Food Bytes: March 2025 Edition

March 16, 2025

FOOD BYTES IS A (ALMOST) MONTHLY BLOG POST OF “NIBBLES” ON ALL THINGS CLIMATE, FOOD, NUTRITION SCIENCE, POLICY, AND CULTURE.

Spring has sprung here in Gotham City, as the Sound Furies sung in Pishon. Yet the air feels heavy and unsettled. The political landscape may be fraught, the trajectory uncertain, but we cannot succumb to despair. Ben Okri wrote in his poem, Arequipa:

To discover
You still have
A world
To make
At sunset
Sobers
The stones.

They may try to dismantle, to divide, to darken the days ahead—but they cannot take the sunrises and sunsets from us. They cannot take our will to build, to dream, to make the world better. And so, dear readers, we keep going.

Onto some interesting news and fantastic science (yay for science being essential…) produced over the last month.

In the news and media:

Grist pontificates how the US government's wobbly tariffs will impact food prices and your grocery bill. Bottom line? It ain’t good. IFPRI modeled how tariffs would impact trade flows. Bottom line? Again, it ain’t good. Their modeling suggests that imposing 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada will cause food exports to the U.S. to decrease by 46.4% and 60.5%, respectively, with impacts across a range of imports, including fruits and vegetables, processed foods, and meat and fish. Maybe food, like eggs, should never have been cheap…
With all these rampant food price increases, maybe we will have to start eating lab-grown meat, but don’t hold your breath if you live in Mississippi.
But if you are eating vast amounts of meat, according to Vox, you can blame universities. Hell, we are catching all the heat these days - Bring. It. On. Yet, the same news outlet also blames pharmaceutical companies.
Another hit to food systems brought on by the new administration is the 1 billion dollar cuts to farmers supporting school meals and food banks. Sorry for those farmers who thought he had your back.
Novo Nordisk (the makers of Ozempic) has started a foundation and is beginning to fund large-scale global health research. It is too bad that the head of their obesity program is a paid advisor to confectionary company Ferrero, along with relationships with McDonalds and Nestle. Talk about conflicts of interest…
The Economist is calling out Ethiopia's prime minister, Abiy Ahmed’s claims that the country has become the breadbasket of Africa.
Speaking of agriculture, no one seems to agree with what regenerative agriculture is exactly.

There are so many wonderful tributes to the great Joan Gussow, who passed away at 96 - yes, good nutrition does pay off. She was a pioneer, started the discipline of “sustainable diets,” and spent her life at Teachers College at Columbia University. She inspired many at the university and across the world.
I was so pleased to see Flow win the Oscar for Best Animated Series - a film of hope amid climate change. It seems pets can’t get enough of it either.
On climate change, perhaps it’s time for better labels that inform us of the greenhouse gas footprint of foods.
And a shoutout to Timor Leste, one of my favorite countries. There are always fits and starts with new democracies. I am keeping my fingers crossed for them.

Among scientific publications:

Around the third or fourth month of the year, peer-reviewed scientific publications kick it up a notch. The slowdown of the holiday season is in the rearview mirror, and the pace of what is put out the world seems to have a bit of a boost. This month is no exception, making it hard for me to highlight a handful. I selected a few more unique papers that I thought were enjoyable reads.

The first focuses on avocados. This paper in World Development goes deep into cartels' control of the avocado industry in Mexico. Often touted as “green gold” because of the insanely high demand for avocados north of the border, media has reported that cartels have an inkling to get in on the action. But why do so if drugs are in high demand? This paper looks into whether declining drug revenues have led cartels to go into other agricultural commodities (beyond poppies for heroin). The author found that declines in heroin demand increased homicides among agriculture workers in the avocado industry, along with robberies of trucks carrying avocados for shipment.

Two interesting reflection manuscripts. One by the great Tom Reardon on bucking conventional wisdom using some of his long-standing work done in Asia and Africa on rural nonfarm employment, processed food demands, the role of small and medium-scale enterprises in food supplies, and the supermarket revolution/growth in Asia. The other is by colleagues led out of Vrije Universiteit Brussel that we should not forget history in planning food system transformations, particularly those working on future scenarios. Using three cases in Mozambique, Holland, and Bangladesh, they articulate the importance of taking a historical lens to scenario building.

