade and transportation. Food security is more assured when trade occurs at local, regional and global levels and policies to support this and other aspects are developed with multiple timeframes in mind. Global food demand is increasing rapidly, as are the environmental impacts of agricultural expansion. Tilman et al. [60] have shown that if current trends of greater agricultural intensication in richer nations and area expansion in poorer nations were to continue, almost 1 billion ha of land would be cleared globally by 2050 leading to signicant greenhouse gas emissions. The land requirement and emissions would, however, be considerably less if sustainable intensication practices could be followed where available technologies lead to increased agricultural production, while reducing environmental risks and improving the use of natural resources. A recent analysis showed how sustainable intensication developed during the 1990s2000s in several countries of Africa has benetted millions of African farmers and has helped create sustainable agricultural systems in Africa [61]. These examples included crop improvements, agroforestry and soil conservation, conservation agriculture, integrated pest management, horticulture, livestock and fodder crops, aquaculture and novel policies and partnerships. Godfray et al. [3] indicated that the world can meet its food requirement following a multifaceted approach. There are multiple pathways to a greener food system and a greener economy (i.e. no single solution such as local organic self-reliance), and sustainable intensication can, therefore, involve a variety of different production systems. A Green Economy will also need a transition to healthier diets as societies grow richer to reduce both environmental and public health burdens; for example, promoting less consumption of meat in western diets would have both health and environmental benets [6264]. There is also no doubt that greater efciency of resource use, aiming at reduction of waste throughout the food chain to decrease energy and water use and enhance other ecosystem
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:717

12 Open issue

services such as biodiversity, is central to a greener economy.

A food systems approach

The need for resilient and equitable food systems that enhance food security while minimising further environmental degradation is clearly underscored in the above discussions. To strengthen food systems, improved interactions are required between research, policy and other stakeholder communities through developing or strengthening existing platforms and mechanisms for the exchange of information and ideas on food security. For example, in 2011, the United Nations food agencies FAO and the World Food Programme (WFP) launched the Food Security Cluster; a cluster of collaborating humanitarian organisations aiming to work together to better address global food crises through coordinating efforts and interfacing with national-level initiatives. This more complex type of food system management requires enhanced engagement of all stakeholders (and especially the increasingly important private sector) and stronger support from donors. Nutrition and the well-being of individuals need greater emphasis in research agendas and outcomes. Reducing malnutrition, overweight and other nutritionally related diseases must be a priority. Policy and decision-makers who struggle daily with meeting both food security and environmental objectives must be involved in setting research agendas. Including the private sector is also critically important as it is ultimately the decisions of billions of individual private decision-makers (including farmers) that drive the outcomes with which we are concerned. There are clearly competing demands, objectives and values held by the many actors in a food system, meaning that activities that boost food security for some actors in one country or locality may undermine the food security of other actors. Anderson [65] proposes a rightsbased approach to setting goals for food system reform. She cites the following criteria for a rights-based food system: democratic participation in food system choices affecting more than one sector; fair, transparent access by producers to all necessary resources for food production and marketing; multiple independent buyers; absence of human exploitation; absence of resource exploitation; and no impingement on the ability of people in other locales to meet this set of criteria. While these may be lofty criteria, they nevertheless arguably offer the only viable mechanism for the co-development of a collective overriding objective for food system actors that can be truly orientated towards sustainable human development.

able to withstand economic and environmental shocks and stresses at different temporal and spatial levels. In the context of climate change a resilient food system anticipates risks associated with climate change, and has redundancy built in (an effective system for stocking adequate amounts of food and for their distribution in times of crisis). It also is supported by strong multilateral cooperation mechanisms which deter zero-sum behaviour in response to food shocks but instead facilitate collective responses across national boundaries. An equitable food system ensures adequate amounts of nutritious food are affordable and accessible to all at all times (social protection and other forms of cash transfers may be necessary to cope with price shocks). It also provides a level playing eld for agricultural producers around the world (i.e. market access), and is further more supported by R&D and innovation systems that cater to the needs of poor and rich alike (i.e. provides incentives for production and dissemination of science and technology relevant to poor regions in poor regions). It also promotes critical elements that support a balanced an equitable playing eld for future human development. Addressing food security through a food systems approach can:  Help ensure the necessary issues are included in dialogues aimed at enhancing food security (especially in the context of other goals) and can assist in identifying the range of actors and other interested parties who should be involved.  Provide a framework to address multiple vulnerabilities in the context of socio-economic stresses.  Assist in determining the main limiting factors that lead to food insecurity, thereby identifying intervention points for enhancing food security.

