key: cord-0820128-xqf0f77f
authors: Bai, Zhaohai; Schmidt-Traub, Guido; Xu, Jianchu; Liu, Ling; Jin, Xinpeng; Ma, Lin
title: A food system revolution for China in the post-pandemic world
date: 2020-12-31
journal: Resources, Environment and Sustainability
DOI: 10.1016/j.resenv.2020.100013
sha: 365397642be49d6007fdf700688628f9afd6c60a
doc_id: 820128
cord_uid: xqf0f77f

The COVID-19 pandemic is worsening food shortages in food deficit countries, such as China, which rely on import for domestic food consumption. We argue that fundamental revolution in China’s livestock system can meet about 50% of its consumption of livestock products and thereby reduce the country’s reliance on imports. Three food system revolutions that can greatly reduce China’s reliance on imports are technically and economically feasible, and generate high eco-system benefits: (1) organic or inorganic based microbial feed protein production to substitute imported feed protein, (2) vegetation greening and fodder production through grassland restoration to reduce import of ruminant animal products, and (3) insect protein based fish-plant production and offshore marine restoration to replace red meat consumption and increase recycling of manure. Together these revolutions can accelerate progress towards multiple Sustainable Development Goals in exporting countries.

International trade of agricultural products plays important roles in supplying food for food deficit countries, including many African countries that rely on grain (Rakotoaroa et al., 2012) , the United Kingdom also highly relied on food importation (de Ruiter et al., 2016) , and China is the largest animal feed importer (Bai et al., 2018a,b; FAO, 2020a) . So far, international agricultural supply chains have proven quite resilient to impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. Changes in food trade and global food prices have so far been modest. However, the pandemic is worsening food shortages in food-deficit countries (FAO, 2020b; IFPRI, 2020) . Some countries have seen COVID-19 related disruptions to domestic supply chains, notably the meat industry in the US and Germany (IMF, 2020) . The zoonotic origins of COVID-19 heighten concerns about food security, particularly in China (Fan, 2020) .

The lack of coordinated global responses to this crisis, and the apparent fragility of key international supply chains encourage some governments to pursue self-reliance for critical commodities and to slow or even reverse the process of globalization even if this might risk the livelihoods of millions of poor people and undermine food security for many (IMF, 2020; WFP, 2020) . In China the consequences of COVID-19 add weight to considerations of increased food security and reduced dependencies on imports. They further add to a growing focus on food safety and quality, particularly for meat and dairy products. * Corresponding author.

E-mail address: malin1979@sjziam.ac.cn (L. Ma).

Food security ranks at the top of China's basic state policies. Extensive subsidies, particularly for fertilizers, pesticides, and plastic films, support domestic agricultural production (Bai et al., 2018a; Jiao et al., 2018) . They account for $130 billion each year or 15% of total agricultural gross domestic production (GDP) value, and have contributed to rapidly increasing in crop yields in China (OECD, 2020). China's policies favor the production of staple crops over non-staple crops and animal feed, such as soybean. In recent years, the country has managed to meet over 98% of demand from domestic production ( Fig S1) . China's domestic markets are stable, as illustrated by the fact that staple food prices were not significantly affected by the world food crisis in 2008 (Yang et al., 2008) . The same appears to hold true in the current pandemic even though meat prices were affected temporarily owing to disruptions in supply chains during the lock-down (IFPRI, 2020) and outbreak of African Swine Fever. However, we argue China's food system requires revolution in the post-pandemic era. This revolution will not be in the traditional grain production system, but in the livestock production sector. China has the world's largest urban population; around 70% of the people permanently live in cities where there are strong demands for high-quality animal protein (FAO, 2020a; Ma et al., 2019) . Demand is so strong that exceeds domestic production capacity. In 2017, China imported 170 Tg of none staple crop products and 1.57 Tg fish meal, which is mainly used as animal feed (FAO, 2020a increasing amounts of dairy products, beef and pork to fulfill domestic demands (FAO, 2020a) . Several so called 'wild animals' but most were actually domesticated or home feed animals were banned under the latest strict policy in China in response to the pandemic (Xinhua, 2020) , such as the Palm civet (Paguma Larvata) and pangolin, believed to be intermediate hosts for SARS and COVID-19 virus transmission (WHO, 2020) . This policy would roughly reduce domestic meat supplies by another several million tons.

