As we have seen during the course, climate change and biodiversity loss have accelerated in the last decades, despite fifty years of international efforts to put development on a sustainable path.

The scientific community has a broad consensus that these problems can no longer be solved by making gradual changes towards more sustainable production and consumption. The problems have become so severe that solving them will require rapid, unprecedented, and far-reaching changes in society’s structures and operating patterns. Advancing climate change and biodiversity loss mean that the world is changing anyway: going on as “business as usual” is no longer an option.

The main message of the reports of the Intergovernmental Panels on Climate Change and Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPCC and IPBES) in recent years has been that fundamental changes are needed in, among other things, economic structures, technological solutions, decision-making systems, and societal mindsets, goals, and values.

Changing systems is complicated and involves a lot of uncertainty. There are always parties who suffer from the changes, which causes resistance and concern among those who benefit from existing systems and whose position is threatened by change. When making changes, tough questions arise as to whose values ​​and views are taken into account. Participatory decision-making, in which all stakeholders can influence the decisions being made, is one of the principles recommended by researchers. However, its practical effectiveness is uncertain when rapid and extensive changes are needed.

Mitigating climate change, halting biodiversity loss and promoting human well-being are all necessary goals in changing systems. Therefore, the measures need to be assessed in light of each objective. Too straightforward or ill-considered changes can do more harm than good. For example, combating climate change by increasing bioenergy production can reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Still, it can be devastating to human and natural well-being if it reduces land and water used for food production or erodes ecosystems. But then again, almost all measures aimed at nature’s well-being, such as the establishment of protected areas and the restoration of habitats, are also helpful in mitigating climate change. Still, they can make it more difficult to obtain economic benefits based on natural resources. Unfortunately, there are no “silver bullets,” i.e., simple technical solutions, to these multidimensional problems.

Transition to sustainable food systems

As an example of the necessary system changes, we can look at food, one of the basic human needs. There have been significant changes in the history of humanity in what we eat and how we acquire food. The transition from gathering and hunting to farming is not seen as a mere success story in terms of well-being. Subsequent food transformations have not been purely positive either.

Our current food system is based on maximizing the efficiency of production and the global trade of commodities. The food system is so complex that it is perhaps better to talk about a network of many local and regional systems. Subsystems of the food system, such as the production and consumption system, have differentiated into their own systems.

Food production has grown exponentially. Growth has been achieved by inserting vast amounts of energy into the system. The food system is very much dependent on fossil fuels, which are needed to power agricultural machinery and produce fertilizers. Because of this dependence, one may ask, for example, how domestic “domestic” food production actually is.

The global food system has become unified as diets in different parts of the world are increasingly similar, and commercially only a few crop plants are preferred. The efficiency of production is based on large farm sizes and the specialization of farmers. It has improved the availability of food around the world. At the same time, production is concentrated in the hands of large commercial actors, which increases the system’s vulnerability. The benefits of streamlining the food system are not evenly distributed.

The food system is linked in many ways to acute environmental crises such as climate change and the destruction of biodiversity. Biodiversity diminishes when land is taken into efficient agricultural use. Recently, there has been more attention to the impoverishment of the soil. The climate impact of agriculture is significant. Methane from animal husbandry, in particular, is a more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

Thus, the current food system causes environmental problems. At the same time, ecological crises increase the vulnerability of the food system. In a system based on international trade, drought and floods can affect food availability for a large number of people. Diversification of local production and increasing self-sufficiency are necessary so that the food supply is not too dependent on imports. At the same time, international trade cannot be eliminated, and it would not even be desirable.

The current crisis of the food system is not just about its environmental impact. The crisis is also social. The reduction of world hunger has justified the efficiency of the current food system. However, estimates suggest that hunger may be on the rise globally, despite growth in production. The food system produces not only absolute hunger associated with insufficient nutrition but also “qualitative hunger” due to a one-sided but energy-intensive diet, which is linked to the increase in overweight and the health problems it brings.