Heat maps of total agri-food mass flux (kg) across transportation modes by flow type at FAF scale. a–c, Agri-food mass flux by highways, d–f, agri-food mass flux by railways and g–i, agri-food mass flux by waterways. Domestic agri-food mass flux (a,d,g), export agri-food mass flux (b,e,h) and import agri-food mass flux (c,f,i).

I am so thrilled to see more studies that are not just examining the impacts of climate on crops or agriculture but go beyond the farm gate to better understand climate shocks and change in the middle of the supply chain - storage, transport, processing, packaging, and retail. This study in Nature Food maps the transportation of food commodities throughout the U.S. by examining highways, waterways, and railways. They look at cost, carbon emissions, and what they call “path redundancies” (the existence of alternative paths). They find that highways are highly redundant to waterways, cost much more, and emit 60x more carbon. Waterways are the opposite in terms of cost and emissions. Railways are somewhere in the middle. Most food in the US is transported on trucks on highways using diesel fuel. It’s time to start using the vast number of waterways better in the U.S.

Great paper in Global Food Security by Preet Lidder and colleagues at FAO on the importance of innovation and technology in transforming rural places. This sentence resonated with me: “Quick technological fixes are unlikely to succeed; resilient and inclusive rural transformation will come from long-term research and innovation processes that incorporate critical inputs from local and traditional knowledge and are underpinned by supportive policies and social and institutional reforms.” Amen to that, sister. The paper discusses how technology can be used responsibly for lasting, equitable change.

Speaking of rural places, there is a land grab gold rush, and this paper in the Journal of Peasant Studies tries to unpack who is rushing, why, and where. Disaggregating the “who” is not easy - it is not always just a country and is often shadow companies or corporations with international interests. The default is to look at foreign land investors, but these authors also see domestic buyers within countries. Bangladesh has the highest percentage of domestic land deals, but Argentina, by far, has the highest number of both domestic and international (foreign) deals. What is the number one cause/use of these deals? Food. Who dominates in the buying of land? Private companies.

Spatial variation in sediment retention (t/year) benefit by watershed and fisheries catch (kg/year) and seafood meals (number/year) benefits by moku provided by agroforestry restoration

Another interesting paper published in Ocean Sustainability put empirical evidence to this notion of bicultural approaches. These approaches “emphasize the reciprocal restoration of both ecology and culture, elevate indigenous and local knowledge and rights, and align with the call for more just and equitable nature-based solutions.” They use Hawaii as their geography and show that restoration of forests through agroforestry increases sediment retention by 30%, nearshore fishery production by 10%, and cultural connection (as measured through biodiversity conservation and food security benefits).

Love this paper examining the trends of food retail environments and their associations with obesity. In the study, the authors dissected retail sector trends over the last 15 years (2009 to 2023) using 97 countries. Not surprisingly, chain outlet density has increased over time, out-competing non-chain outlets. This is happening rapidly across low- and middle-income countries (speaking of history and Tom Reardon, he described this a while back with the supermarket revolution). They correlate the growth of chain retailers with the sales of unhealthy food products as well as obesity prevalence.

Global changes in the current total cropland area within the SCSs in crop groups. GMC = General Circulation Models (of which there are 8) SCS = safe climate space

Finally! A paper that models the impact of climate change on crop yields that goes BEYOND maize, rice, and wheat. This paper in Nature Food modeled 30 major food crops under different global warming scenarios ranging from 1.5 to 4C. In low latitude areas (i.e., the global south), there will be shifts in the ideal locations to grow these foods, and crop diversity would decline ~50% on croplands around the world between 2 to 3 global warming scenarios. However, in higher latitudes, farmers could grow more diverse foods. This paper argues that we may need to shift northward if we want to keep demand with the pace of growing food and a diversity of foods. The authors state: “Alarmingly, we find that the largest adverse effects on current crop production are observed for crops and crop groups that are important elements of the food supply in their current major production areas…Furthermore, we show that the four global staple crops (wheat, rice, maize, and soybean) face some of the largest reductions in cropland area within the SCS, which underlines the need for diversifying crop production.” This study is more motivation to start looking at different crops and protecting the diversity of the global food basket.

