Covid, the Environment and Food Systems: Contain, Cope and Rebuild Better

Covid, the Environment and Food Systems: Contain, Cope and Rebuild Better Anil Markandya 1 *, Jacob Salcone 2 , Salman Hussain 2 , Alexander Mueller 3 and Simi Thambi 2 1 Basque Centre for Climate Change, Leioa, Spain, 2 UNEP –Ecosystem Service Economics Unit, Nairobi, Kenya, 3 TMG –Think Tank for Sustainability, Berlin, Germany The objective of this paper is to analyse impacts of COVID-19 on the nexus of food systems, the environment and sustainable development and propose ways for governments and international agencies to mitigate impacts in the short and medium term. It covers the historic period from early 2020 to early 2021 and also makes an assessment on future prospects. Although evidence is collected from all around the world, the focus is primarily on developing countries. The methods used are a review of the announced actions and preliminary findings in the academic and grey literature as well as on reliable websites from global and international institutions. By October 2020, governments around the world had invested about $12 trillion to counteract the economic effects of COVID-19. This investment could contribute to progress on the SDGs and global climate targets insofar as it was invested within a framework that supports both socio-economic recovery and sustainability. Initial analysis indicates that investments for economic recovery did not sufficiently address food security and sustainability, concentrating instead on immediate economic risk management. The global sustainable development agenda must promote the resilience and sustainability of food systems through policies and measures that: i) account for environmental thresholds and trade-offs; ii) promote food security and healthy diets; iii) enhance and protect rural livelihoods; and iv) address the inequalities and injustices that have emerged and will prevail during a post-COVID transition. National stimulus programs and the actions of international agencies must be assessed and monitored to deliver multiple benefits simultaneously and guide building back better. Keywords: COVID-19, food systems, environment, pollution, rebuild INTRODUCTION COVID-19 presents an unprecedented global health and economic crisis. Since detection of the virus at the end of 2019, it has caused around 157 million infections and more than 3.3 million deaths. 1 All around the world, millions of people have lost jobs and income in the deepest economic downturn in living memory. The health impacts include both the direct consequences of infection and the effects Edited by: Ranjan Kumar Ghosh, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, India Reviewed by: Pablo Imbach, Global Center on Adaptation, Netherlands Srinivasa Reddy Srigiri, Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE), Germany *Correspondence: Anil Markandya [email protected] Specialty section: This article was submitted to Environmental Economics and Management, a section of the journal Frontiers in Environmental Science Received: 01 March 2021 Accepted: 18 June 2021 Published: 06 July 2021 Citation: Markandya A, Salcone J, Hussain S, Mueller A and Thambi S (2021) Covid, the Environment and Food Systems: Contain, Cope and Rebuild Better. Front. Environ. Sci. 9:674432. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2021.674432 1 WHO Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Dashboard | WHO Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Dashboard, Accessed May 10th , 2021. Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org July 2021 | Volume 9 | Article 6744321 REVIEW published: 06 July 2021 doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2021.674432 of measures taken to contain the outbreak, such as increased poverty, hunger, undernutrition and social disruption. These have not yet been fully understood or quantified. 2 It is clear, however, from the material reviewed in this paper, that the combination of economic and health effects is still impacting and will continue to impact the environment. While there are some positive impacts, the majority are negative. Moreover, it is curtailing the prospects for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This article analyses the effects of COVID-19 on all aspects of the environment, with a focus on interconnections between the pandemic and the agri-food system and considers how these effects are best mitigated. The findings are highly relevant to the continued response to the pandemic, as well as to prevention of similar crises in the future. Prior to COVID-19, the case for systemic change in food systems was gathering momentum as countries, the United Nations, and academia drew attention to the role such systems played—both positive and negative—in achieving the SDGs. More than any other sector, the agri-food system entails a web of feedbacks between ecosystems, livelihoods, economic development, trade relations and human health. This means it can support or hinder progress towards many of the 17 SDGs, such as Zero Hunger (SDG 2), Good Health and Well-Being (SDG 3), Gender Equality (SDG 5), Decent Work and Economic Growth (SDG 8) and Climate Action (SDG 13). Food production is a leading driver of biodiversity loss and a major contributor to GHG emissions (PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, 2014;Mbow et al., 2019). The food and agriculture sector employs over a billion people world-wide (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2016, p. 18). Food systems are the backbone of human health but also contribute to some of the fastest growing health problems—non-communicable diseases (NCDs) such as diabetes, obesity related cancers and heart disease (World Cancer Research Fund International, 2014; Anand et al., 2015;Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2016). The article is structured as follows. Macroeconomic Impacts of the COVID19 Crises lays out the socioeconomic impacts of COVID-19, as well the broad economic impacts measures that alleviate the negative effects of the pandemic. It examines the implications for the food system and food security outcomes. The impacts of the pandemic on the environment and natural systems are evaluated in Impacts of COVID-19 on the Nexus Between Agri-Food Systems and the Environment.Coping Strategies and Their Impacts looks in detail at what governments are doing in their