Editing IPCC:AR6/SRCCL/Chapter-5 (section)

==== 5.1.4.1 Food systems in AR5 and SR15 ====

<div id="section-5-1-4-1-food-systems-in-ar5-and-sr15-block-1"></div>

The IPCC Working Group (WG) II AR5 chapter on Food Security and Food Production Systems broke new ground by expanding its focus beyond the effects of climate change primarily on agricultural production (crops, livestock and aquaculture) to include a food systems approach as well as directing attention to undernourished people (Porter et al. 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r132|132]]</sup> ). However, it focused primarily on food production systems due to the prevalence of studies on that topic (Porter et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r133|133]]</sup> ). It highlighted that a range of potential adaptation options exist across all food system activities, not just in food production, and that benefits from potential innovations in food processing, packaging, transport, storage, and trade were insufficiently researched at that time.

The IPCC WG III AR5 chapter on Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) (Smith et al. 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r134|134]]</sup> ) assessed mitigation potential considering not only the supply, but also the demand side of land uses, by consideration of changes in diets; it also included food loss and waste. AR5 focused on crop and livestock activities within the farm gate and land use and land-use change dynamics associated with agriculture. It did not take a full food system approach to emissions estimates that include processing, transport, storage, and retail.

The IPCC WG II AR5 Rural Areas chapter (Revi et al. 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r135|135]]</sup> ) found that farm households in developing countries are vulnerable to climate change due to socio-economic characteristics and non-climate stressors, as well as climate risks (Dasgupta et al. 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r136|136]]</sup> ). They also found that a wide range of on-farm and off-farm climate change adaptation measures are already being implemented and that the local social and cultural context played a prominent role in the success or failure of different adaptation strategies for food security, such as trade, irrigation or diversification. The IPCC WG II AR5 Urban Areas chapter found that food security for people living in cities was severely affected by climate change through reduced supplies, including urban-produced food, and impacts on infrastructure, as well as a lack of access to food. Poor urban dwellers are more vulnerable to rapid changes of food prices due to climate change.

Many climate change response options in IPCC WG II and WG III AR5 (IPCC 2014b <sup>[[#fn:r137|137]]</sup> ) address incremental adaptation or mitigation responses separately rather than being inclusive of more systemic or transformational changes in multiple food systems that are large-scale, in depth, and rapid, requiring social, technological, organisational and system responses (Rosenzweig and Solecki 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r138|138]]</sup> ; Mapfumo et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r139|139]]</sup> ; Termeer et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r140|140]]</sup> ). In many cases, transformational change will require integration of resilience and mitigation across all parts of the food system including production, supply chains, social aspects, and dietary choices. Further, these transformational changes in the food system need to encompass linkages to ameliorative responses to land degradation (Chapter 4), desertification (Chapter 3), and declines in quality and quantity of water resources throughout the food-energy-water nexus (Chapter 2 and Section 5.7).

The IPCC Special Report on global warming of 1.5°C found that climate-related risks to food security are projected to increase with global warming of 1.5°C and increase further with 2°C (IPCC 2018a <sup>[[#fn:r141|141]]</sup> ).

<div id="section-5-1-4-2-food-systems-and-the-paris-agreement"></div>

<span id="food-systems-and-the-paris-agreement"></span>