Search

The growing urgency of environmental threats combined with the slow pace of sustainability transitions has turned attention towards a better understanding of regime destabilization. Focusing excessively on niche innovations could be incumbent regimes’ diversion and resistance strategy and could reinforce the ‘business as usual’ mindset instead of contributing to system-wide changes. Historical cases of system transition have most often been used to understand the dynamics of regime destabilization. However, these insights have limitations when the focus is on ongoing transitions. Moreover, it is argued that more attention should be paid to agency and actors. Herein, regime destabilization is understood through an internally structured selection environment, implying that agency is assumed not only in variation at the niche level but also in the selection processes: (1) the selection environment is shaped by active and strategic actors and actor networks; (2) the selection environment is shaped by diverse discursive framings; and (3) the selection environment is shaped by various actors beyond the regime and even beyond the system in question. The argument is empirically tested in the case of the Finnish food system by constructing prevailing storylines in the sustainability transition. Four contrasting but partially overlapping storylines and their associated actor networks are identified. The empirical case supports the view that actors across all levels aim to influence the selection environment’s formulation with their framing of the problem and the strategic response. Thus, more attention must be paid to the content and diversity of different discursive framings in sustainability transitions.

Enhancing the efficiency of biotic resource use by avoiding losses and boosting circular economy is one key in agrifood systems to ensuring food security and the functioning of the Earth system. The aims of this study were to first identify the greatest prospects for improving the biotic resource use efficiency and, second, to design methods to assess this efficiency. We assessed biotic resource use efficiencies (outputs/inputs) and biotic residue ratios (residues/inputs) in terms of dry matter, energy (LHV d ), nitrogen and phosphorus for two Finnish case regions. We identified the greatest biotic resource use inefficiency as occurring in animal production, followed by crop production. The resource use efficiency in animal production is unavoidably low, but in crop production, the utilization of recycled nutrients, i.e., animal and green manures, and the rejection of the use of spare mineral fertiliser can enhance efficiency. In addition, the agrifood system efficiency was 3.4–21% higher according to the circular use of biotic resources compared to the exclusion of these. The losses from the agrifood system represent 52–76% of the current biotic inputs of the studied elements in crop production, which highlights the importance of efficient resource use in terms of food security. We conclude that substituting the external resources in favour of the circular use of biotic resources as well as the avoidance of losses are the keys to enhancing the system's efficiency. The determination of the biotic resource use efficiency and biotic residue ratio applying the introduced generic assessments serves boosting of circular economy.

Processing of organic residues may affect plant-availability of phosphorus (P) and thus the potential to recycle the nutrient, i.e., recyclability, but empirical evidence in the field is lacking. In field experiments in clay and silt loam soils with low available P, impact on P recyclability by cattle manure and sewage sludge processing methods (composting, anaerobic digestion, lime-stabilization, acid-oxidizer) and three application rates were assessed. Synthetic nitrogen (N) and potassium (K) fertilizers were supplied in surplus and NPK served as a reference. The differences in plant response were small at relevant application rates and not consistently explained by solubility of fertilizer P. Least P was required in composted manure for the same P uptake in silt loam, and composting was beneficial to plant response in clay as well. Lime-stabilization of sewage sludge had an adverse effect on P uptake in silt loam. Increasing application rates of sewage sludge hardly enhanced but did not lower P uptake or yield even at an excessive rate. Soil water-extractable P in the autumn liable to leaching was increased by NPK only. In clay soil, sewage sludges performed better than manures obviously due to anaerobic conditions caused by high precipitation, but in silt loam the contrary was the case. In conclusion, the availability of P in processed residues is more susceptible to weather and soil variables than in synthetic fertilizer. P fertilization benefits in cereal cropping in current north European conditions appear to be generally small.

The introduction of synthetic fertilizers transformed the food system into the one we know today in the Western world. The present paper argues that this transformation has become an irreversible self-feeding process referred to as food system lock-in, which threatens planetary boundaries of nitrogen and phosphorus, hence the food security in the future. A system in a lock-in state can undermine its own existence by deteriorating the capacity to cope with upcoming crises of resource scarcity and environmental instability. In this paper, the roots of lock-in are explored and empirically grounded in the historical narrative of the food system transition in Finland in the past 60 years. The theoretical framework builds on socio-technical studies and the economic theory of increasing returns. The aim of the paper is to identify, through an evolutionary analysis, the processes of increasing returns that have become path-inefficient and have reinforced the lock-in in the food system. Three separate but interdependent processes in the production, in the policy and institutions, and in the supply chain create systematic resistance towards sustainability transition. These findings indicate that more attention should be paid at the public policies that are currently too narrow in their scope and do not effectively bridge the entire system, from food production to consumption. Public intervention is critical for the unlocking, but individuals in the various parts of the food system are those who create new paths.

