and inside that laboratory is the leo, or the landscape evolution observatory. the leo is the world’s biggest controlled experiment that helps environmental scientists understand how carbon, water, and energy interact to create soil and evolve land over time.

click the presentation below to learn more!

yet, lubbock, texas and the surrounding areas are known as the largest cotton patch in the country, and the lone star state proudly produces 42% of the country’s cotton. a crop used primarily for textile products like blue jeans, cotton is responsible for clothing people worldwide while also providing livelihoods millions of agriculturists.

jeremy brown has been in this industry his entire life. he has seen the impacts of climate change all around him and implemented the six principles of soil health to improve his crop from the ground up. 

the stage was set for an evening session at the world food forum (wff) entitled ‘the great food debate: plant-based vs livestock,’ feeding the idea that there are only two sides to take in this debate. this dichotomy fails to represent the average consumer who identifies somewhere between a vegan and a carnivore, and is largely removed from the reality of how food is produced.

it also fails to take into consideration the plethora of rationales people give for eating less meat or more plants, or neither. not to mention from a global perspective, there is surely no right side to take. this dichotomy also fails to give space to the nuance that is needed to reflect context-specific challenges and opportunities for solutions-oriented discussion.

breaking down the barriers

valuable points were shared and diverse voices were heard on both sides of this table, and across other tables at the wff. namely, high levels of production of animal-source food, particularly livestock, contributes disproportionately to the greenhouse gas emissions and environmental degradation from agrifood systems globally, but sustainable livestock can offer climate benefits. additionally, overconsumption of red and processed meat is associated with increased risk of diet-related chronic disease, but red meat is a good source of vitamin b12. finally, producing livestock is core to many people’s identities and livelihoods, but the effects of climate change disproportionately impact vulnerable communities.

this complexity left many of us asking ‘where do we go from here?’ as one audience-member posed to the panelists after the debate. unfortunately, there was no time for this question to be answered and i was simply left to ponder. this question seemed to encapsulate much of what i was feeling as i went in and out of other events over the course of the week — what do i do next as an individual and what do i take back to d.c.? perhaps this was an unintended consequence of so many topics, so many perspectives, and so little time for in-depth discussion.

after a return to normal life and some time for reflection, i feel simultaneously hopeful that i am not pondering alone. people from all over are thinking about the impact of our food production and consumption on the environment, on livelihoods, on our future – and advocating for an agrifood system transformation that is healthy, sustainable, and socially just.

thinking about how best to communicate this urgency, how to hold governments and corporations accountable, how to empower communities. people are calling for innovation, and not just the start-up kind, but innovative pathways for preserving, scaling, and repurposing traditional knowledge and practices to our urgent crises. but how do we better address this question?

so where do we go from here?

as a fourth year ph.d. candidate in policy, with a passion for agrifood policy and research, here are my suggestions for a path forward.

first, we go in search of common ground. our goals on both sides of the table, collectively as food systems advocates, are largely the same — leading a healthy, sustainable, and socially just agrifood system transformation. and what is standing in the way of this transformation is the power of large corporations in shaping what food we produce, process, distribute, purchase, consume, and ultimately waste. this includes the unsustainable agrifood policies that govern these relationships.

what’s more, most folks in the room seemed to agree that industrial livestock production, particularly in high-income countries like the u.s., is problematic for humans, environment, and livelihoods, suggesting much less of a debate than the name suggests.

next, we go beyond the “what” to the “how,” which requires increasingly context-specific discussions as agrifood system transformations will look different everywhere. this is not to say we can’t learn from contexts beyond our own, but narrowing in can help us avoid a needless debate about meat reduction on a global scale, in which wildly different foodscapes will rightfully differ in their perspectives.

we must be explicit about where change is needed and who has the responsibility to mitigate our food systems’ impact on the health of our planet, ourselves, and others. one encouraging panel discussion in a separate event on alternatives to animal-source foods did just that by acknowledging the need for differentiation between livestock in industrialized western diets and livelihoods and those of pastoralists in the global south.

representatives of the fao and panelists alike were in agreement in their call to consider alternatives to animal-source foods through the lens of nutrition, environmental, food safety, and livelihood impacts. prioritizing a systems perspective in research and in policy-making can allow us to evaluate trade-offs inherent to agrifood system transformation.  

this frame begins to break the dichotomies with a “less, but better” approach, rejecting the notion that sustainable food systems require global veganism and a lack of food choice. in countries like the u.s., where meat is largely produced unsustainably and in excess, as well as over-consumed, regeneratively produced and ethically sourced meat can offer nutritional benefits when consumed in moderation. this also helps alleviate the environmental burden associated with intensive livestock production. even minimal shifts to plant-forward dietary patterns can significantly address the adverse effects of excessive meat consumption, promoting both personal and planetary well-being.

where do we go from here in the u.s.? we need to pursue policies that empower producers and consumers alike to transition to increasingly healthy and sustainable foods, such as minimally processed plant proteins. social norms that justify overconsumption of meat should be broken by demanding attention to agrifood systems as a solution to the climate crisis.

lastly, we need to move toward agrifood policy and advocacy conversations that are inclusive of diverse perspectives, including youth. changing behavior is challenging and we need effective policy strategies that prioritize both supply- and demand-side structural changes necessary to facilitate sustainable dietary behavior change.

