Iris: Those working on climate, environment and saving the planet usually depict agriculture and food systems as major culprits. Yes, food systems contribute to a massive amount of emissions, but we need to look at what is realistic and how we shift towards agriculture being part of the solution.
When we run a sector as more climate smart, we need to first identify the risks. How can I know whether an investment in food systems makes the situation better if I only have an opaque or no understanding of the climate risk to a commodity or geography, or which parameters I need to review? The reporting would not have much substance without an established process to reach consensus on what “good” looks like. An investment could be a positive adaptation or one with positive intentions but not doing any good since we didn't understand the climate risks in a given investment context correctly.
We’ve also started looking at agricultural subsidies. There is a real movement in the world now to make them more beneficial for the planet, people and prosperity, ie achieve the triple win, but there is more to be done.
Food systems are all over what we want to achieve. Agriculture is one of the most controversially negotiated subjects in the COP process, so our work is cut out for ourselves.