Stephen Barlow Profile picture
Jul 21 26 tweets 5 min read Read on X
"Climate change-induced food price shocks are on the rise and could lead to more malnutrition, political upheaval and social unrest as the world’s poorest are hit by shortages of food staples."

I have been warning about this for decades.

1/🧵theguardian.com/business/2025/…
However, there is a fundamental flaw in the thinking of this research, which grossly under-estimates the threat from this danger, which I will outline here.

Most of these assumptions, mistakenly see a steadily increasing problem.
2/
Yes, climate change will result, over time in steadily rising impacts, but this totally overlooks the serious danger of sudden disruption.

In the real world, if you plot this over time, it will see this as a steady rise in impact. Not sudden impacts within a given year.
3/
However, from ecology, I am aware of how this works in the real world.

What matters, is not the steady, average food supply for a species over many years, but what happens in exceptionally bad years i.e. the minimum in a given year.
4/
This is what actually happens with populations of animals, where one year, or several bad years, can cause a crash in populations, because what matters is not the steady supply of food over time, but the sudden minimum in a given year.
5/
However, we are not talking about absolute shortages like in animal populations, but restricted supply compared to normal, in a market economy, where food is treated as a commodity, and food prices rapidly rise, if supply is restricted.
6/
The serious flaw in the thinking of studies like this, and other economic based studies, is they're based on averages over periods of time. Not what happens in a Black Swan Event, where lots of extreme weather events combine, to create exceptional shortages in a given year.
7/
Here this could create, food hyperinflation, much more than the inflationary figures cited here, which could affect, far more than just the poor. Where impacts on the poor, could have knock on effects, that impact everyone, if they rebel.
8/
If food prices go beyond what people can afford, for basic nutrition, it would incite serious social unrest, and perhaps, global conflict. Especially if some countries halted the export of staple foods (which has already happened, but it could happen on a bigger scale).
9/
The knock on effects, of this serious social unrest and conflict, could impact everyone. There is the false assumption that people in rich countries would be protected, but this is not the case in many realistic scenarios.
10/
Rich countries import large amounts of foodstuffs, even if they're fairly self-sufficient in staples. Theoretically, they could just do without certain imports, say coffee. In reality, people would be seriously disturbed by things they take for granted, if not essential.
11/
This could have knock on social, political and economic impacts.

It is profoundly mistaken to see the situation, in terms of linear patterns, steadily increasing over time. It could be very sudden, and unforeseen.
12/
This thinking, does not take into account, sudden non-linearity, such as Black Swan Events, which are not foreseen, but which are very plausible, and realistic. The theoretical, smooth patterns over time, cannot be relied on.

13/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swa…
We have to plan, for what might plausibly happen in a given year. Because if we are caught out, by a series of extreme weather events, that seriously impact food supplies, in a given year. It doesn't matter if supplies would theoretically return to normal, say the next year.
14/
If the social, political and economic upheaval, in a given year, leads to the collapse of regimes, wars and other conflict, there will not be a return to normal. Our system, as it is, could collapse, in a way very difficult to reverse.
15/
Famines, sudden scarcities of food, have been a feature of human society since the dawn of civilization, and there have been a number in my lifetime. However, changes in technology, farming methods, and global supply, has meant a big reduction in such events.
16/
Indeed, climate change deniers and minimizers, often point to a reduction in climate related deaths, which is actually down to the elimination of these famine events. But a changing climate, could vastly change and reverse this stability.
17/
In the modern world, we are used to a steady supply of things, predictable yields from year to year. But this relies, on a predictable climate, which is no longer the case. We have seen a big increase in catastrophic extreme weather events.
18/
Once again, it is not inconceivable, that within a given year, a series of extreme weather events, could combine to create severely reduced yields in a year, food hyperinflation, and serious disruption to our system, which could change things forever.
19/
If the system is seriously disrupted, it could prevent a return to the steady supplies the following year, which relies on a stable system, which may have been seriously disrupted.
20/
This is why I say, to avoid this threat, we must rapidly transition from the current, highly competitive, system, in which people, countries and corporations, compete at every level for profit, to a cooperative society, working towards the common good.
21/
The advocates of this highly competitive society, will point to it having lowered costs. But if food is treated as a commodity, and supply becomes restricted in a given year, in a free market economy, it will have the opposite effect, of rapidly driving up food prices.
22/
A sudden, massive increase in food prices, especially globally, far greater than anything seen so far, could tear our societies, and our relatively stable system apart.

