To Save Our Soil, Invest in Smallholder Farmers

“At this year’s UN COP29 summit in Baku, we need to ensure that the world’s smallholder farmers get the climate finance they need and deserve, to protect our farmlands and, by default, ensure global food security,” writes Praveena Sridhar.

—

Smallholder farmers produce over 30% of the world’s food and yet they receive just 0.8% of climate finance. In low or middle-income countries, that figure is more like 70%. 

Across the world, our soils are degrading. This does not only threaten our harvests. It means our agricultural soils, traditionally a carbon sink, are slowly becoming a net emitter of greenhouses as degraded soils lose their ability to retain carbon underground. 

To protect our soils, we desperately need the world’s farmers to transition to more regenerative farming methods. Yet they cannot be expected to make this transition alone. 

At this year’s UN COP29 summit in Baku, Azerbaijan, we need to ensure that the world’s smallholder farmers get the climate finance they need and deserve, to protect our farmlands and, by default, ensure global food security.

Some estimates suggest that we are losing up to 24 billion tonnes of fertile land each year. This is especially concerning given that global food demand is expected to rise 60% by 2050. By mid-century, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) predicts that a staggering 90% of the world’s topsoil could be degraded. 

The deterioration of our soils is a carbon bomb, waiting to go off. That is because soil (traditionally) operates as a carbon sink. The process of photosynthesis harvests carbon dioxide (CO2) to produce nutrients for all the many millions of life forms found in soil. There is more carbon storage potential in the soil than in our atmosphere and all animal and plant life combined.

Conventional methods, including monocrop farming, those requiring the use of synthetic fertilizers and excessive tilling, reduce the amount of organic matter (mostly carbon) stored in soils. Meanwhile, regenerative farming harvests carbon in plants and locks it up in the soil. Regenerative practices like cover cropping, crop rotation, no or low tilling and agroforestry have all been shown to help to realize the potential of soil as a carbon sink, and also improve the health and resilience of agricultural land.

Yet regenerative agriculture is not only more sustainable, it can be more profitable, too. Land becomes more productive and farmers can reduce their costs on fertilizers and pesticides. One study conducted in Kansas showed that a switch to regenerative agriculture could increase profitability by 120% over time. 

You might also like: 11 Ways Farmers Are Adapting to the Unpredictability of Climate Change

So, if regenerative agriculture is cheap, more profitable and better for the environment, why are we not leaning into it?

The catch is that switching to regenerative approaches requires both education and more start-up cash. According to the International Fund for Agricultural Development, there are 500 million smallholder farmers globally. Most of them cultivate less than 5 acres and live on less than US$2 a day. 

One small fluctuation in price or output can see a farmer, and their family, go bankrupt. For example, for $1-worth of food produced by smallholder farmers, the farmer will receive $0.06 on average. The cost of the transition period, combined with the possibility of a lower harvest to start, illuminates why it is so difficult for farmers to transition to regenerative practices. 

Similarly, investing in new seeds, tools or livestock for rotational farming requires start-up capital. Many smallholder farmers cannot access credit markets and are therefore locked into a cycle of low-profit, low-productivity farming. 

The impact of more erratic weather conditions and therefore less consistent crops is already impacting the health and well-being of farmers. In one tragic example, some 650 Indian farmers committed suicide between January and August 2023, largely due to failing crops and their economic implications.  

The point remains: smallholder farmers remain the backbone of our global food production systems. On top of that, it is the poorest regions that are most reliant on them. Smallholder farmers are responsible for some 80% of the food supply in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia, regions that are disproportionately affected by desertification and the resulting famine. 

The international community is not blind to this. Agriculture took a central position at COP28 last year. The figure of $7.1 billion raised for climate-positive action in the food sector at that conference may have sounded impressive but it is dwarfed by the amount of finance devoted to other sectors. Equally, the FAO notes that climate finance for agriculture has dropped by 12% since 2021. 

It is even worse when we consider the private sector. A mere 0.1% of private climate capital has been allocated to adaptation in smallholder value chains. A reason for this is that agriculture is seen only as an adaptation necessity. Given the role of soil as a carbon sink, we know that regenerative farming practices are a valuable solution for climate change.

By helping and most importantly providing a cash buffer for smallholder farmers, we can make sure that a meal today does not come at the cost of many tomorrow. Transforming our food systems requires investments in our small farmers. By aiding the transition to regenerative practices, we can build a more resilient, sustainable and profitable global food system. 

Smallholder farmers should not be asked to take this necessary yet daring leap alone. At this year’s COP29, we must champion those who feed the world but often cannot feed themselves.

Featured image: Wikimedia Commons.