Subsidizing Vegetable Farming to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Policy Memo: Subsidizing the Vegetable to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emission
Your Name
Department of ABC, University – Whitewater
ABC 101: Course Name
Professor (or Dr.) Firstname Lastname
Date

Policy Memo: Subsidizing the Vegetable to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Global warming and climate change are among the modern population's global crises. A key area of concern in both policy and public discourse is the issue of emissions. Sectors like transport, industry and agriculture are among the notable producers of emissions responsible for the heightening of global warming. Food production, in particular, according to MrуwczyЕ„ska-KamiЕ„ska et al. (2021), results in emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, and other planet-warming gases in several ways, including deforestation, digestion of livestock, and production and use of fertilizers. In essence, food production is responsible for up to 34% (Tandon, 2021) of all human-caused greenhouse emissions. This figure is projected to increase with the increasing global population, making food systems an ideal place to curb emissions. Government and organizations are reacting through policies to this end. For instance, in the United States, the White House announced an executive order in 2021 in which the Secretary of Agriculture (DOS, 2021) is expected to propose a strategy that will shift subsidies for dairy and meat production to the production of vegetables, grains, and fruits for consumption. The purpose of the current memo is to discuss the potential outcomes of such a policy.
Rationale for Policy Proposal
Climate change and global warming are severe global problems requiring localized and global solutions. Scientists agree that reducing emissions is a necessary step in addressing these crises because it is the planet-warming gases that have caused the global temperature to increase and the consequences of changing weather patterns and adverse climatic conditions taking place around the world. Production of meat and dairy is currently receiving subsidies in the United States, yet scientific findings have consistently shown that animal agriculture contributes significantly to emissions (Ritchie & Roser, 2021). In essence, there is a contradiction in that, on the one hand, the government is looking to limit emissions, while, on the other hand, the government is using taxpayer funds to subsidize activities that increase emissions in the atmosphere.
According to Lynch and Pierrehumbert (2019), meat accounts for nearly 60% of all greenhouse gases emitted from food production systems. For the cultivation of plant-based foods, the total emissions amount to 27% of emissions in the food sector. Further, dairy cows and their manure also contribute significantly to the production of greenhouse gas emissions. Aside from emissions, however, food production through the rearing of animals has other significant challenges to the environment. Grazing animals, for instance, requires large tracts of land acquired through deforestation. Today, most of the global cropland is being used to feed livestock instead of humans (Xu et al., 2021). Poor handling of waste from industrial livestock agriculture combined with deforestation, emissions, loss of plant and animal species during deforestation, and loosening of the surface soil due to animal activities all contribute to the deterioration of the environment.
Even more importantly, there is a stark difference between animal-based food production and plant-based food. For instance, in the production of 1 kg of wheat, an estimated 2.5 kg of emissions are produced (Lynch & Pierrehumbert, 2019). The production of a kilo of beef, on the other hand, results in up to 70 kg emissions. These figures are also consistent with the amounts of input required to produce either. In terms of water, for instance, it takes 1500 liters to produce a kilo of wheat, while it takes ten times more to produce a kilo of beef (Xu et al., 2021). Water, in itself, is scarce, given that up to 785 million individuals across the world did not have access to basic water services, while a further 884 million lacked access to safe drinking water.
Therefore, it is clear that intensifying animal-based food production to secure the food security and health of the planet is not a good strategy. This intensification has been heightened by the American government's current policy that subsidizes activities in this sector (DOS, 2021). Indeed, Xu et al. (2021) emphasize that with the current trend of food production within and without the US, the world should expect a decline in food production because of climate change and global warming. Production of plant-based foods like vegetables, grains, and fruits, on the other, has been found to have a smaller impact on the planet. Proponents of plant-based food production have highlighted the best strategy for ensuring food security while protecting the environment. Therefore, shifting the current subsidies that animal protein producers enjoy will limit milk and beef production while increasing the intensification of plant-based food production. Some studies also suggest that the current overreliance on animal-based foods is driving significant health problems (Keaver et al., 2021). Thus, the policy is best-placed to help solve the global crises of climate change, ...