How to change the industrial food production system for the protection of health, climate and the environment?

How to change the industrial food production system for the protection of health, climate and the environment?- Article written by th President of UITM-Prof. Tadeusz Pomianek, Ph.D., D. Sci., Assoc. Prof.

The fight to protect humanity from climate catastrophe focuses primarily on reducing greenhouse gas emissions (Infographic: Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the European Union by Pollutant; Cheng et al. 2022). At the same time, humanity faces an equally daunting challenge in the rapidly progressing environmental degradation. Although the share of renewable energy is growing relatively quickly (13% globally, 25% in the EU), not enough necessary changes are implemented in the industrial food production system. This sector is particularly notable for its significant contribution to widespread ecological harm (Atlas Mięsa [Meat Atlas] 2022; Crippa et al. 2021; Cheng et al. 2022).

The entire process of food production and consumption (from farm to fork) generates 35% of the total greenhouse gas emissions, equivalent to 18 billion tons of CO2 annually (Crippa et al. 2021).

The industrial (intensive) food production system has been causing significant damage to our ecosystems (Shi, Irfan Liu Yang et al. 2022). Industrial agriculture, which began about 50 years ago, has nearly tripled agricultural production while increasing agricultural land by just over 10%. This growth, however, has come at a steep environmental cost. Annually, around 200 million tons of artificial fertilizers are used, accelerating soil degradation at a rate approximately 30 times faster than its natural regeneration rate. Of these, about 75 million tons (65%) of nitrogen fertilizers and 14 million tons (56%) of phosphorus fertilizers are not absorbed by crops. Consequently, an estimated 89 million tons of these fertilizers are wasted, contaminating water bodies and predominantly ending up in the oceans, further harming the environment (Crippa et al. 2021; Dasgupta 2021). Notably, China accounts for 33% of this fertilizer usage (Our World in Data 2021; IPCC 2022). Additionally, the use of 3.5 million tons of toxic pesticides annually to protect crops and orchards also poses serious environmental and health risks. These pesticides not only target weeds and pests but also inadvertently harm other plants, insects, birds and are detrimental to human health (Kramarz 2022; Parlas, Qaim 2022).

The industrial production of meat and dairy is considered particularly harmful to the environment. The world produces 320 million tons of meat and 850 million tons of milk annually (Willett et al. 2019; Our World in Data 2022). About 75% of the world’s agricultural land, meadows, and pastures are used for animal production and growing feed crops. Meanwhile, meat provides only 37% of the required protein and 18% of energy. In the process of intensive animal farming, the primary greenhouse gases emitted are methane (CH₄) and nitrous oxide (N₂O). Methane is particularly potent, having 26 times the greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide (CO₂), while nitrous oxide is even more impactful, with a greenhouse effect 265 times greater than CO₂ (Dasgupta 2021; Our World in Data 2022). Globally, approximately 70% of animals are reared under factory farming conditions. In Poland, the industrial meat production sector includes 2,184 poultry farms (each with over 40,000 birds) and 279 pig farms (each with over 2,000 pigs) (Sandström et al. 2018; Statistics Poland 2021; Atlas Mięsa [Meat Atlas] 2022). These farms extensively use antibiotics on livestock to prevent diseases and accelerate meat mass growth (Grossi et al. 2018). What is more, intensive farming has reduced the chicken rearing time from 6 to 1.5 months. Poland, ranking fourth in the EU, uses over 800 tons of antibiotics annually for this purpose, contributing to increasing antibiotic resistance, affecting 300,000 to 500,000 people yearly in Poland (Kramarz 2022). An average American, consuming about 120 kg of meat a year, generates 6 tons of waste. Additionally, 20% of meat is wasted, and since the number of farm animals reaches 60 billion animals, it results in the disposal of 12 billion animals annually! (Crippa et. al. 2021; IPCC 2022).

Certainly, artificial fertilizers, pesticides, antibiotics, and waste generated during meat production and consumption contaminate the soil, groundwater, and water reservoirs and destroy biodiversity. The FAO has recognized that the livestock sector is by far the largest source of ocean pollution (FAO 2019). According to the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the loss of biodiversity causes enormous losses in the global economy, which in the coming years will exceed $2.7 trillion annually (Poore, Nemecek 2018; IPCC 2022 ).

Furthermore, in food processing, storage, and “refreshing,” a wide array of chemical substances are used. It is estimated that each person consumes 2 kg of these chemicals annually. All of this negatively impacts our health, although the extent of this impact is still not fully understood.

Monoculture farming + chemical means of production + factory farms monopolized by international corporations and investment funds form an effective recipe for the end of civilization.

Therefore, we must change the food production and consumption system, mainly for the following five reasons.

1. THE SOIL WILL CEASE TO BE FERTILE AND POLLINATING INSECTS WILL PERISH

Healthy soils are essential for effectively combating climate change, feeding people, and preventing floods and droughts. 95% of food is produced using soil, and 90% of medicines are produced using plants. Nearly all antibiotics come from soil microorganisms.

A single spoonful of soil contains more living organisms than there are people on the Earth. In one gram of soil, there can be up to 75,000 species of bacteria, 25,000 species of fungi, 1,000 species of protozoa, and hundreds of species of nematodes. A hectare of land can have as many as 3.5 million earthworms. Together with other soil organisms, earthworms “process” 37 tons of soil per hectare each year, transforming it into nutrients needed by plants to grow. They aerate the soil and improve its water absorption. Most bacteria decompose organic matter, converting the energy stored in the organic matter into nutrients. Other bacteria fix nitrogen, making it usable by plants.

The rhizosphere is located around plant roots and can be considered an external intestine of the plant. Its functions are astonishing and similar to the human intestine. In both, bacteria break down organic material into simple compounds that are absorbed by humans or plants. Interestingly, the same four out of over 1000 types of bacteria play a key role in both the rhizosphere and mammalian intestines!

Fungi, particularly mycelium, help in plant communication, capture CO₂, transport nutrients, filter pollutants, and decompose organic matter, filtering everything from heavy metals to pesticides and radioactive waste. The more fungi in the soil, the more carbon it stores.

Soil acts as a natural water filtration system, providing clean drinking water and preventing floods. If soil microbes are healthy and the soil is covered (e.g., with leaf residue), it can absorb three times more water (up to 300 mm of rainfall).

This extraordinary and little-known world of soil is consistently damaged by chemical production methods for temporary yield increases. Additionally, a characteristic of industrial agriculture is monocultures, where the same crops are planted year after year in the same location.

Monocultures are prevalent in industrialized countries and in the Global South, where feed for factory farms is produced. In Poland, the rapid increase in corn cultivation is a measure of monoculture: 30 years ago, it was almost non-existent, and now it covers nearly 2 million hectares. Corn heavily exploits soil resources, leading to soil degradation and the destruction of the micro-ecosystems. In order to maintain the crop cultivation efficiency of 1 ha, larger amounts of artificial fertilizers and pesticides are used. It is estimated that 33% of agricultural soils are degraded, with up to 80% in countries like Nigeria. Farmers have already abandoned nearly 1.5 billion hectares due to low yields.

Monocultures are associated with steppe formation and desertification, as degraded soils retain less water, exacerbated by climate-induced droughts. According to the UN, we lose 12 million hectares of fertile soil annually due to desertification. Dry areas now cover 38% of the Earth’s land surface, affecting 2.7 billion people.

It should also be emphasized that soil treated in this way provides food with fewer essential health nutrients, leading to microelement deficiencies, notably zinc, in about 2 billion people. Poor diets combined with chemical production methods also harm and kill bees. In California, 400,000 hectares of almond plantations rely on bees, even from Australia, for pollination. In 2019, 50 billion bees died, mainly due to pesticides, during a single flowering season! Remember, 75% of crops depend on pollination by bees and other pollinators. The decline is not only in bees but also in other insects vital to the ecosystem.Początek formularza

In protected areas of Germany, insect biomass decreased by 70% between 1990 and 2017! Let us recall what Franklin D. Roosevelt said: A nation that destroys its soil destroys itself.