I cannot understand the assumption that business as usual BaU, will continue indefinitely.
23/
All scientific parameters looking at climate change, indicate that the steady predictable climate we have enjoyed, and which made this stable system possible, is coming to an end.
24/
“There are now no non-radical futures. The choice is between immediate and profound social change or waiting a little longer for chaotic and violent social change. In 2023 the window for this choice is rapidly closing.” @KevinClimate

25/bellacaledonia.org.uk/2023/04/18/no-…
@KevinClimate @threadreaderapp unroll

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Stephen Barlow

Stephen Barlow Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @SteB777

Jul 22
I want to expand this, as it seems a lot are not getting what I'm saying and why.

The vast majority of the public, have no idea what neoliberalism is, or that the mainstream parties they vote for, all adhere to neoliberal ideology, as they don't declare it, and deny it.
1/🧵
The main problem with neoliberal ideology, is its invisibility, hence the title of George Monbiot and Peter Hutchinson's book and film about it, being called the Invisible Doctrine. George sums it up in the short trailer.

2/
However, whilst I applaud this attempt to document and expose neoliberalism, there is a huge problem, in that most people will never see it, read it etc, because the media they see and read, never mentions neoliberalism.
3/
Read 23 tweets
Jul 22
I have just come up with an idea for how to unify a progressive alliance.

It could be called something like "Oppose Neoliberalism", and be a declaration of common cause, in opposing neoliberalism.
1/🧵
The idea would be to put the focus on the political parties (or their leadership), that secretly adhere to the tenets of neoliberalism, and to put clear water, between parties and leaders who support, neoliberalism, and those who oppose it.
2/
The aim would be to allow space for various groups and other parties to formulate their own policy, and approach, but to agree, that it must not be neoliberal, and they must strongly oppose and challenge neoliberalism.
3/
Read 12 tweets
Jul 21
I think I need to reiterate this point, because we are being buried under a mass of disinformation and false argument.

I fully supported this statement in this thread, and I know of no credible supported evidence, that contradicts this point.
1/🧵
Any claim that business as usual BaU can continue for much longer, is not credible. It is an article of faith, by those who believe in our system now, as some sort of quasi religious tenet.

Below is the unrolled version of my thread.

2/threadreaderapp.com/thread/1942880…
I will make a brief supported argument, as to why the continuation of BaU, is physically impossible. Currently, in the system that is crashing natural systems, 18% of the global population own a car, and over 80% don't fly.

3/motorbiscuit.com/number-car-own…
Read 19 tweets
Jul 17
This is part 3 of my thread, in which I want to return to my original theme of taxing rich, the very rich, not slightly better off. This both illustrates the obstacle, and the solution.
1/🧵
As I initially explained, despite over 75% of the UK public, wanting a wealth tax, this Labour government and all previous governments, will refuse to agree to it, because of neoliberal doctrine, which is essentially the credo of oligarchs.
2/
This is the reason for these threads. There is the illusory vision of freedom and democracy, which fools people to believe, that because it is a majority view, if we campaign hard enough, that the government will do it, because it is sensible.
3/
Read 13 tweets
Jul 17
This is part 2 of the thread I just posted, as for some reason, Twitter is not allowing me to continue it in threaded style.

I was discussing how our system is rigged, and how our sense of freedom and democracy, is essentially illusory, as it's a rigged system.
1/🧵
When powerful individuals started taking over our societies 5-6,000 years (it wasn't like this for >95% of the existence Homo sapiens), they have learned how to perpetuate their control of our societies, in an evolutionary way.
2/
I don't mean natural evolution here, I simply mean often quite crude trial and error, where the unsuccessful means of control, fall by the wayside, and the successful means of control are perpetuated and copied by other powerful individuals.
3/
Read 22 tweets
Jul 17
I cannot state how important it is to understand this, and not just as regards neoliberalism.

Most activists make the mistake of thinking, if they campaign, that they can change something in the system. Not realizing that the system it rigged.
1/🧵
In other words, people can have anything they like, but only if it is within what the powerful few who control our society will allow. If it isn't, the controlling clique will block it, regardless of public opinion, and election results.
2/
This controlling clique of powerful and wealthy people, have created the illusion of freedom and democracy, but actually they carefully control, what choices are allowed, and what choices are not allowed by the people.
3/
Read 21 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(