Achieving the vision of a resilient and equitable food system

What might a food system look like if it were to more successfully buffer the pressures described above, and achieve equity and resilience? A resilient food system is
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:717

The question of food security is arguably the ideal platform to bring diverse actors together to leverage dialogue and action to address the future of human development [66]. As noted above, the link between food security and human development is well argued elsewhere, (e.g. [11]). Food security is recognised as a basic human right, and it thus offers a rights-based mechanism for developing common goals for actors in the food system that are synchronous with the goals of sustainable development as illustrated in the note on gender above. Moreover, there is already an increasing diversity of actors representing multiple research interests, including agricultural production, environmental sustainability, climate change, sustainable livelihoods, coming together in conversation around the issue of food security. As noted with the issue of climate change [67], the distinction between global and domestic politics becomes inappropriate in the face of a
www.sciencedirect.com

A vision for attaining food security Misselhorn et al. 13

quest for universal food security, and the only way to meet the often conicting demands across scales is through a systemic, cross-scale problem-driven approach to food security. Freedman and Bess [66] used social network analysis to examine an emergent and locally based, participatory coalition focused on promoting food security by creating food systems change. They found that the emerging coalition led to increased information seeking, assistance seeking and collaboration among a diverse group of stakeholders. Their analysis highlights the importance of institutional participation at the local level. They note, however, that such local-level emergent networks nevertheless face challenges in seeking to address globally induced problems [66]. Here the work of boundary organisations may be critical; organisations that sit between sectors (such as science and policy) as well as between or across geographic scales. The role of such organisations is not only to facilitate the ow of information across sectors, but also to dene the scale at which food systems problems are best addressed. There is a
Figure 2

wealth of literature on the institutional dynamics of governance that will enable adaptation and resilience at multiple scales, much of which is born in the literature addressing social-ecological systems focussed on global environmental change (e.g. [6769,70,71]). Lessons across the broad food security literature which looks at food security through multiple lenses, from producing food to environment to health provide a platform to draft key features and outcomes of a resilient and equitable food system. Through the food production lens, a review of agricultural innovation systems nds four key features likely to build, sustain or enhance food security in situations of rapid change were identied [72]: rst, recognition of the multi-functionality of agriculture and opportunities to realize multiple benets; secondly, access to a diversity of social, institutional and technical innovation, as well as agricultural diversity (e.g. to cope with seasonal uctuations) as the basis for exibility and resilience; thirdly, concern for enhancing capacity of decision makers at all levels; and nally, continuity of effort aimed at securing the well-being of those who depend on agriculture.

PRESSURES
Trade..

KEY SYSTEM FEATURES

OUTCOMES
Stable food availability, access and utilisation over time Human development

Supply side: Climate change Energy Food safety and nutritional value Globalization Environment .. Disease Land use and land cover change Non-food crop competition esp. biofuels Food price increases Demand side: Population increases Urbanisation Changing food preferences Food price increases Poverty Low human development including
poor gender equity, resource access, health, education

High levels of interaction with other sectors and systems

High levels of internal interaction Global to local actors

Innovative policies, practices and institutions for environmental sustainability Increased food productivity and recognition of agricultural multifunctionality Food system resilience

Both orchastrated and opportunistic

An equitable and resilient global food system...