Well, that’s all for this month’s Food Bytes folks! Keep watching those sunrises and sunsets and keep on keepin’ on.

Food Bytes: March 2024 Edition

March 24, 2024

FOOD BYTES IS A (ALMOST) MONTHLY BLOG POST OF “NIBBLES” ON ALL THINGS CLIMATE, FOOD, NUTRITION SCIENCE, POLICY, AND CULTURE.

“All of my work is directed against those who are bent on blowing up the planet.” —William S. Burroughs

That just about summarizes it for me. I can’t even begin to fathom what the world will look like here in the U.S. come Jan 1st 2025 (along with the other 4.2 billion people voting for their democracy this year), but I will continue to hang onto the small glimmers of hope for a humanity that doesn’t want to watch the world burn. On a lighter note, let’s get into some food bytes.

Lately, I have been listening to a lot of podcasts while walking to work. There are a few that are worth a listen. Although an older podcast, Everything is Alive is witty. It brings to life everyday objects. For you foodies out there, Louis the Can of Soda (“That's my evaluation of humanity. A chronic search for potency”), Jes the Baguette, and Vinnie the Vending Machine are pretty hilarious. I also listened to the BBC Food Programme’s Herb and Spice Scam. Yes, your oregano is full of olive leaves…and the BBC Food Chain’s Why We Love Dumplings. First off, the host, Ruth Alexander, has the most soothing voice. She really should do some nighttime readings on the Calm app. Second, dumplings hold a unique place in society. Every country/culture has them as part of their staple cuisine: gyozas, wontons, ravioli, pierogis, samosas, khinkali, and empanadas, to name a few (see the photo of these Cuban varietals I recently took at the Isla Diner in Hoboken). Just delish.

As I have mentioned in past blogs, there is the 6-part Barbeque Earth by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace is just outstanding. I highly recommend it. Stay tuned for more podcasts by Ambrook Research’s The Only Thing That Lasts podcast on America’s farmlands, indeed a very precious resource. The first episode wondered if farmland is running out in the U.S., spurred by fears that Bill Gates is gobbling it all up (he owns about a quarter of a million acres of it). The second episode dives into the creation of U.S. farmland.

As far as major media stories go, this long read by the New York Times on India’s sugar cane fields and their impacts on families, particularly women and children, is disturbing and tragic. Worth the read before you open that next can of ice-cold Coke.

Lately, many reports have pulled together evidence on the links between climate and nutrition. Per my usual spiel, there has been so much research over decades showing the various links between climate change, variability, extreme weather events, and deleterious nutrition outcomes, but it sometimes takes a large-scale report to draw attention to the topic. Here are just a handful that have come out in recent months:

Emergency Nutrition Network’s report: Exploring new, evolving and neglected topics at the intersection of food systems, climate change and nutrition: a literature review.
Stronger Foundations for Nutrition’s report: An Evidence Narrative on Climate Change and Nutritious Foods. They also put out a database of climate-nutrition evidence. I was happy to see our team listed with other great researchers, such as Marco Springmann, Sam Myers, Andy Haines, and Matthew Smith.
ANH Academy’s evidence map: Intersections of climate change with food systems, nutrition, and health: an overview and evidence map.

Speaking of food and climate reports, a few are worth your time.

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) released a report in the last two weeks titled The Unjust Climate: Measuring the impacts of climate change on the rural poor, women, and youth. The report highlights how the climate crisis is particularly unjust for rural women. This statistic stood out: A 1° C increase in long-term average temperatures is associated with a 34% reduction in the total incomes of female-headed households relative to those of male-headed households. Extreme weather events also undermine the incomes of the female-headed households relative to those of male-headed households. Check out this figure on the right that shows just one additional day of extreme temps or precipitation is associated with 1.3% and 0.5% reduction in income for women. This may not seem like a lot, but this reduction translates to an annual income loss of 8% with heat stress and 3% with floods.