In addition to strengthening local production, a shift from the consumption of animal products to plant-based diets has been proposed as a critical solution to the food system's problems. Meat and dairy production is much more energy-intensive. It requires more land than crop production, so its environmental impact is much more significant. Switching to a plant-based diet will not only help mitigate climate change; it will also have significant health benefits. However, from a food system perspective, the transition is difficult to implement, as substantial investments made in animal production lead to path dependence. On the line is, among other things, the livelihood of farmers. Food is also strongly a cultural issue, and changes in diet require changes in production and consumption systems and learning of new practices and skills.

Food system transformation is necessary and inevitable. Ecological, social, cultural, and economic sustainability must be taken into account in the transition. If the global food system is not put on a more sustainable footing, there will be hunger and, as a result, unrest. The food transformation must be carried out without delay and in a fair manner, taking into account the opportunities for farmers to be involved and the even distribution of the system's benefits. The transformation will take place on many levels, as a sum of many decisions, and requires collaboration and innovative experimentation.

Energy transition today

Energy policy in Europe aims to ensure energy availability at competitive prices with the least possible impact on the environment. Energy systems everywhere are changing. Windmills are also appearing in the Finnish landscape at an accelerating pace. More than one million heat pumps have already been sold in Finland, mainly for domestic heating. Gradually, solar panels have also begun to appear on the roofs of both private and public buildings. This development is taking place all over the globe.

In a European comparison, introducing new forms of renewable energy in Finland has been relatively slow. One important reason for this is the Finnish forest industry, whose by-products have enabled a high share of renewable energy without new energy technologies. In Finland, renewable energy has also been obtained from hydropower.

The rapid growth of wind and solar power over the last couple of decades is an indication that the energy revolution has started rapidly, especially in the electricity sector. Almost 30% of the world’s electricity is already produced from renewable energy sources.

The pioneer of wind power has been Denmark, which began investing in it as early as the 1970s. The rapid growth of wind power began in Europe, especially in Germany, in the late 1990s with the subsidies for renewable energy. Solar electricity production also began to grow at an unprecedented rate, first in Germany. Since then, China has become the overwhelming market leader in both wind power and photovoltaics. Today, photovoltaic capacity in the world is already greater than that of wind power. The average power of wind is higher, so wind power generates significantly more electricity in the world.

The rapid growth of both solar and wind power is expected to continue as technology prices have fallen rapidly. According to the International Renewable Energy Organization, photovoltaics and onshore wind power are already the cheapest means of production for two-thirds of the world’s population when building new electricity generation capacity.

The electricity sector is only one sector of the energy system. In heating and especially in transport, the energy transition has proved more challenging to implement. In the heating sector, which consumes about half of the energy globally, the share of renewable energy is around 10%. In transport, which consumes about a third of all energy consumed, renewable energy accounts for only 3-4%. Renewable energy for transport mainly refers to biofuels, i.e., liquid fuels processed from biomass such as cereals, wood, or palm oil. The share of electricity produced from renewable sources in transport is only a few per mil. However, the electrification of transportation is one of the significant current trends in the energy sector.

There are also obstacles to the energy transition towards renewable energies. Technological systems tend to evolve in a historically developed direction (path dependence). Systems also tend to lock in as social relationships and practices between actors become established, and technology lifespans are long. In other words, from the point of view of established actors in the energy system, it is advantageous that no attempt is made to change the energy system very quickly.

Political decisions are also holding back development. Examples of practices that preserve the existing energy system are the various subsidies received for fossil energy. According to an estimate used by the International Renewable Energy Organization, the use of fossil fuels was subsidized globally in 2018 by about US $ 400 billion, double the subsidy for renewable electricity generation. Prominent supporters of fossil fuels are large energy-producing countries, such as the United States, Russia, Iran, and Venezuela. The use of peat in Finland is also supported by lighter tax treatment. Peat taxation is a multifaceted issue that has been politically debated throughout the 21st century.

For reflection: what do you think prevents or slows down a food or energy transition? How could these barriers/hurdles be removed?  You can share your reflections and discuss with other course participants on the page linked below.

Would you like to comment something on this section? Voluntary.