Meanwhile, according to the FAO, sustainable soil management could increase food production by 58%!!

2. HUMAN BEINGS WILL NOT STAND IT

What are the consequences of dominating the industrial food production system for the human?

Currently, the world produces over 5 billion tons of food annually and wastes 25% – 30%, i.e. up to 1.5 billion tons; in Poland, this is about 5 million tons of food (Our World in Data 2022; FAO 2019). Of the 8 billion people in the world, 25%, i.e. 2 billion, are overweight, 8% are obese, and 800 million suffer from hunger (Poore, Nemecek 2018; Karaczun 2021). 60% of Poles are overweight, including 25% who are obese (Niedźwiecka 2021).

Polish children rank among the most obese in the EU. The condition of humans is deteriorating. Industrial food, often deeply processed and packaged in plastics, causes drug resistance and an epidemic of heart attacks, strokes, cancers, depression, dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, and other chronic ailments. According to WHO, 5 million people die annually due to drug resistance. Our health is also negatively impacted by poor air quality and weather anomalies. In the US, meat production and consumption generate 16 billion tons of waste per year, or 2 tons per person (Parlas, Qaim 2022). This environment fosters the proliferation of dangerous bacterial strains and viruses, leading to more pandemics. The deteriorating human health condition also causes significant economic losses.

For the above-mentioned reasons, healthcare expenses continue to rise and increasingly exceed food expenses. In Poland, around 170 billion PLN is spent on food, while total public and private expenditure on healthcare reaches 250 billion PLN. The average Brit spends 7 euros daily on food and twice as much, or 14 euros, on healthcare. In the EU, healthcare spending is almost 60% higher than food spending. However, the healthcare system is increasingly inefficient. In 2020, healthcare spending as a percentage of GDP was 6.5% in Poland, 10.9% in the EU, and as much as 18.8% in the US. Therefore, the monthly expenses are 110, 300, and 1000 USD per person, respectively!!! It is noteworthy that Americans lead in industrial food production and consume the most meat per capita (120 kg/year) and use the most medications (30% of global expenditure). In other words, in the US, meat consumption is three times higher per capita, and healthcare and medication spending is ten and seven times higher, respectively, than the global average. Despite massive expenditures, average Americans often cannot afford treatment.

The wealthiest country in the world demonstrates that with the current system of production and consumption, we will never be able to afford an efficient healthcare service. Therefore, it is only a matter of time before the healthcare system collapses. Meanwhile, comparing the effects of the Western diet to the Mediterranean diet leaves no doubt about the better path to follow.

3. WE WILL SUFFOCATE

Forests produce 50% of Earth’s oxygen through the process of photosynthesis. Annually, especially in the Global South, 14 million hectares of forests are cut down, mainly for monoculture feed crops for industrial farms, often located in the Global North. The Amazon Rainforest, the “lungs” of Earth, has lost 17% of its area in 40 years, equivalent to 1.2 million km² (four times the size of Poland). Forests produce oxygen and purify the air. Despite this, Poland exported 3 million trees last year, while most EU countries have banned exports. Additionally, 67% of energy in Poland is produced from coal, primarily used for heating in rural areas, making Poland a leader in poor air quality, resulting in approximately 45,000 deaths annually.

The other 50% of Earth’s oxygen is generated through photosynthesis by microscopic plankton and certain bacteria. Zooplankton also play a role in carbon sequestration by absorbing CO2 during shell formation. Collectively, plankton are responsible for absorbing approximately 37 billion tons of CO2 each year, making them a crucial component in climate regulation. However, the issue arises when chemical agents used in food production, such as artificial fertilizers and pesticides, are not fully absorbed by plants. These chemicals and substantial quantities of toxic waste predominantly end up in the oceans, posing significant environmental threats. This increases ocean pollution and acidification, creates oxygen-deprived zones, and raises temperatures (over 90% of the greenhouse effect is absorbed by oceans), harming oceanic animals and phytoplankton. While we can estimate what will happen in the case of deforestation, no one is able to predict when phytoplankton will start to disappear, and we will run out of oxygen.

4. WE WILL STOP REPRODUCING

Monoculture crops and caged animal farming deplete our food of minerals, vitamins, and antioxidants, affecting, among others, testosterone levels and semen quality. In contrast, the Mediterranean diet, rich in healthy foods, has a positive impact. The Western diet poses a risk of male infertility. Particularly in wealthy societies, infertility affects increasingly younger generations. Obesity is a concern caused by excessive consumption of processed foods and lack of exercise. Adipose tissue contains an enzyme that effectively converts male hormones (testosterone) into female hormones! Over the last 40 years, sperm count has decreased by 60% (42% in the USA over 17 years)! WHO continually lowers the standards for semen quality.

Numerous scientific studies have identified specific factors that detrimentally affect sperm quality, male hormone levels, and libido. Key among these are:

• microplastics, which are pervasive in air, water and food. Plastic is also found in food packaging, cosmetics, paints, varnishes, etc. Toys made of poor-quality plastics are dangerous for children. American scientists found that drinking coffee from a paper cup (lined with a thin layer of plastic) results in the ingestion of 25,000 microplastic particles!
• pesticides that cause infertility, miscarriages and even poorer quality of breast milk. More and more publications argue that pesticides contribute to the surge in autism in children,
• sulfur and nitrogen oxides (from artificial fertilizers), airborne particulate matter PM2.5, and heavy metals, especially cadmium and lead (from vehicle emissions).

Of course, women are also at risk, but to a lesser extent. It is worth adding that iodine, to some extent, neutralizes the harmful effects discussed above, and its level significantly impacts the course of pregnancy and childbirth.

Given that these issues mainly affect men, who still dominate politics, there is reason for optimism.

Additionally, scientists have noticed that IQ is decreasing for the same reasons. So far, it has fallen by four units, which means a drop in labour productivity by as much as 8%. The estimated losses for this reason amount to 5 trillion USD a year.

5. CLIMATE MIGRANTS WILL BREAK THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE WESTERN WORLD

It is crucial to recognize the causal chain set in motion by livestock farms, driven by high meat consumption primarily in Western countries and the profit motives of their owners. International corporations are expanding monoculture crop areas in the Global South, primarily for animal feed. This expansion leads to further deforestation and the appropriation of land that local communities once depended on for subsistence. As a result, the capacity for greenhouse gas absorption diminishes, exacerbating global warming. Additionally, the reliance on monoculture crops contributes to soil depletion and desertification. The extensive use of chemicals in these farming practices not only devastates biodiversity but also escalates disease prevalence among local populations.

Consider the example of flower production. Aalsmeer in the Netherlands hosts the world’s largest flower market, handling about 12.5 billion units annually. Remarkably, 35% of flowers sold in the EU are sourced from farms around Lake Naivasha in Kenya. In this region, women labour in conditions akin to near-slavery, environmental challenges such as droughts and desertification are intensifying, and the excessive use of pesticides has led to the contamination of Lake Naivasha. This lake, which sustained local communities through fishing for centuries, is now so polluted that fishing has been prohibited, drastically altering the local ecosystem and livelihoods.

The table below illustrates the concerning demographic shifts we are currently experiencing.

Table. Forecasted demographic changes for the period 2021-2100 (in millions of people).

The situation in Nigeria is particularly striking. With 80% of its agricultural lands already degraded and diminishing profits from its main wealth, oil, what will the hundreds of millions of Nigerians do?

People living in increasingly hellish conditions tend to knock on the doors of the West, the main contributors to their plight. However, these doors are being closed more firmly to protect the Western socio-economic system, which inadvertently fuels the rise of populism and authoritarian governments. The example of Lampedusa is just a prelude to what is ahead. If industrial food production continues, climate migrants could collapse the socio-economic system of the Western world.