“another world is not only possible, she is on her way. on a quiet day, i can hear her breathing.”

in my last planet forward article, i co-authored an open letter to the world food forum. however, after attending the forum last month as a youth delegate from the gw global food institute, i am worried that what i wrote will be overlooked by its intended audience.

indeed, during the conference i was told time and time again how we as youth hold the solutions, we are the future, we are the generation to save the world. the deputy director of fao even told us how they were ready to listen, we just needed to speak up. but again, i worry that this was not the first time she told a room of youth the same thing. i worry that in youth gatherings of years past, the same message is shared, and nothing changes. 

as youth, we are all too familiar with this phenomenon. the onus to solve the problems our generation faces is placed on us by the people who are complicit in creating the problems themselves. while we did nothing to cause these complex issues, they are pushed onto us by those in power to keep the cycle of degradation, destruction, and disempowerment going and uphold the status quo. 

we youth now find ourselves in a double bind. on one hand, we want to reject such attempts to be burdened with finding the solution for problems caused by other generations, and want to see those currently in power actually use their authority to create a better world. on the other hand, we know there is no time to wait for the change we want to see in the world. we must act now to build a liveable future for ourselves. 

forging the path ahead

in order to escape this double bind, we need to radically rethink and reclaim how we view ourselves as youth. first of all, enough with all this “future talk.” although we will continue to be called “the leaders of tomorrow,” we cannot wait until tomorrow. 

this kind of language is used by those who don’t need to worry about tomorrow. instead, our voices need to be listened to now. we will not be deferred to a later, to-be-determined date of liberation. this way of framing will keep us out of discussion rooms. rather than viewing ourselves as the leaders of tomorrow, we can learn a lot from our indigenous partners, like the haudenosaunee confederacy and other cultures who tell us that sustainability means keeping in mind the needs of the next seven generations who come after us. 

this leads me to my next point. we youth, as a group, are more than just a category defined by age. we are intersectional and multi-faceted in our identities. our struggle overlaps with other marginalized and undervalued groups in society, such as indigenous peoples, women, gender and sexual minorities, people with disabilities, poor people, and more.

we will not be removed or separated from those also seeking more sustainable and just alternatives to the current status quo. when that happens, when we are boiled down to our age which is just a number, we lose our power in solidarity, and end up speaking the same language as the people who wish to hold us down. 

while the future may not always seem bright, there are glimmers of hope coming from youth around the world. at the world food forum, the global indigenous youth caucus shared perspectives from indigenous youth making changes in their communities across the world. unfortunately while there was little integration between this event and the wff itself, the space for knowledge sharing was an important first step. 

hear my voice

here, i would like to raise the voices of small-scale farmer movements coming together to fight for not just identity politics or opaque multilateral agendas, rather for the real just transformations they would like to see in the food system. in 2021, many african civil society and farmers’ organizations chose to boycott the un food systems summit on the grounds that its ‘multi-stakeholder’ approach, while maybe seeming positive on paper, opened the door for large corporations to take the floor from farmers and youth.

indeed such performative moves for inclusion are not transparent, not participatory, and not coupled with justice. despite this, small-scale farmers and civil society still made their voices heard, providing a press release response to the summit and a policy brief for recommended actions and just solutions to climate change and agriculture. 

similarly the africa climate justice group held their first ‘counter cop’ last year to share their own solutions to climate change after growing frustrated with cop’s efficacy. 

while these solutions are less visible than what comes out of the world food forum, the youth are making their voices heard. it is now our job to stand hand-in-hand, uplift each other, and begin (and continue) creating the decolonial, anti-capitalist, antiracist, sustainable, and just world we want to see now.

as the global temperatures increase, a big question that many are asking is, “how will we feed all of these people?”

in october 2023, i had the opportunity to visit some researchers, farmers, scientists, and others in the food and water realms in tucson, arizona, where climate change is being felt and lived by people on a daily basis. here are three main takeaways that stuck with me when i left arizona.  