responses and how these affect the agri-food system as well as the environment. Lessons From Coping With COVID-19 and the Way Forward describes what has been learnt so far from government responses and makes recommendations for actions in the short and the medium term. Overall conclusions are in Conclusion. MACROECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE COVID19 CRISES Impacts on GDP Growth and Other Indicators The negative economic effects of COVID-19 and the measures taken to fight the pandemic have both been enormous. Preliminary estimates by the IMF for 2020 are that a decline in global GDP of 3.5 percent has taken place (International Monetary Fund, 2020b). Such a decline is unprecedented in the postwar period and has had major impacts on poverty, hunger and other key indicators of wellbeing. A recovery is projected for 2021 and 2022, but with exceptional levels of uncertainty, especially given the persistence of infection rates and emergence of new variants of the virus. Even if these challenges are overcome the consequences of COVID-19 will remain for some time. As the World Bank notes, “... beyond its short-term impact, deep recessions triggered by the pandemic are likely to leave lasting scars through multiple channels, including lower investment; erosion of the human capital of the unemployed; and a retreat from global trade and supply linkages. These effects may lower potential growth and labour productivity in the longer term”(World Bank, 2020a, p. xvl). A computable general equilibrium (CGE) model developed to assess the impact of the pandemic in sub-Saharan Africa based on past experiences of similar crises (notably the 2014 Western Africa Ebola crisis) has found that COVID-19 is likely to have a lasting impact on labour productivity due to its adverse effect on human capital and infrastructure (Djiofack et al., 2020). In the best case, with the disease rapidly contained, the authors estimate the GDP of Africa will be permanently 1 per cent lower than without the pandemic; in the catastrophic scenario, where the crisis lasts more than 18 months, it will be 4 per cent lower for more than a decade. Other studies show that budgets for health have not increased enough to maintain services, especially for the poorer sections of the population across a range of countries (Dash et al., 2020) and there has been a loss of human capital. These effects, however, will vary across regions and the findings for Africa may not apply elsewhere. Poverty and Hunger Estimates of people being pulled into poverty vary depending on the poverty line used. They are in the range of 71–100 million for extreme poverty (a poverty line of $1.9 per day) (International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and World Bank, 2020). This implies that global extreme poverty would have increased from 8.2 per cent in 2019 to 8.8 per cent under the baseline scenario (where the decline in GDP is the middle of the projected range) and to 9.2 per cent under the downside (or pessimistic) scenario, where the GDP decline is at the lower end of the range of estimates for 2020. It would be the first increase in global extreme poverty since 1998 and would effectively wipe out progress made since 2017. Even before the pandemic, it was increasingly unlikely that the SDG of reducing extreme poverty to 3 per cent of the global population over the next decade would be achieved (World Bank, 2018). The pandemic puts this goal out of 2 Afirst overview of impacts based on household surveys can be found at https:// advances.sciencemag.org/content/7/6/eabe0997 Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org July 2021 | Volume 9 | Article 6744322 Markandya et al. COVID and Food Systems reach. Household incomes are expected to be weighed down by a sharp reduction in employment opportunities, lost earnings due to illness and the fall in remittances (Gupta et al., 2020;Caruso et al., 2021;Chowdhury and Chakraborty, 2021). At the same time, many people are unable to feed themselves adequately. The World Food Programme (WFP) estimated the number of people suffering from acute hunger throughout the world would double from 135 million at present to 265 million by the end of 2020 (World Food Programme, 2020). Children are particularly vulnerable to a lack of adequate nutrition. An analysis by Lancet found that as many as 6.5 million more children under 5 years of age could suffer from wasting (low weight relative to their height) during the first year of the pandemic, an increase of 14.3 per cent. Without appropriate action being taken, this could result in an additional 10,000 deaths per month (Headey et al., 2020). UNICEF has an online dashboard that collates data from 159 countries to show their performance for different child welfare parameters. It shows that most countries in the low or lower middle income category have experienced drops in nutrition programmes for adolescent girls and boys, as well as in nutrition programmes for schoolchildren (United Nations Children’s Fund, 2020). There are also vulnerable groups in developed countries that are facing unprecedented food insecurity, even in the world’s wealthiest cities, such as Geneva (Patrick, 2020). A report by Oxfam estimates that there could be more deaths from hunger than from COVID-19 (Oxfam Australia, 2020). A report by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) highlights that as guardians of household food security, women are also disproportionately affected by the impacts of the pandemic. In most countries, women lead agriculture and related activities, which makes them more vulnerable to the pandemic than men. There is evidence of this phenomenon in previous epidemics, such as Ebola and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome. These diseases have the potential to seriously undermine the empowerment of these women, making gender-disaggregated data, gender-sensitive social security nets and awareness of the gender impact of policy responses vital (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2020c). Food Prices and Food Security Average food prices rose modestly in 2020: for 2020 as a whole the FAO food price index was 3.1 percent higher than in 2019. 