Learning from community level adaptive capacity

Economic and environmental shocks and stresses are withstood, risks are anticipated Adequate amounts of food are stocked, and distributed in times of crisis; Multilateral cooperation mechanisms deter zero-sum behaviour in response to food shocks and facilitate collective responses across national boundaries Food system equity Adequate amounts of nutritious food are affordable and accessible to all at all times A level playing field is provided for food producers around the world (i.e. market access); R&D and innovation systems are built that cater to the needs of poor and rich alike

Diverse actors, state and non state across sectors

Combining local experience with frontier low-impact technologies

Learning and flexible with sustained attention and accountability

SYSTEM ACTIVITIES AND ACTORS

Producing food: natural resources, inputs, markets Processing and packaging food: raw materials, standards, storage Distributing and retailing food: transport, marketing, advertising Consuming food: acquisition, preparation, customs

Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability

Pressures, features and potential outcomes of a resilient and equitable food system. www.sciencedirect.com Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:717

14 Open issue

The broader literature emphasizes several elements critical to a successfully adaptive and proactive food system; one that can anticipate likely future system shocks and stressors, as well as opportunities, and take measures to mitigate and/or capitalise on them [73]. Such food system elements include: learning through connectivity between scales to draw on local to global experience and technologies; high levels of interaction between actors; exibility to allow for innovation; diverse actors and sectors, including increasing numbers of non-state actors; and the adaptive and creative use of frontier technologies [11,66,72,74,75]. A schematic of a resilient and equitable food system its features, pressures and potential positive outcomes is sketched in Figure 2. Signals of successful, well-functioning food systems need to be considered to enable ongoing learning and adaptation in food systems. Indicators capturing historical patterns of food insecurity such as measures of malnutrition have been traditionally favoured, as have measures of caloric productivity over nutritional value. Greater consideration is needed of those signalling future food insecurity risks. Food prices and crop yields at national scales offer some measures of early warning but usually with very short lead times. The ability of society to adapt to the multiple pressures it faces can be measured in terms of its capacity to adapt, which in turn is a function of a range of factors such as income, education and skills, information and knowledge access, infrastructure, health care coverage, institutional strengths and connectivity across scales [7678]. While such composite indices can incorporate elements of food availability, access and utilisation as well as economic development and political stability, it needs to be recognized that tradeoffs exist between these elements in food system management.

approach to global food security is argued to be central to addressing both. In order to meet the challenge of needed dialogue among multiple stakeholders, across scales, and across the multiple biogeophysical and socio-economic sectors that shape food security, a food systems approach is critical. Essential components to a successfully resilient and equitable global food system include high levels of interaction between diverse stakeholder both government and non-government a commitment to exibility and learning, and the ongoing development and sharing of new green technologies. Is such a system an achievable goal? Absolutely; but it will require strong multilateral cooperation mechanisms across national and regional boundaries which facilitate collective responses, and which keep human development and wellbeing in vulnerable regions at the centre of its efforts.

References and recommended reading

Papers of particular interest, published within the period of review, have been highlighted as:  of special interest  of outstanding interest 1. 2. 3.  Pinstrup-Andersen P: Food security: denition and measurement. Food Security 2009, 1:5-7. Foresight, The Future of Food and Farming. Final Project Report. London: The UK Government Ofce for Science; 2011.

Conclusion
Global food security is increasingly subject to multiple pressures, on both the demand side and supply side of food availability, access and utilisation. Key among these pressures are population growth, and climate and other environmental changes although urbanisation and globalisation are also changing patterns of supply and demand which are having dynamic and complex impacts on food systems. The developing regions of the world are where many of the multiple pressures on food security converge; stressors such as population growth, rapid urbanisation, HIV and AIDS and other health challenges, and climate change are all set to disproportionately impact many of the worlds developing countries, where peoples capacity to adapt is also impeded by underdevelopment. Addressing global food security thus goes hand in hand with human development; and building a Green Economy
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:717