1. listen and learn from traditional ecological knowledge  

traditional ecological knowledge (tek) is information held and created by indigenous peoples over millennia about their local environment, based on an understanding of humans’ interconnectedness with the rest of nature and living in right relationships with other beings.

tek has served native people as they continue to adapt and persist through drastically changing times. michael kotutwa johnson, ph.d., described his hopi ancestors and how they didn’t feel the starvation and poverty effects of the great depression because they were able to grow their own food.

even as drought affected many farmers at that time, because of the tek that hopi people had cultivated through deep relationships with their home over many years, johnson’s ancestors and people were able to feed themselves and persist. 

learning from the past and looking ahead, johnson said food security means making sure there’s food for his people’s future generations. this food must be culturally relevant, nutrient dense, and adapted to the local environment. in order to ensure security in the future, more biodiversity is needed in food. today, indigenous people protect 80% of global biodiversity.

this biodiversity is essential in food systems and being able to grow crops that are resilient and adaptable to the changing climate. one example of tek and resulting food resiliency is that hopi farmers have terraced their gardens, helping to hold and spread the limited rainwater that often comes in sporadic heavy downpours. by being able to slow water down and let it seep through terrace steps to all of the crops, more plants can thrive in an environment that receives under 10 inches of rain per year.

in order to be able to learn from others, you first need to respect them and be able to listen. director of the university of arizona water resources research center sharon megdal, ph.d., shared a concept about listening that she called, “two-eared hearing.”

she first discussed the native concept of two-eyed seeing, or etuaptmumk, where one eye sees the strength of indigenous knowledge and ways of knowing and the other eye sees the strength of western knowledge and ways of knowing.

the key is learning how to see with both eyes to benefit everyone. megdal extended this concept to listening—taking the time and being able to listen to many different ways of knowing and the knowledge that others hold. 

2. build and nurture relationships 

the listening that megdal spoke of is an essential practice in building and nurturing relationships. relationships are important in many ways for growing food and feeding people—connecting people to the land and water, and connecting people to other people.

johnson emphasized the importance of having a strong connection with place for his and other native people, which has facilitated the creation of tek. evidenced by the certain varieties and crops that hopi people have adapted to grow in the hot, dry arizona desert over millennia, is the tending of relationships with the land.

people need to understand where they are in the world in order to best grow food there. this is only possible through being attentive to the land, developing care for it, and “choosing to belong” as robin wall kimmerer says.  

another set of relationships is amongst people. at one point, johnson spoke of the capacity of the world to feed and take care of each other, if only people shared more. people are more likely to share and support others if they have a relationship and are able to trust and care for each other.

megdal commented on a similar idea, saying that a lack of collaboration is the root of many issues. instead, functioning relationships and making connections is essential in moving forward and supporting everyone.

senior research specialist at biosphere 2’s landscape evolution observatory (leo), aaron bugaj, discussed the importance of collaboration and vulnerability in people learning, understanding their limitations, and ultimately growing together.

at leo, people from different fields and areas of expertise meet every week to collaborate on their work in understanding systems and how water moves through landscapes. bugaj said of the team, “we have value to bring individually but we recognize we have to work together and be vulnerable. and that’s been really refreshing to see—i’ve never seen that in 10 years of academic science before.”

to move forward together, people need to first come together through building their individual relationships. 

3. balance is key 

when asked whether principles of tek can meet future demands of feeding 10 billion people, johnson’s response was an immediate “no.” even with the “indigenous ingenuity” of tek, unfettered growth is not sustainable.

the drive of consumption, exploitation, and extraction, which are all causing climate change, are pushing people out of balance and sync with the rest of the environment. many native traditions in the southwest say that nature keeps everything in check, in this case realigning people through famine and lean times.

unmitigated urbanization has negative impacts on biodiversity, water drainage, and climate. to move into the future, the need of communities in arizona must be rebalanced. rather than large-scale and highly dependent food systems, smaller communities, smaller farms, and more community work are necessary.

while the draw of authentic cacio e pepe just might be strong enough to pull some of us from d.c. across the atlantic, it was the 2023 world food forum (wff) that brought us to the food and agriculture organization of the united nations (fao) headquarters in rome, italy.

our group of six graduate students from the george washington university (gw) in washington, d.c., represented the gw global food institute as a youth delegation to the wff. the six of us also share the belief that the policies that currently govern agrifood systems uphold the interests of governments and powerful industry groups at the expense of human health, social justice, and the future of the planet.

as collective first-timers to any united nations convening, we want to provide you with our insights as six individuals with diverse, yet often overlapping reflections on our time and the opportunities we see to make the wff more inclusive and action-oriented. although this year’s wff did an amazing job of bringing together compelling voices and actors from across the globe for important discussions, there were also a few key areas of improvement that would have made the event that much more successful. here are our “sweet” (our favorite parts) and “sour” (our not-so-favorite parts) reflections and our suggestions to strengthen the wff experience for future youth food systems advocates.