The data presented above is terrifying. The unethical pursuit of profit is destroying our planet every day. Moreover, we are afraid that giving up industrial food production will lead humanity to starvation.

American researchers from the University of California, Berkeley, and Stanford University have demonstrated that if we stop consuming meat and use the saved 75% of agricultural lands for forests, they would absorb about 25 billion tons of CO₂ equivalent, nearly half of total emissions. They claim that the remaining 25% of agricultural land would be sufficient to feed the world’s population on a plant-based diet.

20. Kramarz argues that by reallocating agricultural land usage — dedicating 23% to animal farming and 77% to plant cultivation — we could meet the energy needs of about 20.8 billion people and the protein needs of approximately 16.8 billion (Kramarz 2022). This approach is notably efficient, as one hectare of land can produce 6-20 times more plant protein than animal protein (up to 100 times more compared to beef). Additionally, plant protein production uses ten times less water and generates up to 90 times fewer greenhouse gas emissions. (Our World in Data 2021; FAO 2021; NIK Report 2021).

Therefore, I believe that the perceived conflict between maintaining a healthy climate and environment, providing nutritious food, and ensuring a well-fed human population is a false dichotomy. In reality, our choice is more profound: we can either continue with our current consumption patterns and lifestyles, inadvertently marching towards ecological disaster, or we can consciously shift towards more sustainable practices. This includes reducing our reliance on animal proteins in favour of plant-based diets. Our motivation should be the realization that this change is key to securing a better future for our children and grandchildren.

Using Poland as an example, I present a constructive solution to this crucial problem below.

What is the current situation?

In Poland, approximately 5.3 million tons of meat are produced annually, with an additional import of about 0.7 million tons. The current per capita meat consumption is 75 kg per year, meaning approximately 3 million tons are both consumed and exported. Poland also produces nearly 15 million tons of milk, of which about 2 million tons are exported (Kramarz 2022). The annual greenhouse gas emissions in CO₂ equivalent exceed 400 million tons, with 35% attributed to the entire food production cycle, amounting to 140 million tons in Poland (Crippa et al. 2021; Dasgupta 2021; Our World in Data 2021; Parlas, Qaim 2022; IPCC 2022). In fact, meat and milk production in Poland is six times higher relative to the cultivated land area than the global average.

The proposed solution’s principles

It is necessary, preferably within 5-10 years, to reduce meat consumption from 75 kg to 25 kg per person per year. According to the World Health Organization and the National Institute of Public Health, this level of consumption is sufficient for our body (WHO 2019; National Institute of Public Health).

Given the environmental devastation caused by industrial meat production, it is suggested to limit production to domestic needs, gradually phasing out exports and ceasing imports for ethical reasons. This would mean reducing meat production from 5.3 million tons to 0.95 million tons and milk production by about 15% (Sandström et al. 2018; Shi et al. 2022).

Additionally, it is recommended to increase fish and seafood consumption from 10 kg to 20 kg per person per year, meeting the global average. This proposed increase, amounting to an additional 400,000 tons annually, is expected to stimulate the growth of the fishery sector  (Hołdys 2023). Of course, this implies a modest increase in catches, but only by 0.2% (I do not advocate the use of industrial farming).

What will be the balance sheet of changing the economic process on such a large scale?

1. We will lose about 7 billion euros annually in revenue due to the elimination of meat and meat product exports, but we will gain over 6 billion euros from emission rights due to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions exceeding 70 million tons of CO₂ equivalent (Statistical data: Statistics Poland 2022; KOWR 2021). Of course, the EU should mandate the purchase of greenhouse gas emission rights, including by industrial farms, as is currently required for energy and cement producers.
2. Since 75% of the agricultural area is used for animal production, we recover no less than 60% of arable land, i.e. over 8 million hectares, or ¼ of the country’s area. We can devote such a huge area to the production of plant protein and many other food products that are beneficial to humans and less harmful to the environment (Statistical data: Statistics Poland 2022; KOWR 2021).
3. We will save over 30 billion tons of water annually, as Poland’s freshwater resources are three times lower per capita compared to the EU. This means each of us could save 2.2 tons of water daily. What is more, Poland’s annual water consumption is just over 60 billion tons. Given the ongoing drought in Europe and Poland, this is a result of crucial importance (Statistical data: Statistics Poland 2022; KOWR 2021).
4. Transitioning to environmentally sustainable farming practices offers a significant opportunity to reduce the use of artificial fertilizers and pesticides. Such a shift would greatly diminish pollution, especially in rivers, by preventing the runoff of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizers, of which approximately 700,000 tons flow from Polish fields yearly. Additionally, it is noteworthy that adopting organic production methods, such as grass-fed and free-range beef farming, can reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40% and cut energy usage by sevenfold. This approach not only enhances meat quality across various types but also curtails antibiotic use in livestock, thereby mitigating the antibiotic resistance crisis. Furthermore, it can reduce the waste generated by animal farming and processing by at least sixfold, thereby significantly decreasing environmental degradation. (Statistical data: Statistics Poland 2022; KOWR 2021).
5. The previously dried peatlands in Poland, covering an area of 1.2 million hectares, can be re-watered. As a result, instead of emitting greenhouse gases, they will absorb them, reducing emissions by 34 million tons of CO₂ equivalent annually, accounting for 8.5% of Poland’s total emissions. This will also greatly benefit environmental biodiversity. Peatlands protect against droughts and floods, improve water quality, and can be used for fodder production and building materials (Diggelen 2018; Romanowska 2019).

As we can see, the scale of positive outcomes from reducing meat consumption is surprisingly large and significantly distances us from the disaster scientists predict from industrial fields and barns. Achieving this by reducing meat consumption to less than half, from 85 to 45 kg per person per year, is feasible. This will also improve the quality and structure of our diets as we move away from industrial farm meats and double our fish and seafood consumption. It is important to note that the current global average meat consumption is 40 kg per person per year, but it is 80-120 kg in the Global North.

In this context, let us consider the suggestions of scientists. In 2019, the results of a 3-year study by a group of 37 scientists from 16 countries on healthy diets from sustainable food systems were published in the prestigious journal “The Lancet.” According to them, meat consumption should be limited to 16 kg per person per year. Researchers from the University of Leeds and the firm Arup also propose a limit of 16 kg per person per year with further reduction (The Lancet 2019; CAKE 2021). I suggest less radical solutions for many reasons that are worth mentioning:

• plant protein is less easily absorbed by our body than animal protein,
• animal protein contains a full range of amino acids, including those that the body cannot synthesize. From this perspective, legumes and nuts have the highest level of substitution,
• many important minerals and micronutrients essential for health are only provided by meat or fish and seafood,
• switching to vegetarianism or veganism often requires constant diet balancing with the help of dietitians as well as doctors, such as cardiologists (Hoffmann, Górnicka, Jędrzejczyk 2009; Kapusta 2012).

This far-reaching transformation in food production and consumption requires meeting several conditions. First, changing the organization and financing systems of agriculture and rural areas is necessary. In the next two monographs, the team of Prof. W. Misiąg presented the state of affairs and the necessary changes in the form of 54 specific recommendations. This is the basis for the effective implementation of my proposal.

Another essential condition is the introduction of a reliable economic calculation of food production. Currently, indirect costs in industrial food production, i.e. greenhouse gas emissions, environmental devastation, loss of health, and bad eating habits, are completely overlooked. The suffering of animals should not be ignored either.

Below, I present my proposal for estimating the indirect costs of meat production.

In the context of greenhouse gas emissions, the EU has established a system where energy producers using fossil fuels, metal alloys, ceramics, etc., must purchase emission rights. Given that agriculture and livestock farming contribute 35% of greenhouse gas emissions in the entire process from farm to consumer, amounting to 18 billion tons of CO₂ equivalent per year, it is crucial to extend this emission rights purchase requirement to these sectors, too. The EU is actively working towards implementing this measure.