Godfray HCJ, Beddington JR, Crute IR, Haddad L, Lawrence D, Muir JF, Pretty J, Robinson S, Thomas SM, Toulmin C: Food security. The challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science 2010, 327:p812-p818. A review of the challenge of producing sufcient food to meet global demand, which will increase for at least another 40 years. The authors note that although food production in the last half-century has increased, more than one of seven people still go hungry today. On top of this the authors note a new set of intersecting challenges. First, the global population will continue to grow, yet it is likely to plateau at some 9 billion people by roughly the middle of this century. A major correlate of this deceleration in population growth is increased wealth, and with higher purchasing power comes higher consumption and a greater demand for processed food, meat, dairy, and sh, all of which add pressure to the food supply system. Second, at the same time, food producers are experiencing greater competition for land, water, and energy, and the need to curb the many negative effects of food production on the environment is becoming increasingly clear. Third, overarching all of these issues is the threat of the effects of substantial climate change and concerns about how mitigation and adaptation measures may affect the food system. But the world can produce more food and can ensure that it is used more efciently and equitably. A multifaceted and linked global strategy is needed to ensure sustainable and equitable food security, different components of which are explored here. 4. GECAFS: Science Plan and Implementation Strategy. In Earth System Science Partnership (IGBP, IHDP, WCRP, DIVERSITAS) Report No. 22005. Wallingford; 2005, 36. Gregory PJ, Ingram JSI: Global change and food and forest production: future scientic challenges. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 2000, 82:3-14. Ingram JSI: A food systems approach to researching food security and its interactions with global environmental change. Food Security 2011, 3:417-431. Molony T, Smith J: Biofuels: food security, and Africa. African Affairs 2010, 109:489-498. www.sciencedirect.com

5.

6.

7.

A vision for attaining food security Misselhorn et al. 15

8.

FAO: Rome Declaration and World Food Summit Plan of Action. Rome: FAO; 1996.

9. Gonzalez H: Debates on food security and agrofood world  governance. Int J Food Science Technol 2010, 45:p1345-p1352. Abstract: Mechanisms of global governance, developed in response to initiatives adopted by the FAO to combat hunger and confront food crises, are the result of wide ranging historical debates using three basic criteria for justication: the scientic, the politicalideological, and the ethical. On the basis of these criteria, certain forms of understanding and acting on agriculture, health and nutrition at global level have come to be accepted as valid. Currently the debate and the resulting proposals are based on the recognition of food as a universal human right.The emphasis in this article is on the ethical, rights-based approach which demands compliance, transparency and accountability on the part of governments embarked on fullling this universal right to sufcient, nourishing and safe food. 10. Collodi J, MCormack F: Population growth, environment and food security: What does the future hold? HORIZON: Future Issues for Development. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies (IDS), University of Sussex; 2009. 11. Conceicao P, Fuentes-Nieva R, Horn-Phathanothai L,  Ngororano A: Food security and human development in Africa: strategic considerations and directions for further research. African Dev Rev 2011, 23:237-246. This paper succinctly highlights the linkages between food security and human development. Abstract: This paper argues that food security and human development are intricately linked, and that meaningful progress on the one cannot be sustained without concomitant progress on the other. The paper surveys recent research on various aspects of the linkages between food security and human development and highlights areas where further research would enrich our understanding of the complex interactions and synergies between the two. It concludes by calling for a more systematic investigation of the human development food security nexus with a view to generating new and practical insights for improving food security and advancing human development in subSaharan Africa. 12. Ericksen P, Thornton P, Notenbaert A, Cramer L, Jones P, Herrero M: Mapping hotspots of climate change and food insecurity in the global tropics. In CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS); Copenhagen, Denmark. 2011. 13. Cline W: Global Warming and Agriculture: Impact Estimates by Country. Washington, DC: Center for Global Development; 2007:. 250. 14. Easterling WE, Aggarwal PK, Batima P, Brander KM, Erda L,  Howden SM, Kirilenko A, Morton J, Soussana J-F, Schmidhuber J, Tubiello FN: Food, bre and forest products. Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. contribution of Working Group II. In Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Edited by Parry ML et al.: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007:273-313. The full Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Report from 2007 provides extensive food security and environmental change insights across its chapters and is essential reading. The next edition is under development. 15. Fischer G, Shah M, Tubiello FN, Velhuizen Hv: Socio-economic and climate change impacts on agriculture: an integrated assessment. Philos Trans R Soc B 2005, 360:2067-2083. 16. Herrero M, Thornton PK, Gerber P, Reid RS: Livestock, livelihoods and the environment: understanding the tradeoffs. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2009, 1:111-120. 17. Thornton PK, Jones PG, Owiyo T, Kruska RL, Herrero M, Kristjanson P, Notenbaert A, Bekele N, Omolo A, Orindi V et al.: Mapping climate variability and poverty in Africa. Report for the Department for International Development. Nairobi, Kenya: ILRI; 2006. 18. Gregory P, Ingram JSI, Goudriaan J, Hunt T, Landsberg J, Linder S, Stafford Smith M, Sutherst R, Valentin C: Managed production systems. In Implications of Global Change for Natural and Managed Ecosystems: A Synthesis of GCTE and Related Research. IGBP Book Series No. 4. Edited by Walker WS, Canadell J, Ingram JSI. Cambridge University Press; 1999:229-270. 19. Rosegrant MW, Cline SA: Global food security: challenges and policies. Science 2003, 302:1917-1919. www.sciencedirect.com