what is the world food forum?

the wff is a global platform to transform agrifood systems with the 2023 theme of ‘agrifood systems transformation accelerates climate action.’ the forum was composed of three interconnected events – the wff global youth forum, the fao science and innovation forum, and the fao hand-in-hand investment forum. these were intended to facilitate intergenerational and cross-sector conversations about the transformation of agrifood systems at the local, regional, and global level. the wff global youth forum was specifically designed to change the conversation around food and agriculture by giving young people a seat at the table and fostering youth-to-youth connection through open dialogue and a series of cross-cutting events.

global youth forum events included panels, workshops, and youth assembly discussions over five days centered around four tracks: youth action, innovation, education, and culture. our delegation engaged on topics ranging from animal source food alternatives to sustainable development to emerging technologies and traditional innovation for climate action.

as part of the wff, the global youth action assembly sought to turn policy recommendations into action and deepen understanding of policy between fao experts and global youth. parallel to the wff was the global indigenous youth forum, the only gathering of indigenous youth at a high-ranking un agency.

variety of topics and session types to attend

the sweet: there was no shortage of events to attend at the wff over our five days, and we appreciated the organization of the event overall and found it especially beneficial to attend in-person. the opening and closing ceremonies were unique opportunities to hear from world leaders representing diverse agrifood system contexts on their visions for the future and actions they are taking in the present to achieve those goals. we also greatly appreciated events that prioritized time for meaningful breakout discussions in smaller groups.

these discussions provided the space for more critical reflection of the topics being presented, experience and solutions exchange between individuals, and co-creation of priorities around a specific issue.

our delegation felt particularly compelled by the solutions-oriented framing in many of the sessions specific to the science and innovation forum and would encourage more crossover with the sessions in the global youth forum.

keep it sweet: though not embraced by all fao officials, continue to prioritize discussions of progressive topics in a mainstream space. several events discussed alternatives to animal sourced foods (asf) as a way to improve human and planetary health and the fao chief economist made an explicit call for asf reduction in the western world, acknowledging the distinction between industrial livestock production and smaller scale, traditional livestock production.

making connections with other young people

the sweet: at the wff, we met other young people from around the world working on local solutions to agrifood systems in their communities. the event was action-oriented and encouraged us to exchange ideas with our peers about how we want our food to be grown, shared, and consumed. the global context ensured a diversity of perspectives, many of which we have not been exposed to in our own studies and advocacy.

room for improvement: create casual opportunities and intentional spaces (i.e., coffee breaks) at wff for deeper and critical conversations, networking, and collaborations between young individuals, delegations, and fao representatives.

the spaces for interaction will help attendees to understand the different ideas and perspectives on the central topic of the wff. it can also serve as a bridge to connect people with diverse backgrounds but the same working interests to contribute to better agrifood systems and protect the environment. this could take the form of introductions and roundtable discussions starting at the beginning of the week in a room that stays available for youth and delegations to visit in between sessions for the duration of the wff and should include affinity groups that represent personal identities as well as those for different agrifood system areas of interest/expertise.

opportunities to attend the global indigenous youth forum

the sweet: at the same time as the world food forum event, the fao also held the global indigenous youth forum. although they were separate events, they both took place at the fao headquarters allowing us to attend several sessions of the indigenous youth forum.

one session that we attended focused on expanding technological innovation in agrifood systems to include indigenous knowledge. indigenous youth from different regions in the world shared the ways their communities have adapted their traditional agrifood practices to be resilient to climate change. indigenous youth in another session highlighted how our increasingly industrialized global agrifood system and the widespread availability of ultra-processed foods threatens traditional knowledge transfer in indigenous communities. elevating indigenous voices should be a priority across agrifood system sectors and contexts.

room for improvement: prioritize the inclusion of indigenous youth in ongoing agrifood system transformation discussions by providing a broader platform to share traditional knowledge and innovation.

although we appreciated being able to attend the sessions within the global indigenous youth forum, we were disappointed that the indigenous youth event was separate from the wff, because indigenous youth are an integral part of any youth-focused agrifood system discussion. while recognizing the value of having a separate space for indigenous youth, it was off-putting to have the event at the same time and place as the wff, as if to silo the two groups and create a false dichotomy between indigenous and non-indigenous youth in agrifood systems.

limited opportunity for open dialogue and minimal action items

the sour: the sessions we attended were valuable for continuing to think about actions to implement for agrifood systems transformation and environmental protection. however, the panel sessions lacked the opportunity for meaningful insights from panelists. we appreciated the efforts of the panelists to convey their message in a very short time, but the lack of time limited panelists’ contributions to their pre-prepared speeches, inhibiting any dialogue between speakers.