However, there have been no systematic analyses of the reliance of China's animal production and supply on importation, and potential impacts on agricultural production related Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in the exporting countries. In addition, little information is available for ensuring that China's animal production will supply enough high quality livestock products in the post-pandemic era if there is a strong reverse in globalization trends. Hence, the main goals of this study are: (i) quantifying the reliance of China's animal food supply on importation; (ii) exploring eco-system based food system revolutions for China to ensure livestock products supply; (iii) evaluating potential impacts on achieving SDGs in the countries dominating exports to China.

We tracked imported biomass and value of 330 crop products from the main exporting countries and their allocation to feed protein use in China, using different sub-databases module from FAOSTAT (Table 1) . The impacts of feed protein import on domestic livestock production was estimated based on the feed protein intake, and impacts on land use in exporting countries were evaluated according to average crop yield in each exporting country. Import biomass and value of livestock and aquatic products from the main exporting countries was derived from database of Ministry of Agricultural and Rural Affairs in 2019 (Table 1) , with dairy products corrected to a fresh-milk basis. Manure nitrogen (N) excretions and livestock N use efficiency of each livestock category has been estimated to show environmental impacts of export livestock production to China in the main exporting countries based on parameters provided by FAOSTAT.

Information about crop products import and trade matrix was collected from FAOSTAT (Table 1) , data refers to 2017 due to the availability of data across different sub-database of FAOSTAT. We selected 330 crop species to track their export amount, final use and trade value from the main exporters to China, such as EU-28, Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Indonesia, Malaysia, Australia, Russia, and United States. The protein content of each product was derived from Lassaletta et al. (2014) and FAO Food Balance sub-database (Table 1 ). The feed use of each product was obtained from FAOSTAT (Table 1) , considering both the direct feed use and indirect use of residues from processing, as most of protein was retained in the residues after processing. This is important because soybean, rapeseed and barley contribute over 95% to China's total crop import. Import value of crop products was collected from FAOSTAT (Table 1) . External land use was calculated based on the amount of exported crop product and average yield of each crop in each export country. Note that import and re-export of certain products was not included in the calculations. The total traded value of crop products was collected from the detailed trade matrix database of FAOSTAT (Table 1) . We also tracked the land-usechange related GHG emission in 2017 from the GHG emission dataset of FAOSTAT (Table 1) .

Information about the historical changes of livestock products import from 1961 to 2019 was collected from FAOSTAT and MORAR database (Table 1) . MORAR database provides information of most recent trade matrix data. Six livestock categories were selected: bovine meat, dairy products, sheep&goat mutton, eggs, chicken and pork. In addition, all the imported dairy products were converted to fresh milk for comparison among products. The conversion ratio was 8.0 for bulk milk powder packages, 7.0 for infant formula, 10.0 for cheese, 11.0 for cream, 0.1 for whey, 2.5 for condensed milk, 1.0 for packaged fresh milk and 1.0 for yoghurt (Bai et al., 2018b) .

Livestock manure N excretion per kilogram product was based on the amount of excreted N in manure divided by livestock production per animal category per year (Table 1) , and assumed no changes between 2017 and 2019. The feed protein intake of each livestock category was sum of the protein content of different products and N content in the manure multiplied by a factor of 6.25, following the conversion rate between protein and total N content. Then, N use efficiency of livestock production was calculated, based on the N content in the products and total feed N intake. Manure N production related to export of livestock products to China was calculated based on the average livestock manure N excretion per kilogram product and export of different livestock products to China. Traded value was derived from the trade matrix data from MORAR database ( Table 1) .

Reduction of livestock products supply under a no-feed-protein import scenario was calculated based on proportion of feed protein import to total feed protein consumption. Hence, the entire livestock category was reduced by that proportion due to no feed protein import. Impacts of livestock products supply under a no-livestock products import was calculated directly based on import information from 2019.

Microbial protein (MP) can be produced by means of hydrogen (hydrogen-MP) and natural gas (natural gas-MP), without relying on organic resources from agricultural production. Typically, microbial protein production involves the supply of nitrogen, an electron donor, a carbon source and an electron acceptor to reactor systems enabling highly efficient production and harvesting of microbial protein (Pikaar et al., 2017) . In MP production, inputs included raw material and resources, and output was MP. In hydrogen-MP process, the raw material input was Haber-Bosch N, H 2 and CO 2 . In natural gas-MP process, the raw material input was Haber-Bosch N and CH 4 (Matassa et al., 2015 (Matassa et al., , 2016 . The production efficiency was based on literature data while the cost of materials was based on local data. Here we used the average value of two methods. The effect of different MP production process on materials use and economic cost was evaluated based on 1 kg MP.