Annually, Poland emits about 400 million tons of CO₂ equivalent, with 35% (140 million tons) from agriculture and livestock farming. This figure is likely higher as Poland’s meat and milk production per unit of agricultural land is six times the global average. Assuming an emission right cost of 85 euros per ton of CO₂ equivalent, this amounts to 12 billion euros, which should be allocated for transformation or consumer protection if meat costs significantly increase. Implementing my solution across the EU could generate up to 120 billion euros from emission rights sales. Furthermore, Poland’s share of EU greenhouse gas emissions is just over 10%, despite only contributing 3.1% to the EU’s GDP (From Farm to Fork Strategy; Rural Development Foundation; AgroFakt; MWiR).

Industrial food production plays a major role in environmental degradation, including the loss of biodiversity. The IPCC (IPCC-2022) reports that such damage imposes a yearly cost of 2.7 trillion USD on the global economy, with food production and processing responsible for 70% of these losses (Dasgupta 2019; IPCC 2022). Given that 75% of farmland is used for meat production, and we produce 320 million tons per year, the environmental cost per 1 ton of meat amounts to:

2.7 trillion x 0.7 x 0.75 = 1.42 trillion USD

1.42 trillion : 320 million tons = 4.44 thousand USD/ton

Thus, if industrial meat production decreases from 5.3 million tons to 0.95 million tons, as proposed, environmental losses will be reduced by:

4.35 million tons x 4.44 thousand USD = 19.31 billion USD per year (Dasgupta 2019; IPCC 2022)

What is more, this year’s UN report, endorsed by WHO and FAO (2023), states that the global economy is now losing 3 trillion USD annually due to environmental degradation, an increase of 300 billion USD within a year! Additionally, some Western countries are considering implementing relevant taxes. I believe that accurately determining the scale of indirect costs offers a better solution than a generic tax approach.

It is important to highlight the significant and constructive activity of the EU. The implementation of the EU’s strategic program, “the European Green Deal,” has begun. This program will support the development of plant-based protein production at the expense of animal protein. It also aims to reduce the use of chemical substances by 50%, artificial fertilizers by 20%, and antibiotics in animals by 50% by 2030. The development of organic farms will be supported, with the goal to produce organic food on 25% of agricultural land by 2030. Currently, it is 8.5%, and only 3% in Poland.

Let us, therefore, indicate the sources of financing the transformation:

• currently, nearly 20% of the EU’s annual budget, amounting to 30 billion euros, is allocated as subsidies to farms engaged in industrial livestock rearing or feed production. In Poland, around 800,000 people receive direct subsidies (7 billion PLN/year) even though they do not cultivate land, often having leased it without a formal agreement. Meanwhile, at least 10 billion PLN/year in EU subsidies go to farmers and breeders using industrial food production systems. These funds should be redirected to support agricultural production and animal husbandry that are carried out in harmony with nature,
• for the transformation, about 12 billion euros per year can be utilized from the revenue generated through the sale of greenhouse gas emission rights. Implementing my proposal across the EU could yield 120 billion euros annually,
• from this, it follows that in the EU, up to 150 billion euros per year (30 + 120 billion) can be allocated for transforming the food production system. Of course, the 120 billion euro figure is expected to gradually decrease as meat production is reduced in line with the proposed solution (From Farm to Fork Strategy; Rural Development Foundation; AgroFakt; MwiR),
• under the “Horizon Europe” program, 10 billion euros will be allocated for research related to ecological food production methods. This funding should cover research on biostimulants and biological substitutes for chemical substances used in food production, processing, and storage (“Horizon Europe” Program),
• on the cost side, we must also consider supporting industrial food producers through their necessary transformation. However, accurate economic accounting and increasing public awareness should effectively encourage them to undertake this transformation,
• within the current decade, the EU plans to allocate at least 1 trillion euros for investments to achieve the goals set in the European Green Deal. However, it is important to note that the focus in relevant documents is primarily on climate objectives. There is hope that investments in changing the food production system will dynamically increase.

As we can see, there are sufficient financial resources for the proposed transformation and potential consumer protection if the prices of organic meat significantly increase. There are reasons to believe that with large-scale, nature-friendly animal husbandry, the cost of such meat will not significantly rise and will certainly be lower than industrial meat, especially when indirect costs are taken into account.

It should be emphasized that as a result of these changes, the condition of the environment, food quality, and, therefore, human health will improve over time. Therefore, healthcare costs, which are currently higher than food expenses, will decrease (Statistics Poland 2021; National Health Account 2022; Hołdys et al. 2023).

Another essential condition is large-scale education about the need for changes in food production systems, healthy eating, dietetics, and health prevention. This should be done not only through schools but also through the media. (Terlecka et al. 2014 | NIK Report 2021 | EU reports on poor-quality food).

We must understand that our prosperous future lies in harmony with nature, not in its ruthless exploitation. The current state of knowledge, or rather ignorance, will be a significant barrier to effectively implementing necessary changes (Terlecka et al. 2014). Expenditure on health prevention is below 1% of total healthcare spending, which is almost unacceptable. From an economic perspective, it is better to prevent than to treat illnesses.

Only a society that is educated and aware of the current situation can effectively encourage politicians to take determined actions.

Summary

1. Continuing industrial food production entraps farmers and breeders in a rat race. To survive, they increase productivity at the expense of the environment and their and our health. Yet, the biggest profits are reaped by intermediaries, farm owners, international consortia, and investment funds, leaving farmers with meager returns. For example, a farmer receives only 0.8 PLN for 1 kg of wheat, while 1 kg of bread costs 8-20 PLN (10-25 times more). The well-being of 38 million Poles should not be held hostage to profit-extracting experts!

It is impossible to ensure decent profitability in food production while respecting health, the environment, and people without abandoning barbaric methods of farming and animal husbandry. Those who claim to care about farmers should demonstrate that there are better ways!

There’s no defence for poor food quality, as highlighted by both the Supreme Audit Office and EU reports that place us among the “leaders” in this regard (NIK Report 2021; EU Report 2022). Examples of fraud in the food sector, including organic food, are concerning. Therefore, tightening legal regulations and ensuring their effective enforcement is urgent. Food, being akin to medicine, should be subject to rigorous standards throughout the production process to guarantee quality and health safety.

By continuing with the current system, we will not only fall behind Ukraine’s fertile chernozem soils but also miss out on EU funds for transforming our food production system.

A gradual shift away from industrial agriculture towards farming and animal husbandry in symbiosis with nature is proposed as a solution to the accumulating problems in agriculture and rural areas. The focus should be on agroecology and food sovereignty, with a system based on knowledge and understanding of nature rather than solely on profit. This shift would lead to, among others, shorter supply chains, local cooperation, small-scale processing, and the development of markets with food quality control. Such changes are expected to provide a developmental boost for rural areas and small towns. The countryside will no longer be a place for distributing EU social contributions and state budget funds or merely a “bedroom” community. Medium-sized and specialized small farms will regain profitability. The rural areas will start to do what they should always have done – produce food in harmony with nature for our health and their own prosperity. Such a countryside will become a magnet for people tired of urban noise and seeking socially beneficial contact with nature.

Everyone, especially our health, will benefit. The amount of toxic waste will decrease radically, and greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced by at least 20%, saving the environment and climate. This is crucial, as the West is misdiagnosing its problems with demographics and healthcare. These issues cannot be resolved without improving human health and well-being.

2. The number of farms worldwide is steadily declining. According to FAO forecasts, by 2100, the number will decrease from 616 million to 272 million. In the EU, the count fell from 14.3 million to 9 million over 15 years. The USA, with twice the agricultural land area of the EU (361 million hectares), has only 2 million farms. This is accompanied by an increasing average age of farmers (57 years in the EU). These harmful trends need to be halted, especially since agroecological methods imply increased employment in agriculture. The rapid development of artificial intelligence, which will replace many jobs, supports this shift. Instead of awaiting a rise in unemployment, we should develop the job market in harmony with nature for mutual benefits.