room for improvement: we suggest the organizers:

decrease the number of panelists so that they can provide more detailed experiences and concrete action items, as well as give audience members enough time to ask meaningful questions. this follows through on one of the goals of the global youth action assembly, which was to ‘deepen the understanding of policy topics with fellow youth and fao experts.’

ensure higher-level policy- and decision-makers are in attendance from as many countries as possible. it is important that youth delegations have the opportunity to share perspectives and experiences with their representatives to encourage further collaboration, as well as provide pragmatic and constructive feedback on our context-specific agrifood action items and solutions. this approach is especially important given that we learned this week that the fao does not have the ability to enforce any of its efforts at the country level or hold governments accountable to act on their specific commitments.

keep an open mind and a positive, solutions-oriented mindset. we felt that some fao decision-makers were dismissive of the opinions of youth representatives. organizers must ensure that higher-level experts and professionals are interested in inclusive and open dialogue, and take steps to prevent combative environments for the youth representatives and others in the room.

increase the structured participation of policy- and decision-makers at roundtables and in direct meetings with delegations throughout the week, particularly for events that prioritize an open dialogue between all participants during which challenges, opportunities, and expectations can be exchanged and discussed. again, it is important to keep a positive mindset.

open all wff sessions to youth attendees, so they don’t miss out on clear-cut actions presented in other innovation and investment sessions.

specify action-oriented steps in future youth events to help us understand how to most productively and respectfully engage in these spaces to return home with strategies for how we can transform agrifood systems.

misalignment of the 2023 wff theme

the sour: unfortunately, the forum theme this year of “agrifood system transformation to accelerate climate action,” seemed like an afterthought during many of the forum’s central deliberations.

as a whole, our delegation supports a holistic, systemic approach to sustainable agrifood system transformation in high, middle, and low-income countries. the regional policy priority selected as a focus for the north america region, including the u.s. and canada, was to ‘ensure inclusive, healthy and sustainable feeding programs at schools, nurseries, and colleges that are procured from local producers and provide food education.’

however, our policy deliberation at the wff was only centered around changing behavior at the individual level in schools through education. despite the importance of childhood education around food and agriculture and the need to connect students with how their food is produced and prepared, we felt this hyperfocus on education significantly inhibited our ability to propose policies that could drive ‘agrifood system transformation’ and led to a lack of disruptive change policies.

policy actions should not only facilitate the consumer’s ability to make healthy and sustainable food choices, but also incentivize the producer’s participation in an economically rewarding and just transition, and empowering workers through stable livelihoods and protections.

we propose values-aligned food procurement as a strategy to align the foods offered in schools. these values include nutrition, environmental sustainability, animal welfare, local economies, and a valued workforce. the good food purchasing program functioned as a model for this conclusion, along with other strategies to reduce the literal and figurative distance between children and the food they consume.

room for improvement: we suggest the organizers:

provide additional time for fruitful deliberation around larger systems-level challenges. this would have been meaningful for our delegation and other participants and have allowed us to address the urgency in developing policy actions through a systems lens at the event.

democratize the process of choosing data and policy priorities. the policies set for the north american assembly, representing both the u.s. and canada, was determined by a survey taken with 35 respondents. it was unclear who these people were and how representative they were of our region, especially when there were well over 35 youth delegates from north america attending the wff. some participants reported not being aware or knowledgeable of these priorities and being unable to contribute to discussion. instead, there should be more efforts to do meaningful outreach with youth assemblies, ensuring participation in every step of the process, from the forum itself, to remote preparation and follow-up work throughout the year.

ensure transparency in the agenda setting process from year to year, given that all individuals present are not necessarily familiar with or historically engaged in these processes or spaces. additionally, the same level of transparency should be applied to the final drafting and submission of the recommended policy actions that are generated as a result of the regional youth assembly meetings held during the wff. individuals and delegations engaged in these processes at the wff should be provided with information about who is responsible for drafting and reviewing the final policy actions, who is the intended audience of the final policy actions, how the information is presented to them, and what opportunities we are given to stay engaged beyond the wff.

looking forward, we need the guidance and insight of those with experience in the critical topics being discussed at the wff and more seats at the table for diverse agrifood system perspectives. we believe that together, across generations, we can do more ‘to move the needle.’ we appreciated the opportunity to listen, engage, be inspired, and critically reflect on the urgency of transforming our agrifood systems and moving from conversation to action.

