The Q&A below has been compiled from the Fairmiles EU Roundtable event that took place in Brussels on the 30th of April 2024.
What is the Co2 cost of NOT producing a traditionally airfreight product in 3rd world - the opportunity cost of not growing a product is to grow or do something else for income. E.g. grow flue-cured tobacco instead.
Good point. This is something that needs to be better understood. Something for Fairmiles to consider in its future research.
What is the component emissions cost of airfreighting a product, compared to its production?
It depends on the product, its production process and the airfreight route. This would be interesting to look at in future research to gain a better understanding of proportionality in different commodity and product types. A recent study by Fairtrade International for instance shows that emissions linked to energy use for rose production in greenhouses in Netherlands is higher compared to air transport for Kenyan Fairtrade roses
(https://www.fairtrade.net/library/lifecycle-assessment-of-cut-roses).
Can labelling a product's emissions cost in the packaging help consumers decide whether to buy or not, giving individuals the right to choose rather than the "Big Brother" approach?
There are various ecolabelling schemes already in existence. The challenge is the reliability of the data and the assumptions used to calculate the 'eco score' or emissions impact. The score needs to be a fair representation of actual impacts, but we do not think we are there yet. We would also argue that emissions costs should be shown alongside other environmental, social and economic impacts. It should also be noted that specific emissions can vary according to a season’s climate, last mile logistics etc. In best cases, only an average emission can be calculated.
What is the emissions cost of a short haul flight to holiday instead of taking a high speed train? if holidays by air were banned (short haul flights) , what is the impact on emission saving as compared to what is saved by banning airfreighted fresh produce?
It is difficult to answer this question. There are different methodologies that look at GHG emissions for passengers compared to freight. In the case of passenger planes, the reason they fly is for passengers, therefore it might be assumed that people account for the weight of the aircraft and things like chairs, equipment, toilets (etc), therefore freight only accounts for its own weight - giving it a lower emissions factors per kilo. However, there are also methodologies which don't assume this.
Question for any panellist: there is a rising trend of trade-related climate measures both from businesses and from governments, particularly the EU (e.g. deforestation, e.g. CSDD etc) which have unintentional consequences for smallholder farmers?
We acknowledge the trend toward trade-related climate measures, some of which have unintentional consequences for smallholder farmers. Potential airfreight bans are such an example, as demonstrated by Fairmiles research.
Putting freight to one side, could the EU stance on PPP use in third countries which are withdrawn from the EU for environmental reasons, be a bigger barrier to trade?
Comparing measures can be challenging, but feedback from operators in third countries suggests that the withdrawal of certain Plant Protection Products (PPPs) may pose a barrier to trade. This is especially true for quarantine pests and pests causing economically significant damages where alternatives are not readily available, transition periods are too short and when PPP manufacturers do not invest in registering alternative solutions. Finding alternatives is often a challenging task, and the potential impact on and support for farmers are frequently overlooked during policy and regulation reviews.
If airfreight to EU is banned, will producers simply move their production and elsewhere, possibly to buyers in less socially/environmentally conscious markets. How does that help the world?
In light of increasing restrictions, exporters in developing countries may be forced to investigate alternative markets to Europe who may be less demanding and potentially less lucrative for the livelihoods depending on it. We are aware that some exporters are already looking into this. However, many producers and exporters have established a business model centered on exporting fresh produce to the high-end EU market. This model often involves significant investments and lacks readily available alternatives in terms of volumes, prices, currency, reliability, and other factors.
The ethical impact of preventing fresh produce from Southern Africa on millions of Africans has not been highlighted sufficiently in comparison to the EU citizens' carbon footprint. What is fair about banning fresh produce but not holiday flights?
This is a fair point. This was partly covered in James MacGregor's presentation which showed Africa is only responsible for 3% of global emissions, compared to 33% from Europe. In addition, fresh produce is one of the few products that are exported (by air) from African countries to the EU. These countries do import many products from EU origin. The point on holiday flights is also fair. There is some research to show that few people are prepared to give up holiday flights - including people belonging to environmental groups. Equally, we question why there is less focus on non-perishable products (e.g. consumer electronics airfreighted during Black Friday and Cyber Monday - which is the busiest period of the year for airfreight, and fast fashion from Asia)
Is the EU able to grow enough of its fresh produce needs in case air freight is banned and what would be the impact on the other actors in the supply chain? Is there some research data? Are there any post-harvest management and cold chain management implications and/ or advantages that were observed from banning airfreight and switching to sea freight?