20. AIACC: Messages from Dakar: report of the second AIACC Regional Workshop for Africa and the Indian Islands, Senegal,  2004. Assessments of Impacts and Adaptations to Climate Change . Project (AIACC). funded by the Global Environmental Facility; 2004 Who is vulnerable and needs to adapt? How urgently is adaptation needed? What are the options? Which promises to be most effective? Can adaptation be pursued without detraction from other objectives? What are the obstacles? How can they be overcome? What climate information is needed to understand future vulnerabilities and plan for adaptation? These and other questions were the subject of a workshop held in Dakar on 2427 March 2004, which this report outlines. 21. Turpie J, Winkler H, Spalding-Fecher R, Midgley G: Economic Impacts of Climate Change in South Africa: A Preliminary Analysis of Unmitigated Damage Costs. Cape Town: Southern Waters Ecological Research and Consulting and Energy and Development Research Centre, University of Cape Town; 2002. 22. The Royal Society: Food crops in a changing climate: report of a Royal Society Discussion Meeting held in April 2005. Royal Society Policy Document 10/05. The Royal Society; 2005:. 15. 23. Fischer F, Shah M, van Velthuizen H: Climate change and  agricultural vulnerability. In A special report, prepared by the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis under United Nations Institutional Contract Agreement No. 1113 on Climate Change and Agricultural Vulnerability as a contribution to the World Summit on Sustainable Development. Johannesburg; 2002 The methodology and results reported in this study form a rst comprehensive and integrated global ecologicaleconomic assessment of the impact of climate change on agro-ecosystems in the context of the world food and agricultural system. 24. Swaminathan MS: Climate change and food security. In Climate Change and Development. Edited by Gomez-Echeveri C. UNDP Regional Bureau for Latin America and the Caribbean and Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies; 2000: 103-114. 25. AU: Status of food security and prospects for agricultural development in Africa. AU Ministerial Conference of Ministers of Agriculture; January 31February 1, 2006. Bamako, Mali: African Union; 2005. 26. Gommes R, du Guerny J, Glantz MH, Hsu LN: Climate and HIV/ AIDS: A Hotspots Analysis for Early Warning Rapid Response Systems. UNDP/FAO/NCAR; 2004:. 36. 27. Schulze R, Meigh J, Horan MJC: Present and potential future vulnerability of eastern and southern Africas hydrology and water resources. South African J Sci 2001, 97:150-160. 28. Mano R, Isaacson B, Dardel P: Identifying policy determinants of food security response and recovery in the SADC region: the case of the 2002 food emergency. Keynote paper prepared for the FANRPAN Regional Dialogue on Agricultural Recovery, Food Security and Trade Policies in Southern Africa; Gaborone, Botswana, 2627 March 2003: 2003. 29. Piot P, Pinstrup-Andersen P: 20012002 IFPRI Annual Report Essay AIDS: The New Challenge to Food Security. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute; 2002. 30. van Lieshout M, Kovats RS, Livermore MTJ, Martens P: Climate change and malaria: analysis of the SRES climate and socioeconomic scenarios. Global Environ Change 2004, 14:87-99. 31. USAID: RCSA food security strategic option: synthesis and analysis of selected readings. Report prepared by Nathan and Associates for USAID Regional Centre for Africa. USAID; 2003:. 15. 32. Rockstrom J, Steffen W, Noone K, Persson AF, Stuart Chapin I, Lambin EF, Lenton TM, Scheffer M, Folke C, Schellnhuber HJ et al.: A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 2009, 461:472-475. 33. USDA-FAS: Grain: World Markets and Trade; 2010 (FG 05-10). 34. Gregory PJ, Ingram JSI, Andersson R, Betts RA, Brovkin V,  Chase TN, Grace PR, Gray AJ, Hamilton N, Hardy TB et al.: Environmental consequences of alternative practices for intensifying crop production. Agric Ecosyst Environ 2002, 88:279-290. This paper offers the reader more information on the options of agricultural intensication (based largely on the quantity and efciency of use of external inputs) and examines both the on-site and off-site environmental Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:717