however, after decades of imported food, the diets of micronesians today includes many foreign foods and local farming is on the decline. the majority of food in local supermarkets is imported, processed food brought in on cargo ships. “it is postcolonial damage,” says senator jayson walter of pohnpei state, “the problem with our farming right now, it’s not consistent, and we need to establish that consistency.”

in this short documentary, discover how traditional agroforestry practices in the federated states of micronesia integrate farming into the forest, preserving the land and supplying healthy food to those who live there.

the association wants to transition coffee farming practices toward sustainability by replanting native species, moving away from hybrid varieties, growing specialty coffee, and educating the next generation of coffee farmers. the association is made up of 10 farms, or fincas, that have banded together in the pursuit of these goals.

in march 2023, i traveled to líbano with a group of graduate students from the middlebury institute of international studies for an experiential learning trip. there we learned about norte nativa’s specialty coffee practices and the challenges with regulations keeping the fledgling sustainable industry from taking off.

what is specialty coffee?

the process of growing specialty coffee lies in multiple stages of production, in which these farmers incorporate sustainable practices. from planting to growing, fermenting to drying, and eventually to roasting, each step plays an important role in the quality of the beans.  

norte nativa is unique in that each finca naturally specializes in different sustainable or specialty practices, and then shares them with each other as a community. the finca of alexander and maría del pilar naranjo plants cash crops, such as plantains, corn, beans, and cassava, in between coffee plant cycles for a more economically sustainable transition to specialty coffee. 

alejandro franco, the president of norte nativa, specializes in the fermentation of harvested coffee cherries, a crucial step for the natural process of specialty coffee. he also uses seedling wraps made from seaweed, a more sustainable option than the typical plastic found on other farms, which allow for the root to easily grow once planted. his finca also practices trimming instead of cutting coffee plants as a natural process to stress them for more production, while keeping a high quality of flavor.

a broader look at the colombian coffee industry

the coffee industry of líbano in the tolima region is regulated by the federación nacional de cafeteros de colombia (fnc). this organization was created in 1927 when colombian coffee growers joined together to work for their well-being as a union.  

the federación conducts several essential activities within the coffee space. they offer a permanent purchase guarantee to colombian coffee growers at a base market price through a network of cooperative allies. the fnc also keeps the national register of coffee exporters and establishes the requirements for registration of roasters, millers, and coffee factories in colombia.

one of the key roles the fnc plays is conducting research and transferring technology to colombian coffee growers. during our visit to líbano, we visited the federación’s r&d site called the national coffee research center, or cenicafé. cenicafé promotes themselves as generating competitive, sustainable knowledge and technologies that are focused on increasing productivity, and profitability of the country’s coffee farming.  

on our tour around the r&d site, we listened to a staff member describe their efforts to accomplish these goals. she explained that in 2022 the region experienced much higher precipitation, but it had little to no harmful effect on their plants due to genetic modification to withstand such extreme weather events. cenicafé also uses genetic enhancement with the goal of making their coffee plants more resilient to diseases such as coffee leaf rust. this helps generate more profit for the growers and for the community.

the fnc supplies a vast majority of the coffee plants in colombia; as a result, most cafeteros currently use genetic modifications to generate more product and profit.

a different outlook on sustainability

the cafeteros of norte nativa also have ties with cenicafé and the fnc, although they may not always see eye-to-eye. in fact, all colombian cafeteros need to have a license through the federación in order to be recognized as coffee growers. but an important piece of norte nativa’s mission is to move away from the hybrids pictured above that the federación supplies to farmers and instead invest in growing specialty coffee from natural coffee plants without genetic modification. getting back to the organic roots of coffee farming.

this is where norte nativa and the federación differ. whereas norte nativa focuses on restoring historical and natural practices of regenerative agriculture, the fnc addresses the accessibility and livelihood of the larger colombian farming community. we learned about this difference while sitting in on a coffee co-op meeting led by the fnc. 

the fnc puts their resources into short-term solutions to enable small scale colombian coffee farmers to make a living. these short-term methods, however, move away from sustainable regenerative agriculture practices, such as agroforestry, which advances soil fertility, biodiversity, and ecosystem health. norte nativa wants to grow coffee naturally without the need for chemicals or genetic alteration, therefore their members are putting resources into testing regenerative agriculture practices, such as composting for fertilizer. the trade-off is that these are longer-term investments that not all cafeteros have the resources to implement.

franco further explained his organization’s differences from the federación. “the fnc gives cafeteros seeds for free, but then farmers have to do things their way,” he said. these hybrids that cenicafé modifies are more resilient to heat and pests, but the tradeoff is that they need more fertilizer.  “and where do you get fertilizer from? the big companies,” franco said.  