3. It should be emphasized that China has the largest share in terms of greenhouse gas emissions and environmental devastation. It is home to 16% of the world’s population but accounts for 33% of artificial fertilizer use (7.5 times higher than the global average per hectare), 40% of pesticide use, and 28% of meat production (which has increased 40 times since 1961). Additionally, China’s share in energy consumption is 25% (50% higher than the global average per capita) and 31% in plastic production.

4. Unfortunately, the World Bank and many governments support the industrial food production system. According to Professor P. Dasgupta’s team from the University of Cambridge, subsidies for such food production reach 5-7% of global GDP (nearly 6 trillion USD). The IMF (International Monetary Fund) states that subsidies to fossil fuel energy producers amount to 7 trillion USD. Therefore, the total value of these toxic subsidies is around 13 trillion USD – for activities that should be ended as soon as possible for the good of civilization! FAO notes that a full daily diet per person costs 4 USD. Hence, it implies that 90% of the harmful subsidies could be used to feed the entire human population! Additionally, it is worth noting that over 30 trillion USD is stored in tax havens.

5. As I have demonstrated, ample financial resources are available for the necessary transformation. It is frustrating that only a bit of decency, moderation, and basic concern for others is needed to return to a lost paradise instead of marching blindly into hell. Time is limited and perhaps very short. We have little time, perhaps very little.

References

1. Adamski D., 2023, Dariusz Adamski: Konserwatywny upadek polskiej wsi. [own translation: Dariusz Adamski: The Conservative Decline of the Polish Countryside].

Link: Dariusz Adamski: Konserwatywny upadek polskiej wsi – rp.pl

2. pl – portal rolniczy: uprawa, hodowla, dopłaty, ceny. [own translation: AgroFakt.pl – Agriculture Portal: Cultivation, Breeding, Subsidies, Prices] https://www.agrofakt.pl/.
3. The Agency for Restructuring and Modernisation of Agriculture – Portal Gov.pl. https://www.gov.pl/web/arimr.
4. pl World: The number of the world’s farms to halve by 2100, study shows

Link: World: The number of the world’s farms to halve by 2100, study shows – Agronomist(17.05.2023)

5. The Agency for Restructuring and Modernisation of Agriculture – Portal Gov.pl. https://www.gov.pl/web/arimr.

Średnia powierzchnia gruntów rolnych w gospodarstwie w 2023 roku. [own translation: Average Size of Agricultural Land in Farms in 2023]

Link: Średnia powierzchnia gruntów rolnych w gospodarstwie w 2023 roku – Agencja Restrukturyzacji i Modernizacji Rolnictwa – Portal Gov.pl (www.gov.pl)

6. Atlas Mięsa [Meat Atlas] 2022 | Heinrich Böll Foundation | Central Europe Regional Office; Poland, Warsaw https://pl.boell.org/pl/2022/02/14/atlas-miesa-2022
7. Badanie-nasienia.pl Metale ciężkie (ołów i kadm), a jakość nasienia [own translation: Heavy Metals (Lead and Cadmium) and Sperm Quality].

Link: Metale ciężkie (ołów i kadm), a jakość nasienia | Badanie nasienia (badanie-nasienia.pl)( 14 September 2011).

8. Biskupski R.,2023, Susza w Polsce. Zaczyna brakować wody. [own translation: Drought in Poland. Beginning to Lack Water].

Link: Susza w Polsce. Zaczyna brakować wody – rp.pl

9. Bez nawozów, bez oprysków, z kontrolą laboratoryjną: rolnictwo i przemysł zbożowy szukają ekologicznych rozwiązań. [own translation: Without Fertilizers, Without Sprays, with Laboratory Oversight: Agriculture and the Cereal Industry Seek Ecological Solutions].

wyborcza.pl https://wyborcza.pl/AkcjeSpecjalne/7,181470,28012514,bez-nawozow-bez-opryskow-z-kontrola-laboratoryjna-rolnicto.html (2022).

10. Bogužas, V. et al. The Effect of Monoculture, Crop Rotation Combinations, and Continuous Bare Fallow on Soil CO₂ Emissions, Earthworms, and Productivity of Winter Rye after a 50-Year Period. Plants 11, 431 (2022).
11. Bureau, U. C. Census.gov https://www.census.gov/en.html
12. The Center for Citizenship Education – Migranci klimatyczni [own translation: Climate Migrants].

Link: migranci_klimatyczni_-_podstawowe_informacje.pdf (ceo.org.pl)

13. Całka J., 2023, Prof. Całka: mikroplastik może być przyczyną nowotworów [own translation: Prof. Całka: Microplastics May Be a Cause of Cancer].

Link: Prof. Całka: mikroplastik może być przyczyną nowotworów – rp.pl

14. Całka M., Pawlica P.J., 2019, The impact of air pollution on fertility. Journal of Life and Medical Sciences, Nauki Przyrodnicze i Medyczne 4(26):3-11.
15. Crippa, M. et al. Food systems are responsible for a third of global anthropogenic GHG emissions. Nat Food 2, 198–209 (2021).
16. Cheng, M., McCarl, B., Fei, C. Climate Change and Livestock Production: A Literature Review. Atmosphere 13, 140 (2022).
17. Chów przemysłowy zwierząt – dobry czy zły? [own translation: Industrial Livestock Farming – Good or Bad?]. Rural Development Foundation. https://fundacjawspomaganiawsi.pl/chow-przemyslowy-zwierzat-dobry-czy-zly/ (2019).
18. Co uprawia się w Polsce? Powierzchnia zasiewów roślin rolniczych [own translation: What is Cultivated in Poland? The Area of Agricultural Crop Sowing].pl. https://terazpole.pl/wokol-pola/co-uprawia-sie-w-polsce-powierzchnia-zasiewow-roslin-rolniczych/ (2021).
19. Dasgupta, P. The economics of biodiversity: the Dasgupta review: full report. (HM Treasury, 2021).
20. Decyzje w sprawie skarg zbiorowych. [own translation: Decisions on Collective Complaints]. https://commission.europa.eu/content/decisions-and-other-notices-multiple-complaints_pl.
21. DeSchutter, O. System produkcji żywności do kapitalnego remontu. [own translation: The Food Production System Needs a Major Overhaul]. Zielone Wiadomości https://zielonewiadomosci.pl/tematy/ekologia/system-produkcji-zywnosci-do-kapitalnego-remontu/ (2018).
22. [own translation: Subsidies] Strefa Agro https://strefaagro.pl/doplaty (2023).
23. Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT–Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems – The Lancet. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(18)31788-4/fulltext.
24. Diggelen, R. Mires and Peatlands of Europe: Status, Distribution and Conservation. Restoration Ecology 26, (2018).
25. Focused Adaptation: A Strategic Approach to Climate Adaptation in Cities | CAKE: Climate Adaptation Knowledge Exchange. https://www.cakex.org/documents/focused-adaptation-strategic-approach-climate-adaptation-cities.
26. Ekonomiczny opas bydła. [own translation: Economic Fattening of Cattle]. http://www.agrolok.pl/artykuly/ekonomiczny-opas-bydla-.htm
27. Ekspertyza „Woda w rolnictwie” – poznaj diagnozę problemów niedoborów wody w Polsce oraz propozycje ich rozwiązania. [own translation: Expertise „Water in Agriculture” – Understanding the Diagnosis of Water Shortages in Poland and Proposals for Their Solutions]. KSOW https://ksow.pl/aktualnosc/ekspertyza-woda-w-rolnictwie-poznaj-diagnoze-problemow-niedoborow-wody-w-polsce-oraz-propozycje-ich-rozwiazania (2021).
28. Environment, U. N. About UN Environment Programme. UNEP – UN Environment Programme http://www.unep.org/about-un-environment (2017).
29. The European Climate Pact. https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/european-green-deal/european-climate-pact_pl.
30. European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/PL/TXT/HTML/?uri=LEGISSUM:0301_1.