A new report by Helen at Harvard Law School, Options for a Paris-compliant livestock sector, argues that global emissions from livestock must drop by 61% by 2036 to align with the goals of the Paris Agreement. One of the authors, my colleague Matthew Hayek at NYU, is also an author of a Nature Food paper just published that criticizes the FAO’s Achieving SDG 2 without breaching the 1.5 °C threshold: A global roadmap report, arguing that the FAO doesn’t sufficiently address the shift away from the production and consumption of animal-sourced foods - particularly livestock. While the FAO report does set some milestones to reduce emissions and the growth of livestock, according to the authors of the paper, FAO doesn’t really articulate how. They also criticized FAO’s aquaculture target. FAO’s history with livestock is long and sorted. If you want to read a fascinating controversy about another report on livestock FAO produced in 2006 (Livestock’s Long Shadow), check out this piece by the Guardian. Le sigh…Can’t we all just get along?

On a lighter note, and maybe less controversial food system topic (famous last words…), the Vision for Adapted Crops and Soils — also known as VACS (no, this is not a vaccine project) — a project initiated by Carey Fowler in the U.S. State Department, has released its first report and list of 20 potential crops to expand on (see figure on the left). In full disclosure, I worked with Cynthia Rosenzweig’s AgMIP team here at Columbia and NASA GISS on some of the findings. Who doesn’t love traditional, indigenous, neglected crops — now called opportunity crops — and their potential for Africa and the world? AgMIP also released an awesome dashboard called the VACS Explorer to map the resilience of these crops in the face of climate change.

Speaking of data, I am a big fan of Our World In Data’s (OWID) Hannah Ritchie, who has a new book out, Not the End of the World. I hope she’s right. I am not sure how she can muster up any positivity looking at the data - as they say, the data don’t lie!! She consistently feeds the OWID with amazing food and climate data. Her latest is on weather forecasting. She highlights their importance but also how the quality is improving to predict extreme events and trigger early warning systems better. At Columbia University’s International Research Institute for Climate and Society — also known as IRI — we have been generating these types of data for decades that serve many sectors, including agriculture, public health and energy sectors.

It is so hard to keep up with the scientific literature on food systems these days. There is just so much evidence being generated. This paper stood out a bit for me. It tries to establish a strong link between biodiversity loss and our diets. They argue, and I agree, that most eaters don’t have a clue about the potential impacts of their diets on the rich biodiversity that we are losing around the world. In the paper, they estimate the biodiversity footprint of 150 popular dishes worldwide. Of course, beef dishes have high biodiversity footprints = not good…as compared to vegetarian dishes, but there are exceptions! The authors noted that chana masala has a high biodiversity footprint. Drats. The figure below shows the top 20 dishes with the highest biodiversity footprint across three different biodiversity indicators — species richness, threatened species richness, and range rarity using different scenarios for the way food is grown/raised: a) feedlot-grown locally produced, b) feedlot-grown globally produced, c) pasture-grown locally produced, and d) pasture-grown globally produced. Plot symbols and colors represent diet and dishes’ region of origin, respectively. Ingredients in the bar chart correspond to the main ingredient in terms of weight in a dish in the top 20 dishes with the highest biodiversity footprints. Looks like green chile stew fairs a bit better than other dishes. Whew!

Top 20 biodiversity footprint dishes from around the world

A few more fun tidbits for this month’s Food Bytes. Did anyone watch the Oscars? It was pretty boring with Oppenheimer dominating, but I did notice that everyone walking the red carpet looked especially thin and fit. Celebrities are known for trying the latest fad diets and having substantive budgets for expensive trainers and personal chefs, but clearly, this was the Oscars on Ozempic. Let’s see how this all plays out, but I do fear there are reasons to be skeptical about the weight loss drug’s long-term impacts on health. As always, The Maintenance Phase podcast is spot on with its Ozempic episode. Dary Mozaffarrian, former Dean of the nutrition policy school at Tufts, wrote an interesting piece in JAMA arguing that a food-as-medicine intervention should be paired with Ozempic prescriptions. And then there is Oprah who continues to shape the conversation about weight loss and her latest journey using these GLP-1 agonist drugs.

While we are on the topic of celebrity nonsense, Erewhon (nowhere spelled backwards) is just plain silly. But celebrities and the “LA set” flock to it in droves. This piece by Kerry Howley of the Cut is so worth the read: “Erewhon’s Secrets: In the 1960s, two macrobiotic enthusiasts started a health-food sect beloved by hippies. Now it’s the most culty grocer in L.A.” The New York Times claims it’s the “hottest hangout.” Yes, this is the place where Kourtney Kardashian has branded her 'Poosh Potion Detox Smoothie’ for a cool $22 and Saba balsamic vinegar costs $50. With the fiasco of Wegmans opening in NYC (with massive queues around several blocks), let’s hope Erewhon doesn’t decide to come eastward.