The amount of Haber-Bosch N input ( ) was calculated from the N content of MP ( ) and MP amount ( ). According to , the equivalent of urea input ( ) can be evaluated:

Where = 11.2% (Matassa et al., 2015; Pikaar et al., 2018) , = 1 kg.

is the N content in urea, 46%, is the amount of Haber-Bosch N, kg.

Amounts H 2 , CO 2 and CH 4 input to the MP production process was based on published information (Pikaar et al., 2017 (Pikaar et al., , 2018 . The calculated details were as: Matassa et al., 2015) . CO 2 − is the input of CO 2 , − is the output of MP, CO 2 − = 4.9-37.5 t, − = 2.6-20.2 t (Matassa et al., 2016; Pikaar et al., 2018) .

is the output of MP, CH 4 − = 1767 m 3 (Pikaar et al., 2018) , − = 1 t (Matassa et al., 2016) . In hydrogen-MP and natural-gas-MP processes, resources consumed included electricity, water and land. The electricity of hydrogen-MP and natural-gas-MP consumed ( , W ) was calculated as following:

Where is the energy use for hydrogen-MP and natural gas-MP, 361 and 452 MJ, respectively (Matassa et al., 2015; Pikaar et al., 2018) . C is the coefficient value converting electricity to primary energy, 0.31 (Matassa et al., 2016; Pikaar et al., 2018) . The land required by of hydrogen-MP and natural gas-MP to produce 1 kg MP ( , m 2 ) was 0.05 m 2 (Matassa et al., 2015) .

The cost to produce 1 kg MP was the summed cost of materials (Cost urea , Cost nature gas , Cost electr ), the calculated details as following:

Cost MP = Cost urea + Cost nature gas + Cost electr (7)

Cost urea = ×

Cost nature gas = CH 4 × nature gas (9)

Cost electr = ×

Where, , nature gas and are market prices for urea (2.0 CNY per kg), natural gas (3.0 CNY per m 3 ), and electricity (1.3 CNY per kwh −1 ) in China, respectively. Note that 7.0 CNY currently equals 1.0 US $.

For the cost of grassland revolution, we used total GHG emission and land use of exported ruminant products to China, to compare with the GHG emission and land use of improved domestic grassland productivity and domestic industrial ruminant animal production. The average GHG emission and land use of different ruminant products from the main exporting countries was derived from peer-review literature (Herrero et al., 2013; Bai et al., 2018a,b) , which provided average GHG emission and agricultural land requirement per product for mutton, beef, and milk produced in Latin American, Australia, New Zealand and European countries (Table S1 ). In the revolution of grassland system, we assumed part of the natural grassland will change into managed grassland, where average yields are -10 t ha −1 (Fang et al., 2016) . GHG emission and land requirement data of dairy production in China was derived from NUFER-animal model, with improved grassland productivity (Bai et al., 2018a,b) . Then we assumed all the imported ruminant products will be replaced by domestic production system, and compared the current situation with domestic grassland productivity improved situation.

The scores and achievements of detailed SDGs of the main exporting countries have been collected from the most recent SDGs report, which provide the current scores and changes of scores of sub-indicators of 17 main SDGs (Sachs et al., 2020; SDSN, 2020) . Around 14 sub SDG indicators are positively or negatively impacted by crop and livestock production. Positive and negative impacts contributions of livestock production to sub-indicators of SDGs was derived from Mehrabi et al. (2020) , and extended to crop production. The positive impacts included SDG1 -Poverty headcount ratio at $3.20 day −1 , SDG2 -Yield gap closure, SDG8 --Employment rate and SDG9 -Scientific and technical journal articles, and the rest of the indicators were negative impacts (Table S2 ). Green means positive and red means negative contribution to achieve SDGs in the exporting countries. More green or red in each SDG indicators means more positive or negative contributions, respectively. This was relative to SDG scores in the exporting countries, which divided into four levels, SDG achieved, challenges remain, significant challenges remain and major challenges remain. More severe of the challenges means the more red color. Light yellow means no contributions due to achieved SDG in exporting countries. In addition, some SDGs in the exporting countries have no relationship with the trade of crop and animal products with China, due to minor trade flows. For detailed information of the selected sub SDG indicators, positive and negative impacts, achievement level of SDG of different exporting countries, see Table S2 .