16 Open issue

consequences of each for soils, water quantity and quality, and climate forcing and regional climate change. 35. Palm CA, Smukler SM, Sullivan CC, Mutuo PK, Nyadzi GI, Walsh MG: Identifying potential synergies and trade-offs for meeting food security and climate change objectives in subSaharan Africa. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2010, 107:19661-19666. 36. Dyson T: Population and Food. London: Routledge; 1996. 37. Flegal KM, Carroll MD, Ogden CL, Curtin LR, Prevalence: Trends in obesity among US adults: 19992008. JAMA: J Am Med Assoc 2010, 303:235-241. 38. Fageria NK, Baligar VC, Jones CA: Growth and Mineral Nutrition of Field Crops. edn 3. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2011. 39. FAO: The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2008 (SOFI): High Food Prices and Food Security Threats and Opportunities. Rome: FAO; 2008. 40. United Nations: World Urbanization Prospects: The 2007 Revision. New York: Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat; 2008. 41. Fotso J-C: Urbanrural differentials in child malnutrition: trends and socioeconomic correlates in sub-Saharan Africa. Health & Place 2007, 13:205-223 doi: 10.1016/ j.healthplace.2006.01.004. 42. Gillespie S: Poverty, food insecurity, HIV. Vulnerability and the  impacts of AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa. IDS Bull 2008, 39:10-18. This is a very useful introduction to the interactions between HIV and AIDS, poverty and vulnerability in sub-Saharan Africa. The author highlights that socioeconomic and gender inequalities condition the spread of HIV while AIDS-related disease and death increase these inequalities. 43. Chopra M: Globalization, urbanization and nutritional change in South Africa. Food and Nutrition Paper 83: Globalilization of Food Systems in Developing Countries: Impact on Food Security and Nutrition. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO); 2004. 44. Kennedy G, Nantel G, Shetty P: Globalization of food systems in developing countries: a synthesis of country case studies. Food and Nutrition Paper 83: Globalization of Food Systems in Developing Countries: Impact on Food Security and Nutrition. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO); 2004. 45. Fuentes-Nieva R, Seck PA: Risk, Shocks, and Human Development: On the Brink. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan; 2010:. 385. 46. Kaufmann C, Heri S: Liberalizing trade in agriculture and food security mission impossible? Vanderbilt J Trans Law 2007, 40:1039-1070. 47. Ericksen P, Stewart B, Dixon J, Barling D, Loring P, Anderson M,  Ingram J: The value of a food system approach. In Food Security and Global Environmental Change. Edited by Ingram J, Ericksen P, Liverman D. London: Earthscan; 2010. This book chapter on food systems provides comprehensive reading behind many of the issues discussed in this paper. 48. Gregory PJ, Ingram JSI, Brklacich M: Climate change and food  security. Philos Trans R Soc B 2005, 360:p2139-p2148. This paper offers an important review of the dynamic interactions between climate change and food systems. From the abstract: Because of the multiple socio-economic and bio-physical factors affecting food systems and hence food security, the capacity to adapt food systems to reduce their vulnerability to climate change is not uniform. Improved systems of food production, food distribution and economic access may all contribute to food systems adapted to cope with climate change, but in adopting such changes it will be important to ensure that they contribute to sustainability. 49. OBrien K, Quinlan T, Ziervogel G: Vulnerability interventions in the context of multiple stressors: lessons from the Southern Africa Vulnerability Initiative (SAVI). Environ Sci Policy 2009, 12:23-32. 50. FAO: The State of Food and Agriculture 201011. Women in Agriculture: Closing the Gender Gap for Development. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2011:. 160. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:717