System innovation is often postulated as being able to solve “wicked problems.” However, it is unclear whether system innovation truly fits into the prevailing innovation system. When the Finnish government committed Finland to becoming a role model for nutrient recycling in 2010, it underscored the need for systemic change in the food system. As opposed to the existing linear and open-ended food system, a circular nutrient economy would require both structural and functional changes in both production and consumption, by means of technological, institutional, and social changes across numerous sectors simultaneously. We collected stakeholders’ perceptions of the barriers to the transition towards a more sustainable nutrient economy. The results were mapped into a failure framework that indicated that the policy-governance interface lacks directionality and coordination, while the enterprise-market interface creates inadequate demand articulation. Furthermore, the resilience of deep-rooted structures was found to be critical and deserves more attention.

Ilmastonmuutos on yhä keskeisempi osa Suomenkin maa- ja elintarviketalouden arkipäivää. Maaseutuyrittäjät ovat lisääntyvän tietomäärän ja ilmastonmuutoskytkentäisen hanketarjonnan ympäröimiä, mutta harvalle on kirkastunut millaisia ilmastonmuutoksen hillintä- ja sopeutumistoimia tiloilla käytännössä voitaisiin kehittää ja toteuttaa kannattavasti. Kannattavuus mietityttää monia ja uskomuksia ympäristö- ja talousnäkökulmien vastakkainasettelusta löytyy edelleen. Moni ei kykene hahmottamaan miten tie kestävään ja taloudellisesti kannattavaan toimintaan voisi lähteä ilmastonmuutosta paremmin ennakoivista toimista. Valtakunnallinen tiedonvälityshanke ”Ilmastonmuutos ja maaseutu (ILMASE)” pyrkii välittämään ilmastonmuutostietoa maaseudun toimijoille käytännönläheisesti, lähestyen aihetta myös taloudellisen kannattavuuden parantamisen ja maaseudun kehittämisen kannalta. Ilmastonmuutokseen varautumisessa korostuvat yhä enemmän taloudelliset riskit (ääri-ilmiöiden lisääntyminen) ja innovaatiot (uudet viljelykasvit ja uusiutuvan energian liiketoimintamahdollisuudet). Ilmastonmuutoskommunikaatiosta tekee vaikeaa ihmisten subjektiivinen tapa nähdä oikeutettuina itselle nykyhetkessä hyödylliset lyhytnäköiset toimintatavat, sekä erot tutkijoiden, päätöksentekijöiden ja viljelijöiden käsityksissä ilmastonmuutoksen vaikuttavuudesta ja keinoista sopeutua. Tiedotus ilmastonmuutoksen ennustamisen epävarmuudesta, hillintäpoliittisten neuvottelujen hankaluuksista ja sään ääreistymisestä ja hitaasta muuttumisesta voi jopa heikentää toimijoiden reagoimista ilmastonmuutokseen. Ilmastonmuutoksen hillitseminen ja sopeutuminen Suomessa kaipaa toimijatasojen välistä kommunikaatiota, joka muokkaa syvällä olevia asenteita ja helpottaa epävarmuutta. ILMASE-hanke selvitti kyselyn avulla käsityksiä maaseutuyrittäjien ilmastonmuutostiedon tarpeista, esteitä tiedon kiinnostavuudelle ja käytäntöön viemiselle ja kannustimia tuoda ilmastonmuutokseen varautuminen lähemmäksi käytäntöä. Maaseutuyrittäjät olivat vastaanottavaisimpia ilmastonmuutoksen taloudellisia vaikutuksia avaavalle käytännön tiedolle sekä käytännönläheisille keinoille, jotka olisivat sekä ympäristöä vähemmän kuormittavia että taloudellisesti kannattavia. Tutkijoiden haluttiin tiedostavan entistä paremmin tarpeen esittää ja suodattaa faktatietoaan kohderyhmän tarpeisiin. Myös epävarmuus ilmastotiedossa on hyvä tiedostaa, mutta sen jatkuva korostaminen ei kannusta toimintaan. Toivottiin perusteltua tutkimustietoa ilmastonmuutoksen merkityksestä, positiivisessa hengessä ja keskustellen. ILMASE-hanke järjestää vuonna 2012 alueellisia työpajoja ja kokoaa niiden aineistot verkkosivustolleen keskusteluun. Mukaan vuoropuheluun ilmastonmuutokseen varautumisesta kutsutaan maaseutuyrittäjiä, tutkijoita, neuvojia, maaseudun kehittäjiä ja päätöksentekijöitä.