China's demand for meat and dairy products is rising fast, and outstripping domestic production by far. In 2017, China imported 170 Tg of crop products and 1.6 Tg of fish meal, equal to 38 Tg of protein of which 86% were used as animal feed (Fig. 1a) . Currently, imported feed protein equals around 40% of total feed protein intake by animals in China (Fig. 1a, b) according to the livestock products protein uptake and manure N excretions estimations by FAOSTAT (FAO, 2020a). However, the total manure N excretions by the selected 6 animal categories were around 12 Tg N in 2017, which was smaller than the estimates of 14-22 Tg in 2010 (Chadwick et al., 2015; Gu et al., 2015; Bai et al., 2018a) , but similar to the 12 Tg N in 2016 by Zheng et al. (2019) . Large variations were partly due to different excretion factors used, especially in studies not considering N losses during animal housing (Chadwick et al., 2015) . This was also partly due to the inclusion or exclusion of backup animals, for example, few studies used the stock number of non-dairy cattle and few studies used the slaughter number, which may contribute to the large differences. Hence, the estimated reliance on imported feed protein may vary across methodologies.

In 2019, China also imported 20 Tg of animal products -of which 80% was ruminant animal products ( Fig S2) -to supply increasing demands for animal products. The shortfall in China's domestic animal protein production is further compounded by recent domestic bans on the rearing and consumption of some types of 'wild animals' to curb the risk of zoonotic diseases. They will cut annual domestic meat supplies by several million tons per year and threaten a $75 billion business accounting for up to 6.3 million jobs (Figs. 1c, S3) .

Along with the European Union, North America, India, and other major importers, China's international demand for soft commodities also contributes to deforestation and other environmental damage in exporting countries (FABLE, 2019) . A growing understanding of sustainable soft commodity supply chains may further highlight the need to reduce China's import dependency for animal protein and feed, particularly as the country prepares to host the 15th Conference of the Parties under the UN Convention on Biological Diversity in Kunming in 2021.

With food security in grain and other staple crops assured (Fig S1) , China further needs to revolutionize its livestock production system to reduce its reliance on imports to meet 50% of its meat, dairy and eggs consumption (Fig. 1c) , and 40% of animal protein supply (including aquatic proteins) (Fig. 2 ). This will help ensure long-term security of remaining import needs, address environmental spillovers, and provide an opportunity to improve meat production processes for food safety and quality (Fig. 2) . Here, we identify three revolutions to support this transformation.

Bacteria can metabolize hydrogen (in combination with carbon dioxide), natural gas or other organic resources to produce microbial protein (MP) that rich in essential amino acids. Fungi can use biomass (fiber and lignin) residues from food production and forestry for amino acids and proteins, such as mushrooms. MP and including mushrooms can be used as animal feed as there are fewer requirements of taste, smell and shape than in human food. Since the 1970s technologies for MP production have improved significantly and several pilot plants demonstrate the feasibility of large-scale production with or without organic resources and without requiring agricultural land (Fig. 3a) . With growth periods of less than one month, such systems can achieve extremely high productivities per area of land (Pikaar et al., 2017 (Pikaar et al., , 2018 .

Some 20 billion US $ may be needed in operating costs, excluding labor costs that are hard to estimate, to replace 38 Tg of imported feed protein with natural gas MP production becoming fully implemented in China. This corresponds to half of China's import bill for feed products in 2017 (Fig. 3b, c) . In addition, this amount of MP synthesis requires only 0.19 million ha of land and can be sited on non-agricultural land. This can lower demand for cropland by some 33 million ha (Fig. 3b) , including in biodiversity-rich tropical regions (Escobar et al., 2020) . In 2017, China imported large amounts of feed protein from Brazil and Argentina, where land use change caused hundreds of millions tons of CO 2 emission (Fig. 2a) .

Synthetic microbial protein production in China can contribute to multiple Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in export-source countries (Fig. 2) , especially in Latin American, North American and Australia due to the large feed protein trade. For example, reducing feed protein imports could significantly reduce SDG11-exposure to air pollution, SDG12-nitrogen production footprint and SDG13-effective carbon rates in these regions, due to their relatively low SDG scores in 2019 (Fig. 2) . However, major exporting countries may also lose $40 billion in trade (Fig. 3) and over 50% of the income loss would occur in Brazil and Argentina (Fig. 4a) . It would impact achieving SDG1 and SDG2.1 in Brazil and Australia (Fig. 2) .

