These notes come from an AFNZ (Agri Foods for Net Zero) meeting I attended last year. Although they’ve been sitting in drafts, the insights feel timely and relevant.
The main goal of the meeting was to refine the group’s research agenda. This agenda aims to speed up the shift toward Net Zero emissions. Much of the discussion was unattributed, but Tim Benton from Chatham House and Leeds University made a significant point about what he calls the “triple lock-in” affecting the food sector.
So, what does this “triple lock-in” mean? Benton highlighted three main issues:
- The cheaper food paradigm
- Market concentration
- Path dependencies
First, let’s talk about the “cheaper food paradigm.” The idea here is that cheap food is good for the economy. However, this notion overlooks key aspects, such as health and sustainability. A recent report from the FAO notes that the external health costs of our food system reach at least $10 trillion annually. A staggering 70% of these costs result from unhealthy diets high in processed foods, contributing to obesity and related diseases. Even in wealthier countries, childhood hunger leads to long-term health problems.
Next up is market concentration. A few large companies dominate food markets, often stifling competition. These giants usually focus on maximizing profit rather than promoting healthier and sustainable food options. New startups struggle to break into this tightly controlled market, resulting in a lack of innovation in healthier food systems.
The third issue, path dependencies, refers to the way investments and existing policies reinforce the current system. Once companies and governments invest heavily in a model, it becomes challenging to shift away from it. This situation creates a cycle that benefits the status quo but harms public health and the environment.
Benton argues that while these issues seem deeply rooted, they are not as stable as they might appear. Changing public perceptions about food, primarily due to rising health and environmental costs, could disrupt this paradigm. Moreover, geopolitical shifts complicate matters further, as nations turn toward protectionist policies.
Benton illustrated the political landscape with a triangle involving markets, politicians, and consumers. Shifts in how consumers view themselves—either as citizens or merely consumers—affect this dynamic. Recent social media trends show an increasing focus on sustainability and health, indicating consumers are seeking more accountability from corporations. This change could pressure politicians and businesses to act responsibly.
To change the food system, we need to break this triple lock-in. As Benton states, “The politics will change as the world changes.” By understanding these dynamics, we can advocate for a more sustainable and equitable food system, ultimately benefiting everyone.
For further insights, the FAO’s full report is available here.
A version of this article is also published on my Just Two Things Newsletter.
Photo by Arno Senoner on Unsplash.