The aim of the study was to explore the currently unexploited potential of agrifood waste and by-product biomasses for energy recovery and nutrient recycling, to mitigate climate change and eutrophication. The technical potential was assessed in two different case regions in Finland using two contrasting processing technologies, one oriented to recycle carbon and the other one to maximise replacement of fossil energy. The reduction in nutrient surplus through efficient recycling of biomass and consequent decline in fertiliser use was calculated. The reduction in GHG emissions was estimated based on the replacement of fossil energy and the diminished fertiliser manufacture. It was established that the full potential of use of the biomass to reduce GHG emissions can only be exploited in biorefineries that both produce energy and efficiently recycle nutrients. Such biorefineries have the potential to significantly mitigate climate change and prevent eutrophication. The potential reduction in GHG emissions corresponded to a third of agricultural emissions, and the reduction in fertiliser manufacture contributed with an additional fifth of that. The energy recovery corresponded to 5–10% of the fossil energy used in the regions, and the reduction in energy use for manufacture of fertilisers represented an additional 14–20% in comparison with that. The potential for nutrient recycling corresponded to 99–120% of P and 45–72% of N in the yields harvested in the regions. The choice of technology had a more pronounced impact on energy recovery, GHG emissions and C budget than on nutrient recycling.

1 Climate Change Adaptation and Food Supply Chain Management: An Overview Ari Paloviita and Marja Jarvela Part I Food Supply Chains: Actors, Products and Relationships 2. Climate Change and Food Security: Three Case Studies on Uncertainty Pekka Jokinen, Tuija Mononen and Rauno Sairinen 3. Building Resilient Food Supply Chains for the Future Titta Tapiola and Ari Paloviita 4. Making Sense of Resilience in Barley Breeding: Converting the Concept of Response Diversity into a Tool of Reflection and Decision-Making Sami Paavola, Sari Himanen, Helena Kahiluoto and Reijo Miettinen Part II Local vs. Regional Vulnerabilities and Opportunities 5. Vulnerability to Climate Change in Food Systems: Challenges in Assessment Methodologies Sirkku Juhola and Tina-Simone Neset 6. Food Security During Climate Change: The Challenge of European Diversity Gianluca Brunori and Tiina Silvasti 7. Climate Change, Vulnerability and Local Adaptation Strategies of Food Enterprises in Finland Antti Puupponen 8. Carbon Footprinting - The Clearest Way to Create a Climate-Friendly Food Consumption and Food Chain Hanna Hartikainen, Hannele Pulkkinen, Juha-Matti Katajajuuri and Pirjo Peltonen-Sainio Part III Sustainable Livelihood, Community and Farm Resilience 9. Good Farmers, Good Adapters? How a Cultural Understanding of Good Farming Affects the Adaptive Capacity of Farmers? Suvi Huttunen, Hanna Mela and Mikael Hilden 10. Framing Resilience in Relation to Territorialization Elena Battaglini, Marija Babovic and Natalija Bogdanov 11. Balancing Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation with the Socio-Economic Goals of Farms in Northern Europe Heikki Lehtonen, Xing Liu and Tuomo Purola 12. Coping with Climate Change: Rural Livelihoods, Vulnerabilities and Farm Resilience Marja Jarvela and Teea Kortetmaki Part IV Climate-Resilient Supply Chain Management - Upstream and Downstream 13. Managing Food Systems for Resilience Helena Kahiluoto, Karoliina Rimhanen, Miia Kuisma and Hanna Makinen 14. Citizens and Sustainable Culinary Cultures Johanna Makela and Mari Niva 15. Food Waste and Related Climate Impacts in Finland Kirsi Silvennoinen, Juha-Matti Katajajuuri, Hanna Hartikainen, Lotta Heikkila and Anu Reinikainen 16. Food Processing Companies, Retailers and Climate-Resilient Supply Chain Management Ari Paloviita