51. Ligon E, Sadoulet J: Estimating the effects of aggregate agricultural growth on the distribution of expenditures. Distribution of Expenditures: Background Paper for the World Bank Development Report. The World Bank; 2008. 52. Christiaensen L, Demery L, Kuhl J: The (Evolving) Role of Agriculture in Poverty Reduction: An Empirical Perspective. UNU-WIDER: World Institute for Development Economics Research; 2010 . 53. Aggarwal PK, Talukdar KK, Mall RK: Potential yields of rice wheat system in the Indo-Gangetic plains of India. Rice Wheat Consortium Paper Series. New Delhi, India: RWCIGP, CIMMYT; 2000. 54. Aggarwal PK, Joshi PK, Ingram JSI, Gupta RK: Adapting food systems of the Indo-Gangetic plains to global environmental change: key information needs to improve policy formulation. Environ Sci Policy 2004, 7:487-498. 55. Nabarro D: Presentation on the UN System High Level Task Force on Global Food Security and the Updated Comprehensive Framework for Action (UCFA). Rome: High-Level Task Force on the Global Food Security Crisis (HLTF), United Nations; 2010. 56. UNEP: Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication. United Nations Environment Programme: Green Economy Initiative; 2011. 57. Ewing M, Msangi S: Biofuels production in developing countries: assessing tradeoffs in welfare and food security. Environ Sci Policy 2009, 12:520-528. 58. Pingali P, Raney T, Wiebe K: Biofuels and food security missing  the point. Rev Agric Econ 2008, 30:506-516. A useful insight into non-food agricultural production issues focussing on the implications of biofuel production. 59. McNeely JA, Solh M, Hiremath RB, Kumar B, Suarez PAZ,  Uprety K, Abdulrahim MA, Ruf F, Legoupil J-C: Experts address the question: Can the growing demand for biofuels be met without threatening food security?. Nat Resources Forum 2009, 33:171-173. As for the Pingali, Raney and Wiebe paper cited here, this paper is a very useful overview of key issues related to biofuels and food security. 60. Tilman D, Balzer C, Hill J, Befort BL: Global food demand and the sustainable intensication of agriculture. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2011, 108:20260-20264. 61. Pretty J, Toulmin C, Williams S: Sustainable intensication in African agriculture. Int J Agric Sustainability 2011, 4:5-24. 62. Hamm MW: Linking sustainable agriculture and public health: opportunities for realizing multiple goals. J Hunger Environ Nutr 2008, 3:169-185. 63. Johnson JMF, Franzluebbers AJ, Weyers SL, Reicosky DC: Agricultural opportunities to mitigate greenhouse gas emission. Environ Pollut 2007, 150:107-124. 64. Eshel G, Martin PA: Geophysics and nutritional science: toward a novel, unied paradigm. Am J Clin Nutr 2009, 89:1710S-1716S. 65. Anderson MD: Rights-based food systems and the goals of  food systems reform. Agric Hum Values 2008, 25:593-608. Important foundation arguments in this paper for a rights-based approach to food systems development. From the abstract: The core criteria of RBFS are democratic participation in food system choices affecting more than one sector; fair, transparent access by producers to all necessary resources for food production and marketing; multiple independent buyers; absence of human exploitation; absence of resource exploitation; and no impingement on the ability of people in other locales to meet this set of criteria. Localization and a community base can help achieve RBFS by facilitating food democracy and reducing environmental exploitation, primarily by lowering environmental costs due to long-distance transportation. Sustainability per se is an empty goal for food system reform, unless what will be sustained and for whom are specied. The RBFS concept helps to clarify what is worth sustaining and who is most susceptible to neglect in attempts to reform food systems. Localization can be a means toward sustainability if local food systems are also RBFS. 66. Freedman D, Bess K: Food systems change and the  environment: local and global connections. Am J Commun Psychol 2011, 47:397-409. A novel approach to assess how food systems can emerge and function through a case study analysis using social network analysis. www.sciencedirect.com