Ruminants' digestive systems require roughage, such as grass that cannot be replaced by MP. China increasingly relies on imported beef and dairy products partially due to its lack of cheap and high-quality domestic grass, such as alfalfa (Bai et al., 2018b; Zu Ermgassen et al., 2020) . Grasslands cover some 300 million ha in China, which is around 2.5 times the area of available croplands. China's grasslands are mostly Table S2 . Green means positive and red means negative contribution to achieve SDGs in exporting countries; more green or red in each SDG means more positive or negative contributions, respectively; light yellow means no contributions due to the higher SDGs score in exporting countries; NA means data not available; NP means not applicable due to no or little trading between China and the exporting countries. natural grasslands with an average biomass production of 0.75 ton ha −1 , which is low by international standards (Fang et al., 2016) .

Improved management of China's grasslands requires two major actions. First, develop managed grasslands which have >10 times higher biomass yield than natural grassland. This starts by spatial planning to align feed and ruminant animal production with local climate conditions, water shortages, environmental carrying capacity, and feed demand (Bai et al., 2018b) . Productivity enhancements require technology innovations and policy support for grass and ruminant animal breeding, cultivation, harvest and processing, as well as recycling nutrients between livestock and grass production to avoid pollution swapping (Bai et al., 2018a,b) . Second, China needs to increase the biomass yield and diversity of unprotected natural grassland via proper cultivation, nutrient and water management, to offset GHG emissions from increasing domestic ruminant livestock production (Bossio et al., 2020) .

Currently, the Chinese Academy of Sciences is leading efforts to tackle these twin challenges. Findings suggest that both prongs of the grassland revolution are feasible and economically attractive in China (CAS, 2020) . Agricultural and environmental implications of these changes promise to be substantial. GHG emissions and agricultural land area associated with ruminant meat consumption would be reduced by 20% and 80% for imported ruminant animal products, respectively (Fig. 3c, d) . This would also change the current export of livestock products from relatively lower feed N use efficiency regions to China (Fig. 4b) , which may decrease the global feed N use efficiency. Significantly, China would be able to reduce beef imports from Brazil to zero, which in turn would help curb losses of biodiversity in the Amazon (Cohn et al., 2014; Zu Ermgassen et al., 2020) . Meanwhile, it will also improve SDGs scores in the other main exporting countries (Fig. 2) . For example, the volume of manure N excretion embedded in China's imports could be significantly reduced through grassland revolution in China. This in turn, will help to increase the relatively lower scores for SDG2.2, SDG11, SDG12 and SDG13 in these regions (Fig. 2) . Reduced imports may have smaller impacts on GDP in the relatively poor countries, as the majority of high value livestock exports to China come from rich countries, such as EU, Australia and New Zealand (Fig. 4n, o, p) .

China imported 6.3 Tg of aquatic products including 1.6 Tg of fish meal in 2019 (Fig S4) . With imported salmon suspected of causing a recent new outbreak of COVID-19 in Beijing, imports of aquatic products were temporarily banned, and there is a growing interest in reducing the dependency on these imports in China. Domestic aquatic production has greatly contributed to China's food security, but its intensive production methods have destroyed much biodiversity and critical ecosystems in inland and coastal habitats (Zhou et al., 2019) .

To ensure sustainable supplies of aquatic products in the post-COVID-19 era, China should consider two major changes based on existing technologies. First, the country needs to increase capacity of large-scale industrial fish plants that are separated from inland or coastal ecosystems to reduce pollution (Zhang et al., 2011) , and use insects as a main feed protein, such as black soldier flies (Hermetia illucens (L.)) (Palma et al., 2019) . These insects are grown in part on livestock manure, which can close the livestock nutrient loop by converting excess manure from MP and managed grassland based livestock system. These shifts would promote domestic substitutes for the imports of aquatic products and fish meal, which in turn can reduce pressure on aquatic ecosystems and their biodiversity in exporting countries (Parodi et al., 2018; Palma et al., 2019) . Moreover, industrial fish plants can be developed near livestock farms, recycle manure and cutting connections to aquatic ecosystems (Jin et al., 2020) . This would lower environmental pollution from aquaculture systems in China (Zheng et al., 2019) . Second, China needs to sustainably cultivate its coastal waters via the newly developed 'Blue Granary' technology system, such as vertical aquatic eco-production system, offshore seagrass cultivation and habitat biodiversity recovery, and far-reaching marine industrialization with large-scale aquaculture equipment, to fully recover habitat and agricultural production functionality of vast coastal water of China (MOST, 2020). Again, this will positively contribute to several SDGs especially related to SDGs 11-14 in leading exporting countries (Fig. 2,  S4) .