Phosphorus (P) flow from deposits through agriculture to waterways leads to eutrophication and depletion of P reserves. Therefore, P must be recycled. Low and unpredictable plant availability of P in residues is considered to be a limiting factor for recycling. We identified the determinants for the plant-availability of P in agrifood residues. We quantified P in Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) and in field soil fractions with different plant availabilities of P as a response to manure and sewage sludge with a range of P capture and hygienization treatments. P was more available in manure and in sludge, when it was captured biologically or with a moderate iron (Fe)/P (1.6), than in NPK. Increasing rate of sludge impaired P recovery and high Fe/P (9.8) prevented it. Anaerobic digestion (AD) reduced plant-availability at relevant rates. The recovery of P was increased in AD manure via composting and in AD sludge via combined acid and oxidizer. P was not available to plants in the sludge hygienized with a high calcium/P. Contrary to assumed knowledge, the recyclability of P in appropriately treated residues can be better than in NPK. The prevention of P sorption in soil by organic substances in fertilizers critically enhances the recyclability of P.

Nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) cycles are absolutely vital in maintaining sustainable food systems. Human activities disturb the natural balance of these cycles by creating enormous additional nutrient fluxes, causing eutrophication of waterways and pollution in land systems. To tackle this problem, sustainable nutrient management is required. This paper addresses sustainable nutrient management in two countries: The Netherlands and Finland. We adopt a critical perspective on resource politics, especially towards opportunistic policy strategies for the pollutant management of N and P. Two research questions are considered. First, what are the key systemic and policy failures that occurred in the N and P systems in the Netherlands and Finland between 1970 and 2015? And second, which lessons can be drawn when addressing the policy responses in the two countries to cope with these failures? The cases are analyzed within Weber and Rohracher’s framework that addresses “failures” preventing sustainable transitions. The results show that a number of failures occurred, besides market failures (over-exploitation of the commons, externalization of costs): lack of directionality, policy coordination, institutions, capabilities, infrastructure, demand articulation, and reflexivity. Policy responses in both countries resulted in ponderous policy frameworks that were adequate to tackle nutrient problems from the industrial sector and municipalities. However, both countries provided only a moderate response in terms of system-wide integrated policy frameworks to cope with sectoral-transcending issues. The agricultural use of N and P, in contrast to detergents, has not been subjected to strong regulatory measures.

The aim of this study was to determine biorefining efficiency according to the choices made in the entire value chain. The importance of the share of biomass volume biorefined or products substituted was investigated. Agrifood-waste-based biorefining represented the case. Anticipatory scenarios were designed for contrasting targets and compared with the current situation in two Finnish regions. Biorefining increases nutrient and energy efficiency in comparison with current use of waste. System boundaries decisively influence the relative efficiency of biorefining designs. For nutrient efficiency, full exploitation of biomass potential and anaerobic digestion increase nutrient efficiency, but the main determinant is efficient substitution for mineral fertilisers. For energy efficiency, combustion and location of biorefining close to heat demand are crucial. Regional differences in agricultural structure, the extent of the food industry and population density have a major impact on biorefining. High degrees of exploitation of feedstock potential and substitution efficiency are the keys.

Biodegradable waste quantities in Lithuania and their potential for the co-treatment in renewable energy and organic fertilizer production were investigated. Two scenarios were formulated to study the differences of the amounts of obtainable energy and fertilizers between different ways of utilization. In the first scenario, only digestion was used, and in the second scenario, materials other than straw were digested, and straw and the solid fraction of sewage sludge digestate were combusted. As a result, the amounts of heat and electricity, as well as the fertilizer amounts in the counties were obtained for both scenarios. Based on this study, the share of renewable energy in Lithuania could be doubled by the co-treatment of different biodegradable materials