A vision for attaining food security Misselhorn et al. 17

67. Koch I, Vogel C, Patel Z: Institutional dynamics and climate change adaptation in South Africa. Mitig Adapt Strategy Global Environ Change 2007, 12:1323-1339. 68. Naess LO, Bang G, Eriksen S, Vevatne J: Institutional adaptation to climate change: ood responses at the municipal level in Norway. Global Environ Change A 2005, 15:125-138. The article examines the role institutions play in climate adaptation in Norway. 69. OBrien G, OKeefe P, Rose J, Wisner B: Climate change and disaster management. Disasters 2006, 30:64-80. 70. Ogunseitan OA: Framing environmental change in Africa:  cross-scale institutional constraints on progressing from rhetoric to action against vulnerability. Global Environ Change: Hum Policy Dimensions 2003, 13:p101-p111. Good reading for an illustration of the role of cross-scale communication and learning as noted in our paper in addressing climate change in this instance through the lens of environmental change assessments. From the abstract: The reconciliation of national development plans with global priority to mitigate environmental change remains an intractable policy controversy. In Africa, its resolution requires integrating local knowledge into impact assessments without compromising the scientic integrity of the process.The study focused on the particularities of projected impacts of climate change, and specically on considerations of the health sector within the context of multivalent international agreements to conduct and use environmental assessments. The analysis addresses limitations of cross-scale communication nodes that are embedded in boundary institutions such as the Country Study Program which is hosted by industrialized nations. 71. Strauch AM, Muller JM, Almedom AM: Exploring the dynamics of socialecological resilience in East and West Africa: preliminary evidence from Tanzania and Niger. African Health Sciences 2008, 8:S28-S35.

72. Brooks S, Loevinsohn M: Shaping agricultural innovation  systems responsive to food insecurity and climate change. Nat Resources Forum 2011, 35:185-200. We draw on this paper in this useful article, which takes lessons from selected country experiences of adaptation and innovation in pursuit of food security goals, and identies four features of innovation systems more likely to build, sustain or enhance food security in situations of rapid change: rst, recognition of the multifunctionality of agriculture and opportunities to realize multiple benets; secondly, access to diversity as the basis for exibility and resilience; thirdly, concern for enhancing capacity of decision makers at all levels; and nally, continuity of effort aimed at securing the well-being of those who depend on agriculture. Finally, implications for policymakers and other stakeholders in agricultural innovation systems are presented. 73. Misselhorn A, Challinor A, Jones J, Plocq-Fichelet V, Schaldach R, Thornton P: Surprises and possibilities: addressing risk in food systems. In Global Environmental Change and Food Systems. Edited by Liverman JIPE. London: Earthscan; 2010. 74. Sastry RK, Rashmi HB, Rao NH: Nanotechnology for enhancing food security in India. Food Policy 2011, 36:391-400. 75. Swaminathan MS: Achieving food security in times of crisis. New Biotechnol 2010, 27:451-460. 76. OBrien K, Leichenko R, Kelkar U, Venema H, Aandahl G, Tompkins H, Javed A, Bhadwal S, Barg S, Nygaarda L, West J: Mapping vulnerability to multiple stressors: climate change and globalization in India. Global Environ Change 2004, 14:303-313. 77. Vincent K: Creating an index of social vulnerability to climate change for Africa. Working Paper 56. Norwich: Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research; 2004:. 55. 78. Alberini A, Chiabai A, Muehlenbachs L: Using expert judgment to assess adaptive capacity to climate change: evidence from a conjoint choice survey. Global Environ Change 2006, 16:123-144.

www.sciencedirect.com

Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:717