31. European Green Deal – New European Development Vision. https://raport.togetair.eu/human/people-the-world-the-climate/european-green-deal-new-european-development-vision
32. European Commission. Frequently Asked Questions: Revision of the Pharmaceutical Legislation.

Link: Q&A: Revision of the Pharmaceutical legislation (europa.eu)

33. European Parliament. REPORT on a pharmaceutical strategy for Europe

Link: REPORT on a pharmaceutical strategy for Europe | A9-0317/2021 | European Parliament (europa.eu)( 08.11.2021).

34. Every Drop Counts | Ogden, UT. https://www.ogdencity.com/515/Every-Drop-Counts.
35. Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT–Lancet Commission on healthy diets…. Oxford Martin School https://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/publications/food-in-the-anthropocene-the-eat-lancet-commission-on-healthy-diets-from-sustainable-food-systems/
36. pl Męskość cierpi z powodu wszechobecnej chemii. Szkodliwy wpływ na liczbę plemników, a nawet rozmiar penisa (2021). [own translation: Masculinity Affected by Ubiquitous Chemicals: Detrimental Influence on Sperm Count and Even Penis Size].

Link: Męskość cierpi z powodu wszechobecnej chemii. Szkodliwy wpływ na liczbę plemników, a nawet rozmiar penisa (focus.pl)

37. Feeding a thirsty world: Challenges and opportunities for a water and food secure world (2012 World Water Week report). SIWI – Leading expert in water governance https://siwi.org/publications/2012-world-water-week-report-feeding-a-thirsty-world-challenges-and-opportunities-for-a-water-and-food-secure-world/.
38. Fedorska A., 2021, Wieloryby ratują klimat. [own translation: Whales Save the Climate].

Link: https://energia.rp.pl/klimat/art17031251-wieloryby-ratuja-klimat

39. From Farm to Fork Strategy. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/from-farm-to-fork/ (2022).
40. Giorgi, M. D. The rise and fall of monoculture farming. EIP-AGRI – European Commission https://ec.europa.eu/eip/agriculture/en/news/%E2%80%9C-rise-and-fall-monoculture-farming%E2%80%9D (2022).
41. Grossi, G., Goglio, P., Vitali, A., Williams, A. G. Livestock and climate change: impact of livestock on climate and mitigation strategies. Anim Front 9, 69–76 (2018).
42. González-Comadran M., Jacquemin B., Cirach M., et. al. 2021, The effect of short term exposure to outdoor air pollution on fertility, Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology 19, 151.
43. Handel zagraniczny produktami rolno-spożywczymi [own translation: Foreign Trade in Agri-food Products]. Krajowy Ośrodek Wsparcia Rolnictwa (KOWR). [National Centre of Agricultural Support]. https://www.kowr.gov.pl/analiza/handel-zagraniczny-produktami-rolno-spozywczymi.
44. Hołdys, A. Niebieska alternatywa, czyli czas polubić owoce morza. [own translation: The Blue Alternative: Time to Appreciate Seafood]. https://www.projektpulsar.pl/czlowiek/2206242,1,niebieska-alternatywa-czyli-czas-polubic-owoce-morza.read (100AD).
45. Hoffmann, M., Górnicka, M., Jędrzejczyk, H. Zamienniki białka zwierzęcego – technologia, wartość odżywcza, możliwości wykorzystania. Część I. Nietradycyjne źródła białka – produkty sojowe fermentowane. [own translation: Substitutes for Animal Protein – Technology, Nutritional Value, Utilization Opportunities. Part I. Non-Traditional Protein Sources – Fermented Soy Products]. Postępy Techniki Przetwórstwa Spożywczego nr 1, 75–80 (2009).
46. Infographic: Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the European Union by Pollutant| News |European Parliament]. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/society/20180301STO98928/greenhouse-gas-emissions-by-country-and-sector-infographic (2018).
47. Ionescu A., 2023, The world will have half as many farms by the end of the century

Link: The world will have half as many farms by the end of the century • Earth.com

48. pl Ile tlenu pochodzi z oceanu? Drugie płuco planety

    [own translation: How much oxygen comes from the ocean? The planet’s second lung]

Link: Ile tlenu pochodzi z oceanu? Drugie płuco planety [wideo] – GospodarkaMorska.pl

49. Ośrodek Działań Ekologicznych. Ocean-Drugie Płuco Planety [own translation: The Ocean – The Planet’s Second Lung].

Link: Ocean – drugie płuco planety (woda.edu.pl)

50. Jägerskog, A., Clausen, T. J. Institute, (SIWI) Stockholm International Water. Feeding a thirsty world: challenges and opportunities for a water and food secure future. (SIWI, 2012).
51. Jedynka – polskieradio.pl. Jedynka – Polish Radio https://jedynka.polskieradio.pl/artykul/3119807,Zostal-ostatni-kontrakt-Orlenu-ale-czekamy-na-sankcje-Anna-Moskwa-o-imporcie-paliw-z-Rosji [own translation: The Last Contract Remains, but We Await Sanctions: Anna Moskwa on Fuel Imports from Russia].
52. Karaczun, Z. Na kombajnie do katastrofy. [own translation: On a Combine Harvester to Catastrophe]. Gazeta Wyborcza (2021).
53. Kapusta, F. Rośliny strączkowe źródłem białka dla ludzi i zwierząt. [own translation: Leguminous Plants as a Protein Source for Humans and Animals]. Nauki Inżynierskie i Technologie / Wroclaw University of Economics 16–32 (2012).
54. Kramarz, P. Jak nakarmić świat w dobie kryzysu klimatyczno- -ekologicznego, in: Jasikowska, K., Pałasz, M. (eds.), Za pięć dwunasta koniec świata. Kryzys klimatyczno-ekologiczny głosem wielu nauk. Kraków: Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie, Biblioteka Jagiellońska, pp. 415–454. za512.uj.edu.pl (2022). [own translation: How to feed the world in the age of climate and ecological crisis, in: Jasikowska, K., Pałasz, M. (eds.), Five to Twelve: The End of the World. The Climate and Ecological Crisis through the Voice of Many Sciences. Cracow: Jagiellonian University, Jagiellonian Library, pp. 415–454.]
55. Kramarz, P., 2023, Papka czy żywność? Technologie czy przyroda? [own translation: Mash or Food? Technology or Nature?].

Link: https://zielonyblog.wsiz.edu.pl/papka-czy-zywnosc-technologie-czy-przyroda/

56. Kramarz P., 2023, Nie będzie żywności bez bioróżnorodności. „Przybij piątkę nauce”. [own translation: No Food Without Biodiversity. Lecture part of the series “High Five to Science”].

Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJ3OkrjvMG4

57. Kościański J., 2022, FAO: na świecie jest 4,74 miliarda hektarów gruntów rolnych. [own translation: FAO: There are 4.74 Billion Hectares of Agricultural Land Worldwide].

Link: FAO: na świecie jest 4,74 miliarda hektarów gruntów rolnych (farmer.pl)

58. Klimatyczna baza wiedzy [own translation: Climate Knowledge Base]. Klimatyczna Baza Wiedzy
59. Lipko M., 2018, Niedobór jodu wpływa negatywnie na płodność [own translation: Iodine Deficiency Negatively Affects Fertility].

Link: Niedobór jodu wpływa negatywnie na płodność – Ginekologia – Termedia

60. Kossobudzka M., 2023, Suplementy cynku mogą leczyć uszkodzenia płuc? [own translation: Can Zinc Supplements Treat Lung Damage?].

Link: Suplementy cynku mogą leczyć uszkodzenia płuc? (wyborcza.pl)

61. Jaki Potencjał Mają Odnawialne Źródła Energii (OZE) w Polsce? [own translation: What Potential Do Renewable Energy Sources Have in Poland?]. pl Link: https://ideologia.pl/odnawialne-zrodla-energii-oze-w-polsce/ (2017).
62. Livestock and climate change: impact of livestock on climate and mitigation strategies | Animal Frontiers | Oxford Academic.