Two field experiments, conventional grass ley and organic grass-clover ley, were established with barley as a nurse crop in spring 2000 and given either low or high fertilization with mineral fertilizer (Mineral) or composts. The compost types were municipal biowaste (Biowaste), biowaste + sewage sludge (BioSludge) and cattle manure (Manure). Plant yields and nitrogen (N) uptakes were measured for three years and efficiency of N utilization was estimated. In single application of compost, the total N was mainly in organic form and less than 10% was in inorganic form. Along with increasing amount of inorganic N applied in compost, the yield, N uptake and N recovery increased during the application year. The highest compost N recovery in the application year was 12%, found with Biowaste. In the following years the highest N recovery was found where the lowest total N had been applied. Clover performance was improved in the organic grass-clover ley established with BioSludge fertilization, producing total ley yield comparable with Manure compost. High total N application in composts caused high N surplus and low N use efficiency over three years. Generally, moderate compost fertilization is suitable for ley crops when supplemented with mineral N fertilizer or clover N fixation., Heinänurmi ja apila-heinänurmi perustettiin suojaviljaankeväällä 2000 ja lannoitettiin perustamisvaiheessa biojätekompostin tai biojäte-puhdistamolietekompostin kahdella eri tasolla. Tavanomaisella heinänurmella verrannelannoitteena käytettiin väkilannoitetta ja luonnonmukaisella apila-heinänurmella käytettiin karjanlantakompostia. Suojaviljasta ja nurmista mitattiin sadot, typpisadot sekä maan liukoisen typen (NH4, NO3) pitoisuudet vuosina 2000–2002. Lisäksi apila-heinänurmen apilasadon avulla määritettiin biologisen typensidonnan määrä. Toisen ja kolmannen vuoden aikana tavanomaiselle heinänurmelle annettiin typen ja kaliumin lisälannoitus lannoitussuosituksen mukaisesti. Typen hyödyntämisen tehokkuutta arvioitiin vuosittain kahdella menetelmällä, typen hyväksikäyttöasteen (N recovery) ja kasvien saatavilla olevan typen määrän (ABN) arvioinnin avulla. Typen hyödyntämistä kolmivuotisen jakson aikana arvioitiin typen peltotaseen (N balance) ja typen käytön tehokkuuden (NUE) avulla. Kompostien kokonaistypestä alle 10% oli liukoisessa muodossa ja kompostitypen hyväksikäyttöaste ensimmäisen vuoden kasvisatoon vastasi suurimmillaankin biojätekompostilannoituksella alle 12% kompostien kokonaistypestä. Suojaviljan kuiva-aine- ja typpisato sekä typen hyväksikäyttöaste kasvoivat kompostilannoituksessa annetun liukoisen typpimäärän kasvaessa ja kompostikäsittelyt lisäsivät satoja lannoittamattomaan kontrolliin verrattuna. Toisen ja kolmannen koevuoden aikana biojätekompostilla lannoitetun apila-heinänurmen sato oli alhaisempi kuin lantakompostilannoituksella. Toisaalta biojäte-puhdistamolietekompostilla lannoitetun seosnurmen apilasato oli suurempi ja kokonaissato yhtä suuri kuin lantakompostilannoituksella. Ensimmäisen vuoden alhaisella kokonaistyppilannoituksella typen hyväksikäyttöaste toisen ja kolmannen vuoden aikana saattoi olla suurempi ja vuotuinen sadontuotto yhtä suuri kuin suuremmalla kompostilannoituksella. Kolmen vuoden typpitaseet olivat yleensä positiivisia ja joissakin tapauksissa hyvinkin suuria, sillä kompostilannoituksissa annettiin suuri määrä orgaanista kokonaistyppeä josta vain osa korjattiin kasvuston typpisadossa. Typpitase oli positiivinen ja lähinnä tasapainotilannetta alhaisella lannoitustasolla sekä biojätekompostilannoituksella. Typen käytön tehokkuus (NUE) oli kääntäen verrannollinen typpitaseisiin, sillä pienemmällä kompostilannoituksen määrällä saatiin suurempi typen käytön tehokkuus ja likimain sama typpisato kuin suuremmalla kompostilannoituksella. Jätekomposteja voi käyttää rehunurmen lannoitukseen ja täydentää kompostilannoitusta väkilannoitteella tai apilan typensidonnan avulla.

