Climate and biodiversity loss threaten Europeans’ diets

What do corn, rice, wheat, cocoa, coffee and soybeans have in common? The answer can be found in a recent report on the risks that climate change and biodiversity loss pose to Europe’s imports of key food commodities. The analysis, prepared by the British consulting firm Foresight Transitions, is not optimistic.

Report warns of shortages

Most of the global supply of corn, rice, wheat, cocoa, coffee and soybeans comes from small producers who are systematically forced to sell their crops at prices below the cost of production. Their profits are therefore insufficient to invest in climate change adaptation, and the level of international support they receive is minimal. This fact, according to analysts at Foresight Transition, affects food security in the EU, and raises concerns about the future of companies dependent on the supply of imported food raw materials.

The problem of import instability is also making its mark at the national level. Half of each of the six food commodities analyzed in the report comes from countries that are extremely vulnerable to climate change. In most cases, they do not have the funds or institutional resources needed to adapt and build climate resilience.

Analysis methodology

In 2023, food imports in the 27 EU member states reached a total value of 158.6 billion euros. To assess its vulnerability to climate change and biodiversity loss, Foresight Transitions analysts selected three staple food products (corn, wheat and rice) and three important raw materials used in the European food and livestock industry (cocoa, coffee, soybeans).

The countries from which the EU imports selected products were evaluated according to two main criteria:

• University of Notre Dame’s Global Climate Change Adaptation Index (ND-GAIN);
• Biodiversity conservation status indicator (BII).

As a point of clarification, it is worth adding that both of these indicators are on a scale of 0 to 100. Norway is currently considered the best adapted country to climate change (ND-GAIN 74.6), while Chad is considered the worst (ND-GAIN 27.1). By contrast, a BII score of 90 percent or higher is considered a safe level of biodiversity conservation, while 0 to 30 percent is considered low.

Climate risk vs. chocolate bar

More than half of imported corn, wheat, rice, coffee, cocoa and soybeans come from countries with low or medium ND-GAIN. This means that not only are they particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change, but they also lack the resources to adapt to it. The greatest risk is to imports of coffee, cocoa and rice, products mainly grown in climate-sensitive tropical zones.

Examples of black scenarios in this regard do not need to be searched for long. Pakistan, which is the second largest exporter of rice to the EU, experienced an unusually intense monsoon season in 2022. Accompanying floods caused rice production losses of 80 percent, or the equivalent of $543 million.

The market for chocolate, of which Europe is the world’s largest producer, exporter and consumer, is also problematic. This is all the more paradoxical because the cocoa needed for its manufacture is all imported, primarily from West Africa. As much as 96.5 percent of imports come from countries with low (Cameroon and Nigeria) and medium-low (Ivory Coast, Ghana and Ecuador) ND-GAIN levels. Further weather anomalies could put the availability of chocolate treats in question.

Why does the loss of biodiversity threaten agricultural production?

It might seem that farmers grow food crops that are in demand in the world and have nothing to do with natural flora. In reality, however, the loss of biodiversity has a colossal impact on crop productivity. Weakened ecosystems are much less resilient to climate change, disease and pathogens, affecting the health of plant cover in entire regions.

An example is the cocoa plantations in West Africa, which, due to a violation of the natural biological balance, have fallen victim in recent years to the viral disease CSSD ( Cocoa Swollen Shoot Disease), transmitted by proliferating mealybugs.

In Brazil, the loss of biodiversity associated with the destruction of natural vegetation has in turn led to severe changes in the microclimate. Their victim is the soybean crop, which is yielding diminishing returns per hectare. A similar phenomenon is observed with regard to the condition of the soil, which is definitely not favored by agricultural monoculture. Eroded and low-fertile soil is bad news for farmers.

Imported corn, wheat and cocoa come from countries where biodiversity loss has reached levels considered dangerous. Meanwhile, corn production in Europe, which still covered 81 percent of internal demand in 2020-2022, is threatened by intensifying heat waves. Thus, a scenario is possible in which yellow cobs will be in short supply both in the EU and in importing countries such as Ukraine and Moldova with a BII index of medium and below.

Black prognosis for store shelves and business

In many countries, biodiversity loss dovetails with poor resilience to climate change. One example is Uganda, from which 10 percent of the EU’s coffee imports come. The climate change adaptation index here, meanwhile, is only 28, while BII is only 57 percent, and is expected to drop another 6 points by 2050. Meanwhile, it is coffee that generates a third of export earnings in this poor African country.

Floods and heat waves are limiting cocoa production in Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire, which at the same time are forecast to see a progressive loss of natural vegetation. Not surprisingly, chocolate prices in the EU are rising, and analysts say things could get worse. Especially since cocoa cultivation itself promotes deforestation and loss of biodiversity. The problems are increasingly evident in Europe as well. The chocolate crisis has led to the closure of more than a dozen family-owned candy companies in the past year, and to massive layoffs at large food corporations.

Can Europe protect itself from shortages?

Obvious methods to neutralize the risks of food imports into the EU include diversifying supply and increasing domestic production. However, the latter is hampered by natural disasters and weather anomalies, which European countries are increasingly experiencing. In 2024, wheat production on the continent was the lowest since 2018.

Analysts at Foresight Transitions therefore suggest looking at the food import problem from yet another angle. First, consistent reductions in greenhouse gas emissions can reduce the intensity of climate change impacts, protecting crops in vulnerable countries. Second, it seems reasonable to increase financial support for adaptation and mitigation measures in countries that are important trading partners of Europe. This assistance should address not only climate, but also the protection of biodiversity, whose impact on agriculture remains underestimated.

The report’s authors urge the EC’s directorates-general, specifically DG-CLIMA, DG-ENV and DG-AGRI, to start implementing a model of a research-based approach to the problem, which analyzes various possible scenarios and seeks intensive rather than optimal strategies. Modern information technologies can additionally help European decision-makers plan international trade taking into account the interests of multiple parties and stabilize food imports even under the high uncertainty provided by today’s climate.

In the article, I used:

EU Food Imports, Foresight Transitions, May 2025, https://www.netzerotrade.org/eu-food-imports