Based on global production data, the EU exports far more fresh produce than it imports. However, the EU is not able to produce sufficient fresh produce all-year round in the quantities it needs. Switching from airfreight to sea freight is not possible for short shelf-life perishable products (e.g. French beans). Shipping and transit times are longer, and therefore have a significant impact on post-harvest management. Answering from a Fairmiles perspective, we would say that these are certainly areas where we need more research.
How did you attribute the dependence of livelihood to the mode of Transport? I.e., what would change for livelihoods if you tried to switch all of this to seafreight?
From our survey data, we looked at the volume of produce which can be directly attributed to goods flown by air, and how many producers/jobs are depending on it. There is consensus in scientific literature to extrapolate between economic activity and livelihoods for each producer (often the only income for a family). It is challenging to make assumptions based on switching this all to seafreight, as in most circumstances this is not possible. In many cases it is because of shelf-life (e.g. the product would not last long enough to be sea freighted). In some cases it’s because land-locked countries have no or limited access to seafreight.
Is the data of the airfreight to EU or also other regions?
It is based only on exports to Europe (EU+UK)
Question 1: I didn't see any analysis of comparable CO2 emissions (sorry if I missed it) e.g. if you were to try to produce green beans or flowers in the EU (with greenhouses, etc. etc.) vs producing them in Kenya, what is the CO2 difference? Question 2: In Kenya, we are trying to support a shift from air freight to sea freight (which is possible with refrigerated containers and for certain products i.e. flowers, avocados) - have you done any research on this?
Comparative studies can be problematic as they are often based on assumptions - so we have seen studies showing airfreight to be favourable compared to seafreight in certain circumstances and vice-versa. For instance, a recent study by Fairtrade International informs that Fairtrade roses from Kenya have a smaller environmental footprint when compared to roses produced in Netherlands, even when factoring in airfreight or seafreight transport to Europe (https://www.fairtrade.net/library/lifecycle-assessment-of-cut-roses). During the event, Mr Boelen added that studies indeed highlight that the energy source is one of the main influencing parameters.
Fairmiles seeks not to antagonise, but to ask the question on how to find a fair balance. Production and transport realities may differ from season to season, while also factors as quality, (financial) risk, perishability, flexibility, alternative routes, etc. should ideally be taken into consideration. Several respondents to the Fairmiles survey indicated that airfreight allows to ship smaller volumes, which provide more opportunities for smallscale farmers and MSMEs to reach international markets.
What is the difference between air and sea freight re carbon for same consignment?
This difference depends on the origin, destination, type of transport, volume, fuel type, speed, etc. Theoretically, the same consignment will emit less CO2 by sea container compared to airfreight. However, as Fairmiles intends to do, the hidden opportunity and transaction costs have to be taken into consideration (reliability, alternative freight solutions, freshness, quality, time, product perishability, cost, …). In general, each crop/origin has its comparative advantage, that is the definition of international trade.
Do a proper study on the implications of sea export - volumes needed to justify one container, different vegetables need different temperature and ethylene requirements?
This is noted for future research.
Shifting from air freight will affect quality of short shelf life products e.g green beans.
We agree with this point
With crops being grown outside, weather has a great impact. seafreight takes longer and will affect the % off sold in the end.
Yes - and we believe that waste is sometimes overlooked in comparative studies (e.g. sea containers that are written off due to quality issues on arrival at European ports).
Can we say that this does not apply to all air lifted products. If the products use passenger flights instead of a dedicated cargo flight then the emissions are reduced and fair?
This is not necessarily the case, as emissions are based on the weight of goods being transported. However, there are some methodologies which suggest the emissions are lower per kilo compared to freight planes (see Q4). Additionally, there is the argument that without fresh produce, these planes would still fly and likely be filled with other products. So 'globally', no emissions would have been saved - but a retailer may be able to claim a saving in their own reports. The point is, does this actually make a difference if globally, nothing has changed - and if not, how can we evolve the Net Zero guidance to take this into account?
What about products whose shelf life is 7-10 days, how do we ship these via sea freight which takes 30+ days?
This is a fair point - and one which presents a challenge to the argument of switching more products from air to sea.