Link: https://academic.oup.com/af/article/9/1/69/5173494?login=true.

63. Mazur, J. Eurostat: W UE już 37% energii pochodzi z odnawialnych źródeł. [own translation: Eurostat: 37% of Energy in the EU Comes from Renewable Sources]. Magazyny energii

Link:https://e-magazyny.pl/zielone-wiadomosci/eurostat-w-ue-juz-37-energii-pochodzi-z-odnawialnych-zrodel/(2022).

64. Miesięcznik – Forum Energii [own translation: Energy Forum Monthly]. http://www.forum-energii.eu/pl/dane-o-energetyce/miesiecznik.
65. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. Portal Gov.pl. https://www.gov.pl/web/rolnictwo(2023).
66. Misiąg J., Misiąg W., 2023, Jak skutecznie wspierać wieś i rolnictwo? [own translation: How to Effectively Support the Countryside and Agriculture?].

Link: Jak skutecznie wspierać wieś i rolnictwo? – Zielony blog WSIiZ (wsiz.edu.pl)

67. Mikołuszko W., 2023 Płeć męska do naprawy! Liczby nie kłamią: źle się dzieje z mężczyznami. [own translation: Male Gender in Need of Repair! Numbers Don’t Lie: Bad Things Happening to Men].

Link: Płeć męska do naprawy! Liczby nie kłamią: źle się dzieje z mężczyznami (polityka.pl)

68. Michalak A., 2019, Liczba plemników maleje. To wina tworzyw sztucznych? [own translation: Sperm Count Decreases. Is It Due to Plastics?].

Link: Liczba plemników maleje. To wina tworzyw sztucznych? – rp.pl

69. Metody żywienia bydła opasowego – Technologia Produkcji Rolniczej. [own translation: Feeding Methods for Beef Cattle – Agricultural Production Technology]. https://technologia.kpodr.pl/index.php/2020/04/15/metody-zywienia-bydla-opasowego/ (2020).
70. Meat Consumption and Sustainability | Annual Review of Resource Economics. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-resource-111820-032340.
71. Mniej mięsa, rezygnacja z aut. Kukiz o raporcie C40 Cities: To brzmi jak Orwell. Dom wariatów. [own translation: Less Meat, Giving Up Cars. Kukiz on the C40 Cities Report: Sounds Like Orwellian Madness]. Wprost https://www.wprost.pl/opinie-i-komentarze/11096320/mniej-miesa-rezygnacja-z-aut-kukiz-o-raporcie-c40-cities-to-brzmi-jak-orwell-dom-wariatow.html (2023).
72. Monoculture Farming Explained: What Are The Pros And Cons? https://eos.com/blog/monoculture-farming/ (2020).
73. Monbiot G., 2022, The secret world beneath our feet is mind-blowing – and the key to our planet’s future.

Link: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/may/07/secret-world-beneath-our-feet-mind-blowing-key-to-planets-future

74. Mozolewska P., 2023, Co z płodnością przyszłych pokoleń? [own translation: What About the Fertility of Future Generations?].

Link: PressReader.com – Repliki gazet z całego świata

75. Mulak D., W Unii Europejskiej ubyło 5,3 mln gospodarstw rolnych! [own translation: In the European Union, 5.3 Million Farms Have Disappeared!].

Link: https://www.topagrar.pl/articles/aktualnosci/w-unii-europejskiej-ubylo-5-3-mln-gospodarstw-rolnych-2454446 (05.04.2023).

76. Naszkowska K., Dla kogo dopłaty rolne? KE chce zmian, [own translation: For Whom Are the Agricultural Subsidies? The European Commission Seeks Changes]. Gazeta Wyborcza (2021).
77. Nations, U. World Population Prospects 2019: Highlights. United Nations https://www.un.org/en/desa/world-population-prospects-2019-highlights(2019)
78. Niedźwiecka B. Przemysłowe hodowle zwierząt – środowiskowa i etyczna katastrofa. [own translation: Industrial Animal Farming – An Environmental and Ethical Disaster].
79. National Institute of Public Health – National Institute of Hygiene. https://www.pzh.gov.pl/.
80. Nauka dla Przyrody. Przemysłowe hodowle zwierząt – środowiskowa i etyczna katastrofa https://naukadlaprzyrody.pl/2021/04/05/przemyslowe-hodowle-zwierzat-srodowiskowa-i-etyczna-katastrofa/ (2021). [own translation: Industrial Animal Farming – An Environmental and Ethical Disaster].
81. NYELENI POLSKA – RUCH SUWERENNOŚCI ŻYWNOŚCIOWEJ. Agroekologia jako alternatywa dla rolnictwa przyjaznego dla klimatu. [own translation: Agroecology as an Alternative for Climate-Friendly Agriculture].

Link: Agroekologia jako alternatywa dla rolnictwa przyjaznego dla klimatu – NYELENI POLSKA – RUCH SUWERENNOŚCI ŻYWNOŚCIOWEJ

82. Odnawialne Źródła Energii – OZE w pigułce. [own translation: Renewable Energy Sources – RES in a Nutshell]. ON Polska. https://eon.pl/dla-domu/portal-o-odnawialnych-zrodlach-energii/zielona-energia/odnawialne-zrodla-energii.
83. Our World in Data. Our World in Data https://ourworldindata.org.
84. Ocean – drugie płuco planety. Woda nas uwodzi – projekt ekologiczny [own translation: The Ocean – The Planet’s Second Lung: Water Seducing Us]. https://www.woda.edu.pl/artykuly/ocean/.
85. Pękalska A., 2023, Agroekologia. Jak budować lokalne i sprawiedliwe systemy żywnościowe. [own translation: Agroecology: How to Build Local and Fair Food Systems].

Link: Agroekologia. Jak budować lokalne i sprawiedliwe systemy żywnościowe – Kupuj odpowiedzialnie (ekonsument.pl)

86. Poore, J., Nemecek, T. Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science 360, 987–992 (2018).
87. Produkcja roślinna też pożera planetę. Ponad połowę wykorzystujemy, by karmić zwierzęta. [own translation: Plant Production Also Devours the Planet: Over Half Used to Feed Animals]. https://wyborcza.pl/AkcjeSpecjalne/7,181470,28090131,produkcja-roslinna-tez-pozera-planete-ponad-polowe-wykorzystujemy.html.
88. Polski Instytut Ekonomiczny. [Polish Economic Institute]. Strona główna – Polski Instytut Ekonomiczny (pie.net.pl)
89. Pimbert M., 2018, Agroekologia jako alternatywa dla rolnictwa przyjaznego dla klimatu. [own translation: Agroecology as an Alternative for Climate-Friendly Agriculture].

Link: Agroekologia jako alternatywa dla rolnictwa przyjaznego dla klimatu – Zielone Wiadomości (zielonewiadomosci.pl)

90. Report “Focused adaptation: A strategic approach to climate adaptation in cities.” C40 Cities and McKinsey Sustainability, 2021.

https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/business%20functions/sustainability/our%20insights/how%20cities%20can%20adapt%20to%20climate%20change/focused-adaptation-a-strategic-approach-to-climate-adaptation-in-cities-vf.pdf