Source: https://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=16-P13-00020&segmentID=5

Speaking of hippies, I have been working on a book about how America’s 1960s counterculture movement used food systems to ignite a social revolution and ultimately failed. The American counterculture movement, born during the fertile but tumultuous late 1960s to early 1970s, recognized a similar looming storm and tried to redirect its path. The mounting political, social, and cultural challenges (limitations on natural resources, industrialization, pollution, inequities, population growth) influenced an entire generation to work toward rebuilding food systems into a more ethical “ecological utopia” of balance, stability, and food consciousness. Back-to-the-land communes, food co-ops, the first Earth Day, Stewart Brand’s Whole Earth Catalog, the Black Panthers’ Breakfast Program, Cesar Chavez’s National Farm Worker’s Association, and the Diggers’ free food experiments in the Haight Ashbury were all attempts to break the status quo and democratize food systems. They approached food and environmental issues as foundations for building an ideal society while simultaneously providing nourishment and wellness for the human population and the planet. They radicalized and politicized food as a medium for social revolution. While some of their individual battles prevailed, their revolution was defeated. Why did their vision fail, and why did we not heed their canary calls when we still had a fighting chance to fix the system? This story is about the short-lived influence of the counterculture hippie movement, why they clung to food and environment as their raison d’etre, and why we’re still fascinated by their history but struggle to learn from it in these darker, more dangerous times. So, stay tuned as I continue to scroll away.

Reminds me of one of the Sound Furies song’s we recorded a few years ago, V-Dubbed.

in the back of a ’66 VW
for a last cigarette can i bug u?
in her birthday suit under the trenchcoat
Patty Hearst doubled as her scapegoat

A new year's resolution for the planet

January 3, 2023

I woke just as the sun rose on the second day of 2023, reflecting, as one does, on what I accomplished over the last year, why it matters, and how I should strive to do things differently in the new year. January always brings about a time for reflection, renewal, and rebirth. For me, the promises I make to myself in the hopeful light of the turning of the clock last only a few weeks, and then I end up reverting toward the same comfortable, survival-mode routine. Maybe a few things change here and there. I tinker around the edges. But nothing spectacularly transformative. And maybe, just maybe, that is okay. This is who I am. These are my habits. My flaws. My warts. My joys. My life. Call it my age, but I guess I am a little less willing to set myself up for failure. Or maybe, I am just letting go.

I say all this to you not as a person who is defeated and cynical but as a person who is hoping for the best but expecting the worst in 2023. I am not an optimist nor a pessimist. I am a realist. I am a “who is going to wash the glass?” This morning, I re-read the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, also known as the IPCC, report on the physical science basis of climate change. This report lays down the hard science of climate change, the repercussions of that change, and future projections under different scenarios of zero to significant action toward mitigation. It is, frankly, incredibly stark. Many of us who work on climate change issues are told to be more positive and report on and present the good news, the silver linings. Of course, not all is doom and gloom, but it comes close. Unlike me, who tinkers on the edges each year trying to meet my new year's resolutions and goals, policymakers and industry players involved in fossil fuels, agriculture, and infrastructure, need to make massive resolutions that are transformative, and they need to stick to them.

This graph below really says it all. It shows the different shared socioeconomic pathways (SSPs), from sustainable to fossil fuel-dependent. Clearly, the world is not moving towards the optimal SSP 1.9. We are more likely hovering toward the SSP 2-4.5 pathway - the middle of the road. The graph shows that if we commit to this SSP, the world will continue to generate greenhouse gases by 2050, with a final tapering off after 2070. By then, the damage will be done - wreaking havoc on human, animal, and plant populations that depend on a more stable planet. Extreme weather events will come with more frequency and devastation. We will see much upheaval, migration, and inequities.

We are running out of time regarding climate change, and the chance to “reset” year in and year out is shrinking. So let’s raise a glass to bold and sticky resolutions that mitigate climate change and ensure that the most vulnerable and disadvantaged have the support to adapt. Let’s make 2023 about the planet.