Can we have a comparison on carbon emissions by producing fresh vegetables in European greenhouses in winter and airfreight emissions from Africa.
We agree this would be useful data to have. Quite often comparative studies might look at data based on products grown in-season in Europe.
Why do the panel think that fresh produce has more pressure than other industries on this issue? Why only on fresh fruits and vegetable yet even passengers plane does the same in term of emission in the environment?
This is a good question. We wonder for instance why airfreighted non-perishables are not scrutinised more. The answer may be that non-perishable air freight is often 'consumer driven' (e.g. consumers wanting electronic devices and fast fashion quickly) versus fresh-produce which often has to be flown because of the short shelf-life. This is perhaps a point we need to emphasise more. Food also often tends to be more emotive than other categories! The origin of fresh produce is always tagged – it is one single origin, hence more explicitly present to consumers compared to other products with more components. However, more in general, farmers/producers are often vulnerable price-takers in international supply chains with relative low negotiation power compared to high value or multinational industries.
Do you put into consideration land locked countries, how hard it will be to do export business? They entirely rely on air transport even when it's very expensive and increases the cost of products.
This is a good point and relates to the point above. Unfortunately, we cannot just assume that anything that is airfreighted can simply be switched to sea. We have highlighted how one reason is due to shelf-life, but it is also true that this is also because some countries are landlocked.
I believe you will also need to focus in on Geographic origin (Land Locked) and therefore the Emissions of getting Sea Freight shipments by road through to viable ports. Do you put into consideration land locked countries, how hard it will be to do export business. they entirely rely on air Transport even when it's very expensive and increases the cost of products.
This is true. See point above. We also need to consider geo-political factors like we have seen recently in the red sea, which has provides additional challenges for seafreight.
Why not get organizations to strive to be net zero. This emissions are necessary.
100% agree- we must all strive to achieve Net Zero.
Is there any coordination going on between Blue Skies, other research initiatives, CSOs, other businesses, policymakers etc. to facilitate joined up thinking about how to reduce these impacts on smallholders across the board?
I believe Fairmiles is an example of this. COLEAD also do a lot of work in this area. But we do need to see more coordination and partnerships in the approaches we take.
Most products shipped by sea are in temperature and gas controlled containers, is this being considered when comparing the actual carbon cost? Also sea freighted products are regularly harvested unripe and ripened on arrival using high temperatures (more carbon..) and unnatural gases. These are not “fresh” products. I would argue that airfreight is the only way to supply genuinely fresh products.
This is a good point and something that also needs to be taken into account in future research.
How come we have not been able to reach the EU consumers with a more balanced approach on airfreight? The main message is: airfreight is damaging our planet so buy more products from local sources. Pressure on retailers are increasing by NGO's and the consumers' opinion. How to get a more balanced message across?
We know that the concept of ‘foodmiles’ is flawed and that buying locally does not necessarily mean a lower environmental impact than imported food, however this is not widely understood among consumers and even some NGOs. The social and economic dimension of sustainability is even completely omitted in the public debate. We therefore have a job to do to ensure we have the right data, and then ensure that it is understood by consumers and NGOs either through more published research or increased media coverage. Retailers can also play a role during consumer panel sessions and in the direct communication towards its clients. The role of retail and its potential communication channels should not be underestimated.
Is the EU planning to grow more of their food (tropical included) if they reduce airfreighted food imports? Islands like Martinique and Guadeloupe, which are French departments export to France are at a disadvantage to the farmers since they get lower payment.
As far as we are informed, there are no such plans. If you look at trade statistics the EU is an important exporter of food products, including perishables.
Airline passenger volumes are expected to double by 2042. Are the EU planning to limit the growth of passenger travel into/out of Europe? 80% of fresh produce is carried in passenger aircraft bellies. Growth in passenger volumes give developing countries opportunity to increase supply to the EU. Producers are looking to invest in growth to take advantage of this opportunity.
Martijn Boelen from the EU Commission responded on this question during the Roundtable: the EU Commission does not have policies for a specific sector, though they are trying to make carbon more expensive. This means that if the market price + carbon price becomes too expensive, people might fly less. You can not deny people to travel, but you can make it more expensive. That is an example of the carbon trade mechanism. Mr Boelen noted that it was recently extended to sea vessels. There is no policy for airfreight, but along the same lines, one could expect a rise in airfreight cost in the future