Britain’s agricultural productivity has stagnated at a time when
the world needs to double food production to keep up with the
growth of the population, according to a new IEA report.
Two papers, written by Matt Ridley and David Hill, set out how
innovation in farming can lead to higher crop yields, while also
releasing land from farming and returning it to nature. British
farmers have been constrained from embracing innovations such as
biotechnology, genetic modification,...Request free trial
Britain’s agricultural productivity has stagnated at a time when
the world needs to double food production to keep up with the
growth of the population, according to a new IEA report.
Two papers, written by
Matt Ridley and David Hill, set out how innovation in farming can
lead to higher crop yields, while also releasing land from farming
and returning it to nature.
British farmers have been constrained from embracing innovations
such as biotechnology, genetic modification, gene silencing and
editing, as well as precision farming and robotics – all of which
can increase yields, bring down costs for farmers and consumers,
and reduce the environmental impact of farming.
Post-Brexit, farmers in the UK could be exposed to tough
competition if external tariffs are lowered. Furthermore, there is
little extra land that can be farmed easily or productively in the
UK.
It is therefore imperative, the report argues,
that the government allows farmers to enhance their
competitiveness by introducing new technology - some of which is
already being used successfully in other parts of the world - to
make the most of the land they currently farm.
To ensure these technological advances are also beneficial to
conservation, well-designed economic incentives can be put in
place. Through concepts such as habitat banking and environmental
credits, innovative policy can generate rewards to habitat
creation, wildlife enhancement and ecological benefits that are
both effective and affordable.
Innovation in farming and food production is
vital
Innovation in farming between 1960 and 2010 meant
that 68 per cent less land was needed to produce given
quantities of food, allowing more land to be spared from
farming. Embracing available technologies will make UK farming
viable and, as early adopters, British farmers would reap the
economic benefits including:
• Better return on investments
• Lower reliance on subsidy
• Greater ability to compete in world markets
• Lower reliance on chemicals
• Lower use of tillage
• Land sparing for nature
• Growth in research and development
• Job opportunities
Technologies that should be embraced
• Genetic
modification: this was rejected almost
completely by the EU, despite clear evidence that this innovation
has reduced reliance on chemical pesticides by an
estimated 36 per cent on average. The effect
of campaigns against GM crops was to leave British farming more
dependent on pesticides and less competitive than it would have
been if the UK had adopted GM crops.
Genetic modification has the potential to extend the
shelf-life of food which ultimately reduces waste.
• Bacterial nitrogen
fixing: this is a promising candidate for a
step-change in agricultural productivity. Results from 200 trials
of N-fix technology suggest yields could increase
by 30 per cent and reduce the use of
fertilisers by close to 50 per cent.
This is significant; if rice wheat and maize were to experience a
30 per cent increase in yield with lower costs to farmers and less
pollution, there would be dramatic economic and ecological impacts
in the form of price falls and land sparing, which would be
environmentally beneficial.
• Precision farming and
robotics: data collected from drones to make
farming more efficient - such as crop density and plant health
- represents a potential competitive advantage for countries that
adapt their regulations to suit the use of drones and autonomous
tractors.
Robots could also pick ripe fruit, which would make the reliance on
cheap labour - which is both economically and politically
unsustainable - unnecessary.
• Conservation
management: practices focused on managing wild
habitats can be improved and transformed by intelligent innovation.
For example, techniques of biological control of invasive species
have improved dramatically in recent decades.
Restoration of biodiversity & how it can
work
The introduction of technological advances in farming
techniques could result in land sharing (where habitats within the
farmed landscape provide food and cover for the full range of
wildlife groups) and land sparing (where land can be dedicated to
other uses such as protecting, enhancing and management of natural
capital).
Land sharing and land sparing can be incentivised to benefit
wildlife and natural capital without excessive cost to the
taxpayer.
Four investment vehicles to provide necessary funding for
biodiversity restoration
• Habitat
banks: conservation credits raised on land
through biodiversity interventions are sold to developers to
deliver net gain.
• Green bonds:
issued to raise capital to deliver projects on sustainable
agriculture.
• Environmental
credits: purchased by corporates through
natural capital accounting, in order to increase market
advantage.
• Impact
investments: for projects that both enhance and
restore biodiversity in association with either land sparing or
land sharing through interventions to make farming truly
sustainable.
Commenting on the report, author Matt Ridley
said:
“This report concludes that the UK could be well placed to
adopt the biotech and robotic innovations that are about to
transform farming. Both papers in this report set out a path for
ensuring that innovation in agriculture brings environmental
benefits as well as economic ones.
"Species abundance and habitat extents across the UK have been
severely impacted by farming practices over the past 60 years and
transformational change in how we use land, if we are to restore
this biodiversity, is necessary. With effective policy backing,
innovation in farming has the potential to enable that
transformational change to take place."
|