focusing on the ecology of the finca, planting more trees for shade-grown coffee, diversifying the plants, attracting more birds and animals – all of this leads to healthier soil. according to franco, “the quality of coffee is based on the quality of the environment around [it].” and in order to cultivate a healthy, biodiverse ecosystem needed for quality plants to grow, norte nativa says it is transforming farming practices from their current unsustainable situation.

we met other cafeteros within norte nativa who offered further perspectives on how to achieve sustainable specialty coffee. cafetero monica sierra lópez showed us her farm’s organic farming, drying processes – either naturally in the sun or using mechanical driers for a faster method – and a natural water filtration system that recycles water back into the river without contamination.

one of the organization’s founding members, don antonio gonzalez, also emphasized the importance of a circular economy where everything is recycled through composting, creating a natural fertilizer. he explained that commercial fertilizers are not designed to account for the unique qualities of individual farms, so his finca is practicing precise, local fertilization for particular plants and soil at higher elevations.

brewing a better future

each of the cafeteros of norte nativa have their own visions, their own individual hopes and dreams for the future.  

jaime gonzalez, who led the trip connecting middlebury institute students with norte nativa, has a vision to bridge the us and colombia through education. according to gonzalez, his plan is to “create a community of practice and knowledge-sharing through the fincas as study areas of conservation, restoration, and regenerative production for environmental education of students in líbano and abroad.”  

for franco, the next steps are establishing a market for specialty coffee and eventually expanding the sustainable practices of norte nativa to other fincas in the líbano region and beyond.  to help this happen, middlebury institute graduate students under lyuba zarsky, ph.d., are researching potential markets for colombian specialty coffee.

under starry lights strung overhead, wrapped up in conversation during one of our evening gatherings, martinez looked fervently at me and added, “i want to plant these seeds of thought. i want to plant them for the new generation.” her vision is one of making good food – transitioning to good, healthy food processes for generations to come. “yes coffee, too, but it’s more than that,” she said.  surrounded by a newly formed community, the lights illuminating the faces of coffee farmers and graduate students joined in conversation, the individual and collective visions of norte nativa were already blooming to life. 

a special thanks to the cafeteros of norte nativa for hosting us, bringing us into their large family, and showing us around their fincas and homes in líbano.

climate change brings about fluctuations in temperature, precipitation patterns and extreme weather events, which disrupt and reduce agricultural productivity. increasing biodiversity and plant precision breeding are techniques that can create agricultural resistance to climate change.

precision breeding can help agriculture get ahead of climate change effects such as drought and strong storms by making plants resistant to them, according to ryan mertz, operations lead at the bayer marana product development center in southern arizona.

reduced food availability is a big concern due to climate change, according to the united states environmental protection agency. climate change has caused increased severity of droughts and floods that cause challenges in raising crops. crop yields are particularly important in the u.s. as the national sector supplies nearly 25% of all grains on the global market.

short corn to fill tall orders

bayer, which operates a climate-regulated greenhouse outside of tucson, arizona, is using plant breeding to develop new products for farmers globally.

scientists use dna analysis to see the traits in the corn seeds, designing products by analyzing billions of genomic data points over time. at the bayer facility, there are automatic seeders that follow the identities of each seed and place them into germination trays until they sprout seven to 10 days later. if the seedlings’ size and vigor look promising, they are ready to be planted.

the bayer site in arizona is centering its attention on short-stature corn, which is sturdier due to its low height and more resistant to strong winds.

“we’re always trying to innovate. [with] climate change, you’ll have bigger storms, extreme floods, or drought conditions,” mertz said. “bayer is working to constantly improve their products.”

breeding for biodiversity

plant breeding can lead to new crops and also contribute to plant biodiversity, which is significant as new varieties of plants can be made to adapt to environmental stress conditions — meaning less food loss in fields — and create diversity that maintains functions of an agroecosystem. biodiversity has also been achieved differently through native techniques.

genetic biodiversity is the key to climate adaptation, according to michael kotutwa johnson, ph.d., assistant specialist at the university of arizona school of natural resources and the environment and member of the hopi tribe in northern arizona.

plant biodiversity entails having crops that are physically different. for example, hopi corn varieties are not all the same height, produce varying numbers of ears, and are different colors, johnson said. to achieve this diversity, people must plant crops year in and year out.

johnson said he was able to eat corn that was 30-40 years old, that was dried out and preserved, by boiling it in water and making it “come back to life.” 