91. Razem dla planety i wszystkich jej mieszkańców – Greenpeace Polska. [own translation: Together for the Planet and All Its Inhabitants]. https://www.greenpeace.org/poland/
92. Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers | Science. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aaq0216
93. Rekordowy udział źródeł odnawialnych w światowej produkcji energii. 2023 rokiem przełomu? [own translation: Record Share of Renewables in Global Energy Production. 2023 a Breakthrough Year?]. https://oko.press/rekordowy-udzial-zrodel-odnawialnych-w-swiatowej-produkcji-energii-2023-rokiem-przelomu
94. Romanowska, D. Superbakterie coraz trudniejsze do zwalczenia. Co nam grozi? [own translation: Superbacteria Increasingly Hard to Combat: What is the Threat?]. Newsweek https://www.newsweek.pl/zdrowie-i-nauka/nauka/medycyna-dlaczego-antybiotyki-coraz-slabiej-dzialaja-co-nam-grozi/bbt857j
95. https://c40.my.salesforce.com/sfc/p/#36000001Enhz/a/1Q000000A9MA/ZOxO84.z876AUV3tsOFiauSxBcppcUFz0tqEr5xFz7g
96. Salaheen S., Biswas D. Chapter 2 – Organic Farming Practices: Integrated Culture Versus Monoculture (eds.) Debabrata Biswas, Shirley A. Micallef, Safety and Practice for Organic Food, Academic Press, 23-32 (2019).
97. Sandström, V. et al. The role of trade in the greenhouse gas footprints of EU diets. Global Food Security 19, 48–55 (2018).
98. Shi, R., Irfan, M., Liu, G., Yang, X., Su, X. Analysis of the Impact of Livestock Structure on Carbon Emissions of Animal Husbandry: A Sustainable Way to Improving Public Health and Green Environment. Frontiers in Public Health 10, (2022).
99. Skoczylas J., 2021, Agroekologia – droga do zrównoważonego systemu rolnego i sprawiedliwości społecznej. [own translation: Agroecology – The Path to a Sustainable Agricultural System and Social Justice].

Link: Agroekologia – droga do zrównoważonego systemu rolnego i sprawiedliwości społecznej – Zielone Wiadomości (zielonewiadomosci.pl)

• Soil Association Link: https://www.soilassociation.org/
• Serwis Samorządowy PAP: Wojciechowski: W ciągu dekady w Europie ubyło 3 mln gospodarstw rolnych czyli 25 proc. [own translation: Local Government Service of PAP: Wojciechowski: Over a Decade in Europe, 3 Million Farms Lost, 25% of All].

Link: Wojciechowski: W ciągu dekady w Europie ubyło 3 mln gospodarstw rolnych czyli 25 proc. wszystkich | Serwis Samorządowy PAP(05.12.2022)

• Statistics Poland / Metainformation / Description of economic indicators / Description of economic indicators announced by the President of the Statistics Poland/ National Health Account https://stat.gov.pl/en/metainformation/description-of-economic-indicators/description-of-economic-indicators-cso/national-health-account-1370/
• Szałaj K., 2023, Ilu rolników prowadzi gospodarstwo, a ilu tylko pobiera dopłaty bezpośrednie? [own translation: How Many Farmers Run a Farm, and How Many Just Receive Direct Payments?].

Link: Ilu rolników prowadzi gospodarstwo, a ilu tylko pobiera dopłaty bezpośrednie? (tygodnik-rolniczy.pl)

• Świat Przemysłu Farmaceutycznego. PMR: Wartość dystrybucji farmaceutycznej w Polsce w 2021 r. wyniosła 56 mln. zł. [own translation: World of Pharmaceutical Industry. Value of Pharmaceutical Distribution in Poland in 2021 Reached 56 Million PLN]

Link: PMR: wartość dystrybucji farmaceutycznej w Polsce w 2021 r. wyniosł | Farmacom (przemyslfarmaceutyczny.pl)

• Terlecka, M. K. et al. Edukacja ekologiczna. Wybrane problemy. [own translation: Ecological Education: Selected Issues]. (2014).
• Torfowiska a klimat. [own translation: Peatlands and Climate]. Centrum Ochrony Mokradeł. https://bagna.pl/zglebiaj-wiedze/torfowiska-a-klimat (2023).
• The future of urban consumption in a 1.5°C world – C40 cities by C40 Cities – Issuu. https://issuu.com/c40cities/docs/c40_cbe_mainreport_190613 (2019).
• The rise and fall of monoculture farming | Research and Innovation. https://ec.europa.eu/research-and-innovation/en/horizon-magazine/rise-and-fall-monoculture-farming (2022).
• Trzeba jeść mniej mięsa i pozbyć się aut. Klimatyczne zaciskanie pasa w stolicy. [own translation: Eating Less Meat and Ditching Cars: Climate Belt-Tightening in the Capital]. https://www.gazetaprawna.pl/wiadomosci/kraj/artykuly/8661056,warszawa-miasta-c40-ochrona-klimatu-jedzenie-miesa-auta-rekomendacje.html (100AD).
• Tygodnik Poradnik Rolniczy – portal rolniczy. Rolnictwo i wieś. [own translation: Agriculture and rural areas.] https://www.tygodnik-rolniczy.pl/rolnictwo
• Ulanowski T., 2022, Ziemia. Część 3. Jak nakarmić świat? [in:] Soczewka Pisma: Ziemia [own translation: Earth. Part 3: How to Feed the World?]
• Urhahn J., Pohl Ch., 2018, Agroekologia i RWSy – alternatywy dla rolnictwa przemysłowego. [own translation: Agroecology and RWSs – Alternatives to Industrial Agriculture].
• Link: Agroekologia i RWSy – alternatywy dla rolnictwa przemysłowego | Heinrich Böll Foundation | Central Europe Regional Office; Poland, Warsaw (boell.org)
• Waluś M., Planeta w kształcie soi, [own translation: Planet in the Shape of a Soybean], Gazeta Wyborcza (2022).
• Wantuch D., Na kombajnie do katastrofy, [own translation: On a Combine Harvester to a Catastrophe], Gazeta wyborcza (2021).
• Wantuch D., Dużo, tanio, chemicznie, [own translation: Plenty, Cheap, Chemical], Gazeta wyborcza (2021).
• Warsaw, U. Raport UNFPA: ‘Sytuacja ludności świata 2007’. [UNFPA Report: ‘The State of World Population 2007’]. unic.un.org.pl //www.unic.un.org.pl/swp/2007/streszczenie_raportu.php (2007).
• Willett, W. et al. Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT-Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. Lancet 393, 447–492 (2019)

119. Winiecki J., 2023, Stoimy u progu kryzysu wodnego, bo wciąż tkwimy w micie „polskich bagien i mokradeł”. [own translation: On the Brink of a Water Crisis: The Myth of Polish Swamps and Wetlands].

• Link: Jan Mencwel – wywiad. Susza rolnicza w Polsce. Susza. Woda w Polsce. Kryzys wodny. Niedobory wody w Polsce. Wody gruntowe i zarządzanie wodą. Regulacja rzek, jezior i mokradeł. Katastrofa klimatyczna. [own translation: Jan Mencwel – Interview. Agricultural Drought in Poland. Drought. Water in Poland. Water Crisis. Water Shortages in Poland. Groundwater and Water Management. Regulation of Rivers, Lakes, and Wetlands. Climate Catastrophe] (projektpulsar.pl)
• Wojdak, L. ee-J. Z., Jakub. Ziemia | Pismo. Magazyn Opinii. [own translation: Earth | Opinion Magazine]. https://magazynpismo.pl/ziemia/(2023).
• WWF – Endangered Species Conservation. World Wildlife Fund https://www.worldwildlife.org/
• WWF Water Risk Filter. https://riskfilter.org/water/home
• WWF Living Planet Report® and Living Planet Index® are registered trademarks of WWF International.
• Link: Living_Planet_Report_2020-Full.pdf (wwf.pl)
• VOSviewer – Visualizing scientific landscapes. VOSviewer https://www.vosviewer.com//
• cmsmirage.pl, Cmsm. sp z o o- & Redakcja. Produkcja mięsa przyśpiesza proces globalnego ocieplenia. [own translation: Meat Production Accelerates Global Warming]| ppr.pl. www.ppr.pl http://www.ppr.pl/produkcja-miesa-przyspiesza-proces-globalnego-ocieplenia-156287

128. Zdążyć z opasem bydła w dwa lata. [own translation: Finishing Cattle Fattening in Two Years]. https://www.tygodnik-rolniczy.pl/rolnictwo/zwierzeta/zdazyc-z-opasem-bydla-w-dwa-lata-2374579(2018)