斯德哥尔摩国际和平研究所-The-Geopolitics-of-Food-Security--Barriers-to-the-Sustainable-Development-Goal-of-Zero-Hunger_16页_246kb

Summary of The Geopolitics of Food Security: Barriers to the Sustainable Development Goal of Zero Hunger

I. Introduction

The United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development includes SDG 2: Zero Hunger, which aims to end hunger, achieve food security, and promote sustainable agriculture. However, since 2015, the number of undernourished people has increased, reaching 690 million in 2019 and potentially 840 million by 2030 if current trends continue. The coronavirus pandemic in 2020 is expected to further worsen the situation, possibly adding 130 million more people to the list of those undernourished.

Food insecurity is not only a technical or humanitarian issue, but also a political failure, rooted in geopolitical dynamics. The paper argues that geopolitics—a system of political practice based on zero-sum logic and territorial or state-based notions of security—plays a crucial role in harming food security and undermining global cooperation. It outlines how geopolitical competition affects natural resources, trade, armed conflict, and climate change, and calls for more integrated policy engagement to address these challenges.

II. Between Governance and Geopolitics: Room for Analysis

• Food security governance involves a complex network of state and non-state actors, including transnational corporations, civil society, and financial institutions.
• International crises such as the 2007-2008 and 2011-2012 food crises led to the emergence of global initiatives like the HLTF and the L'Aquila Food Security Initiative.
• The politicization of food has increased, with geopolitical tensions contributing to supply disruptions, trade wars, and unilateral policies.
• The World Economic Forum has highlighted that geopolitically motivated food supply disruptions are a growing global risk.
• Geopolitical competition hinders dialogue and cooperation on achieving the Zero Hunger goal, emphasizing the need for more explicit engagement with geopolitical issues.

III. The Competition for Natural Resources

• Global competition for agricultural resources, such as land, water, and nutrients, is a key factor in food insecurity.
• Phosphorus, essential for soil fertility, is a critical resource with uneven global distribution.
  • Morocco and Western Sahara hold 72% of global phosphate rock reserves.
  • China is the largest producer of phosphate rock, despite having less than 5% of the reserves.
• Import-dependent states, such as India and European countries, are highly vulnerable to geopolitical shifts in phosphate supply and fertilizer markets.
• Land grabbing by governments and corporations has intensified, often driven by strategic interests and speculative motives.
• Environmental sustainability has also led to green grabbing, where biofuel production and land use changes can disrupt local food systems.
• Balancing environmental and food security imperatives is essential for sustainable food systems.

IV. The Necessity of Trade

• Food self-sufficiency is not feasible for all countries due to resource constraints, costs, and environmental factors.
• Global food trade plays a key role in moderating production shocks and smoothing resource distribution.
• Debates continue over the degree of liberalization in agricultural trade and its impact on food security.
• Export restrictions and panic buying during the 2007-2008 food crisis worsened the situation, leading to trade disruptions.
• The WTO has failed to regulate export restrictions effectively, and agricultural trade remains one of the most contentious issues in global trade negotiations.
• The 2018 US-China trade war disrupted soybean trade, highlighting the geopolitical risks in agricultural commerce.
• Unilateralism and protectionism have accelerated due to the pandemic, with trade interdependence increasingly seen as a liability.

V. Interactions with Armed Conflict

• Armed conflict is a major driver of food insecurity, especially since 2014.
• Undernourished populations are concentrated in conflict-affected regions.
• Conflict disrupts agricultural production, distribution, and access, often leading to social unrest and violence.
• Geopolitical tensions have entrenched the idea of food as a strategic resource, leading to import bans and trade restrictions.
• The politicization of food has undermined multilateral cooperation, as seen in Russia's ban on Western food imports and China's restrictions on US soybeans.

VI. Climate Change and Its Geopolitical Implications

• Climate change interacts with geopolitical dynamics, reshaping physical landscapes and political strategies.
• It exacerbates resource competition, particularly in water-scarce regions, and influences agricultural productivity.
• Transboundary water disputes are often linked to agricultural needs, and water grabbing by foreign entities can harm local communities.
• Phosphorus scarcity is a global challenge that affects soil fertility and crop yields, with geopolitical implications for fertilizer supply.

VII. Conclusion

• Geopolitical competition is a major barrier to achieving Zero Hunger.
• Integrated policy engagement and analysis are needed to address the complex interplay between geopolitics and food security.
• The return of geopolitics—marked by great power competition, populist nationalism, and weakening multilateralism—puts SDG 2 at greater risk.
• Future pathways to achieving food security must consider the geopolitical context, including resource distribution, trade policies, conflict, and climate change.