“that’s what food security is. making sure that our future generations can have this, and this food right now is nutrient-dense,” johnson said. “those seeds are like us, they represent us. so if you take care of them, nurture them, they come back to life.”

indigenous value systems allow for them to have a large biodiversity, because they have a relationship with the environment that is not based on gross domestic products, johnson said.

indigenous lands contain 80% of the world’s biodiversity, while indigenous peoples make up only 5% of the world’s population. many of these communities demonstrate that having small farms or gardens is not an obstacle to achieving plant biodiversity. 

on his roughly 11-acre farm, johnson grows corn, squash, melons, peach trees and other food varieties. 

this year, johnson lost some crops to heat stress, but the ones that produced seeds he will save and plant in a year or more depending on heat conditions, he said. according to johnson, this has been practiced by hopi for well over 2,000 years. he said his people have been planting for so long that they have produced genetically diverse plants with different rooting systems, ones that are deep or shallow. both are necessary for optimizing nutrient capture from different soil types. 

johnson said that technology such as automatic planters and tools to healthfully remove topsoil can be helpful in agriculture, but when it comes to achieving genetic biodiversity, the hopi have all the traditional tools they need. while scaling this biodiversity may not be possible due to the manual labor needs involved, the practices that cultivate such biodiversity are sacred food ways that every person is dependent on, johnson said. 

“as a result of planting every year, plants such as corn — which originated in south america over 10,000 years ago with fairly high rates of precipitation (30 inches or more) — are able to thrive in our climate, which only produces six to 10 inches of annual precipitation,” johnson said.

according to johnson, this is thanks, in part, to the process of starting small before scaling even becomes an option. “a lot of the technology can be very useful. we’re always talking about upscaling, but i think it’s almost better to create a system ahead of the scale because some stuff is just unscalable.” 

ernst nursery and farms is located in marion county, the largest agricultural-producing county in oregon. the company had previously been cited by the oregon occupational safety and health administration (osha) in 2014 for not providing its workers with water during a previous record-breaking heat wave, telling them they needed to bring enough water from home for a full day in the fields.  

in the wake of perez’s death, ernst nursery and farms was fined $4,200 after an oregon osha investigation found that the company had not properly trained all employees on how to protect themselves from the heat. according to the oregonian, which obtained notes from an oregon osha employee, the farm’s controller, kim stone, argued that the company employees working in the hot sun should use “common sense” and bear personal responsibility for “how they push their [bodies].”

consequences of climate change

in june and early july 2021, oregon experienced what was termed “the heat dome,” when temperatures topped 119 f in some parts of the state. at least 96 deaths were attributed to the 2021 summer heatwave. two days after perez’s death, on june 28, construction worker dan harris collapsed while fixing an irrigation leak in a roof. he later died at the hospital. oregon osha listed his death as “heat stress” and ultimately fined robinson construction co. $420. such cases are expected to multiply as oregon experiences ever-more extreme heat waves, increasing the vulnerability of manual laborers to the health consequences of working outdoors.  

these days, 100-degree-plus temperatures in the pacific northwest are no longer unusual. a 2023 climate assessment from oregon state university found that the number of days that are hotter than 90 f and nights that are warmer than 65 f are increasing across oregon. in addition, the total annual area burned by wildfires in oregon has increased during the last 35 years. along with ruining homes and claiming lives, wildfires also choke the air with smoke that can have short- and long-term effects on those who breathe it in.

how can states protect workers?

in 2020, oregon governor kate brown directed the state’s osha and oregon health authority to create rules to protect workers from extreme heat; but this process was delayed by the pandemic. this meant no excessive heat protections were in place during the sweltering 2021 heat dome. perez’s death shined a harsh light on the lack of such protections.

at a vigil for perez, the oregon farm workers union again demanded protections for workers forced to work outdoors during deadly summer heat waves. finally, in late summer 2021, oregon osha implemented a set of emergency protections for workers during extreme heat. on may 9, 2022, oregon osha adopted permanent rules that officially made these protections state law.  

these rules require employers to provide all workers in environments over 80 f with free, fresh water and mandatory shade breaks, as well as training on safety precautions to take during extreme heat, particularly how to recognize signs of heat exhaustion.

in doing so, oregon implemented the most comprehensive heat protections for workers of any u.s. state. it is one of only five states to have any standard that protects workers from extreme heat.

for workers around the country, the risks are increasing. according to the national climate assessment, if current greenhouse gas emissions are not reduced, high and low temperatures will increase by 5 f in most of the united states by mid-century, and there will be 20 to 30 more days of the year that surpass 90 f. extreme heat has already caused over 600 deaths nationwide from 1999 to 2009, according to the center for climate and energy solutions.

earlier this summer, the federal government acknowledged the risk with a statement from the white house. on july 27, president joe biden announced actions that directed the department of labor to issue a hazard alert which affirmed worker protections for heat related issues and outlined employer obligations to protect workers.

federal osha has been developing federal heat-related standards since 2021, however there is as yet no federal standard for protecting workers from heat or wildfire smoke.