These three revolutions are technically feasible and can greatly reduce China's dependence on imports for food security, though it is unlikely that China will become entirely independent from imported food and feed. By reducing biodiversity loss and curbing greenhouse gas emissions in China and internationally, these changes would also assist in achieving 'Ecological Civilization: Building a Community of Life on Earth', the theme of the 2021 conference of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity hosted by China in Kunming. Moreover, these changes would put China at the forefront of developing technologies for sustainable protein production, which can then be shared with and transferred to net food and feed importing countries.

If these revolutions are implemented, China will reduce but not cease agricultural imports, since the country benefits from lower food price, and precious virtual land and water use through imports. In addition, the exporting countries generated earnings that boost domestic job opportunities and GDP (Fig. 4) . But it is time for China to rethink its food supply chain and invest in these food system revolutions, due to the profound impacts of global pandemic on the global landscape, and great reliance of China's food quality on global markets. In addition to these food system revolutions, China could support dietary shifts towards more vegetables, fruits and beans, and less meat (particularly pork, beef and mutton) (Springmann et al., 2018) , which will further reduce the demand for imports from China.

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Global environmental costs of China's thirst for milk

China's livestock transition: driving forces, impacts and consequences

The role of soil carbon in natural climate solutions

Improving manure nutrient management towards sustainable agricultural intensification in China

Cattle ranching intensification in Brazil can reduce global greenhouse gas emissions by sparing land from deforestation

Spatially-explicit footprints of agricultural commodities: Mapping carbon emissions embodied in Brazil's soy exports. Glob. Environ. Chang. 62, 102067. Fan, S., 2020. Agriculture, food and nutrition security under Covid-19: lessons from China

Small vs large area' principle: protecting and restoring a large area of natural grassland by establishing a small area of cultivated pasture

Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO)

Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), 2020b. Crop Prospects and Food Situation #2. Food and Agricultural Organization

Integrated reactive nitrogen budgets and future trends in China

Biomass use, production, feed efficiencies, and greenhouse gas emissions from global livestock systems

Global food security portal

Confronting the crisis: priorities for the global economy

The transformation of agriculture in China: Looking back and looking forward

Spatial planning needed to drastically reduce nitrogen and phosphorus surplus in China's agriculture

Food and feed trade as a driver in the global nitrogen cycle: 50-year trends

Exploring future food provision scenarios for

Can direct conversion of used nitrogen to new feed and protein help feed the world

Microbial protein: future sustainable food supply route with low environmental footprint

Livestock policy for sustainable development

Organisation for European Economic Co-operation and Development

Managing high fiber food waste for the cultivation of black soldier fly larvae

The potential of future foods for sustainable and healthy diets

Decoupling livestock from land use through industrial feed production pathways

Microbes and the next nitrogen revolution

Why Has Africa Become a Net Food Importer? Explaining Africa Agricultural and Food Trade Deficits

Global cropland and greenhouse gas impacts of UK food supply are increasingly located overseas

The Sustainable Development Goals and COVID-19

Options for keeping the food system within environmental limits

Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN), 2020. Sustainable development report 2020

Report of the FABLE Consortium. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) and Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN)

World Food Programme (WFP), 2020. Global Report on Food Crises. World Food Programme

World Health Organization (WHO), 2020. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak

The decision of a total ban on the illegal wildlife trade

Fighting global food price rises in the developing world: the response of China and its effect on domestic and world markets

Emergy evaluation and economic analysis of three wetland fish farming systems in Nansi Lake area

Spatiotemporal characteristics of the bearing capacity of cropland based on manure nitrogen and phosphorus load in mainland

Marine ranching construction and management in East China Sea: Programs for sustainable fishery and aquaculture

The origin, supply chain, and deforestation risk of Brazil's beef exports

Supplementary material related to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resenv.2020.100013.