Nautojen jaloittelu- ja ulkotarhat sekä hevostarhat ovat yleistyneet viime vuosina. Syynä on mm. parsinavetoissa olevien lehmien ja hiehojen laidunnussäännös, joka voidaan korvata jaloittelulla tarhassa. Myös suurten pihattonavettojen yhteyteen usein rakennetaan tarha, vaikka varsinaista ulkoilupakkoa pihatossa pidettävillä eläimillä ei ole. Ulkotarhoissa kasvatetaan osan vuotta tai ympäri vuoden emolehmiä ja lihanautoja. Viime vuosina hevosten määrän lisääntyessä on rakennettu uusia talleja ja tarhoja. Varsinaisissa jaloittelutarhoissa eläimet jaloittelevat muutaman tunnin kerrallaan, mutta ulkotarhoissa ne ovat ympäri vuoden. Tarhat ovat maapohjaisia, vaihtopohjaisia tai tiivispohjaisia (asfaltista tai betonista valettuja tai sementillä stabiloituja). Osa tarhoista on perustettu metsään. Tarhoista aiheutuvaan ravinnekuormitukseen vaikuttavat monet asiat. Eläintiheys on niistä tärkein – mitä enemmän eläimiä on tarha-alaa kohti, sitä suurempi on kuormitus. Kun eläimet ovat koko vuorokauden tarhassa, kuormitus on suurempi, kuin jos ne jaloittelisivat tarhassa vain muutaman tunnin päivässä. Ruokinta-, juotto- ja makuualueiden lähiympäristössä ravinnekuormitus on suuri, olipa tarha-alaa kuinka paljon tahansa. Peltoviljelyn aiheuttamaa vesistökuormitusta on pyritty vähentämään monilla eri toimenpiteillä. Erityisesti on kiinnitetty huomiota lannan levitysmääriin, -ajankohtaan ja -tapaan. Kasvipeitteettömässä tarhassa eläinpaine saattaa olla suuri (yli 80 nautayksikkövuorokautta hehtaarilla vuodessa; ny vrk/ha v), kun suositusten mukaan karjatilalla saa olla 1,5 lypsylehmää peltohehtaaria kohden. Sonnan ja virtsan käsittely tarhassa saattaa olla puutteellista, jolloin ravinteita voi kulkeutua sade- tai valumaveden mukana ympäristöön. Tarhavesissä ravinteiden ja ulostemikrobien pitoisuudet saattavat olla moninkertaiset pellon valumavesiin verrattuna. Tarhavedet voivat pilata lähikaivoja ja heikentää rantavesien hygieniaa sekä osaltaan lisätä vesien rehevöitymistä aina leväkukinnoiksi asti. Nautojen tarhoista aiheutuvaa ravinne- ja mikrobikuormitusta vesiin ja kuormituksen vähentämistä on tutkittu MTT:ssä kymmenisen vuotta. Sonnan säännöllinen poisto tarhasta vähentää ravinteiden joutumista vesiin. Tiivispohjaisesta tarhasta on helpompi poistaa sonta ja kerätä valumavedet kuin maa- tai vaihtopohjaisesta tarhasta. Jos maa- tai vaihtopohjainen tarha on salaojitettu, osa vesistä saadaan kerättyä. Maa- ja vaihtopohjaisista tarhoista valumavesiä muodostuu vähemmän ja niissä on yleensä myös vähemmän fosforia, typpeä ja mikrobeja kuin tiivispohjaisen tarhan vesissä, sillä maapohja suodattaa osan epäpuhtauksista. Tiivispohjaisten tarhojen vedet suositellaankin kerättäväksi ja levitettäväksi pellolle. Maa- ja vaihtopohjaisten tarhojen vesiä ei myöskään tulisi laskea suoraan ympäristöön. Niitä voidaan puhdistaa esim. erilaisilla pienpuhdistamoilla, suodattimilla, kosteikossa tai niiden yhdistelmillä.

The aim of our study is to identify business models and opportunities with corporate social responsibility(CSR) presented by biorefineries based on wastes and return flows of agrifood systems. Two regional cases are explored and methods for generalisation are developed.

Recent research suggests that anthropogenic nutrient flows may have transgressed the regulatory capacity of the earth. Agrifood systems account for most of the flows, and the food supply is limited more by reducing the excessive flows than by phosphorus (P) reserves or population growth. The food supply is limited primarily by the P flow tolerated by freshwater ecosystems and next by the needed reduction in the conversion of nitrogen (N) to reactive form in fertilizer manufacture, legume cultivation and fossil fuel combustion. The required reduction in P and N flows would reduce the food supply to 250 and 710 kcal capita −1 d −1 , respectively, in the current agrifood systems. Dietary changes, waste prevention and nutrient recycling are parts of the necessary transformation.