3 Projections by FAO and other agencies are varied but we are beginning to see the global repercussions of disrupted agricultural production during 2020. The FAO food price monitor showed distressing increases in January and February 2021. This global picture also contains severe local price increases in a number of locations. The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) has launched a COVID-19 food price monitor that tracks pressure on food prices showed mostly downward trends in 2020, but with some exceptions (Food Security Portal, 2020). For example, last year potato prices in India increased more than 15 per cent and rice prices have also risen in some markets. In Uganda, prices of maize, millet and wheat have gone up more than 15 per cent and some commodity prices have increased in Rwanda and Burundi as well, the two other countries in Africa that are monitored. A long term view of food price movements, however, shows periodic cycles with significant increases followed by declines. The current movements would not stand out in this long run picture. 4 A number of factors have been identified as the causes of local price rises. Some supply chains are being negatively impacted by a lack of workers and transportation, such as meat processing (Schmidhuber et al., 2020) and dairy (Minten et al., 2020). There are reports that prohibitions on the migration of seasonal farm workers are also impacting crop prices (Gonzalez and Aronczyk, 2020;Schmidhuber and Qiao, 2020). In some places, global supply chains (i.e., the different stages in taking a food item from the grower to the consumer) have broken down and while local supply chains are reorganizing to accommodate this phenomenon, there has been upward pressure on prices in some cases (The Economist, 2020;Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2020f). Furthermore, as of April 2020, 17 countries had introduced export restrictions on food items (World Trade Organization, 2020a). While these are a relatively small number compared to previous crises, they nonetheless impact food prices locally, particularly in countries heavily dependent on food imports, such as the small island developing states (Tableau Public, 2020). 5 The same was observed in previous periods when a decline in production of a food commodity is followed by export restrictions, raising prices internationally (Espitia et al., 2020). In 2020, the problem in most countries was not a food security crisis induced by food prices going up but rather incomes going down (Schmidhuber et al., 2020). The increase in unemployment and poverty referred to above reduces spending on food and raises the level of hunger and undernutrition. At the same time, there are warnings that supply factors could worsen due to falling investment, labour shortages and other aspects of supply chain logistics (Goel et al., 2020). The spread of COVID-19 in slaughterhouses—not from meat itself but from the working and living conditions—is particularly important (Science Media Centre, 2020). More generally, restrictions on movement enacted to prevent the spread of the virus are starting to disrupt the supply of agri-food products to markets and consumers, both within and across borders (Organisation for 3 FAO Food Price Index | World Food Situation | Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 4 Food Prices - Our World in Data 5 According to IFPRI, during the crisis of 2007–08 export restrictions blocked about 11 per cent of the calories that flowed through global markets. In this pandemic similar measures have affected only 3 per cent of supplies but there are signs that the number is going up. See: http://sdg.iisd.org/commentary/guest-articles/covid19-measures-in-spotlight-at-wto-meeting-on-agriculture/. Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org July 2021 | Volume 9 | Article 6744323 Markandya et al. COVID and Food Systems Economic Co-operation and Development, 2020b;Nandi et al., 2021). 6 How this impacts the wider community will depend on national policy responses. The FAO food price index reported a 4.3 percent global average increase in January, 2021. Rising food prices in 2021 could compound with income loss to create a food security crisis. IMPACTS OF COVID-19 ON THE NEXUS BETWEEN AGRI-FOOD SYSTEMS AND THE ENVIRONMENT The economic, health and social impacts of COVID-19 have direct and indirect links to the natural environment and to the way agri-food systems are organized. The UNEP COVID-19 updates list a number of impacts on the environment (https:// www.unep.org/covid-19); this section summarizes these impacts and highlights linkages to food systems. The updates also discuss opportunities to mitigate climate change and new risks arising from the pandemic with the potential to accelerate climate change. Similarly, they draw attention to the role of habitat destruction on the propagation of zoonotic diseases such as COVID-19 and the threat facing agriculture sectors, such as rice production, which are being further damaged by the effects of the pandemic. Table 1 provides a list of key ways in which food systems and nature are being affected by COVID-19 and the measures taken to contain it. It groups impacts according to UNEP’s three areas for strategic action: ecosystems and biodiversity; pollution; and climate change. The main channels by which these categories are impacted are through the economic, health and social effects of COVID-19. Many environmental impacts—both positive and negative—are related to the economic contraction: on the one hand, less economic activity may reduce pollution and emissions; on the other, shrinking budgets may curtail investment in sustainability and conservation and poverty may increase pressure on natural resources. Ecosystems and Biodiversity There has been some evidence that wildlife has benefited from noise reductions and lesser human activity during the lockdowns of 2020 (Chowdhury and Chakraborty, 2021), but the economic downturn is hurting ecosystems where budgets for the management of protected areas are being cut. Due to limited monitoring of these protected areas and limited revenue from tourism the incidence of poaching is increasing in several countries, such as India (Saeed et al., 2020), as well as some countries in Africa (Roth, 2020) 7 and South-East Asia (Briggs, 2020). A UNEP COVID-19 update (United Nations Environment Program, 2020b) details the decline in revenue from great ape tourism in Rwanda, which has been halted due to fears that humans could transmit the virus to the animals. Many protected areas use the income generated from tourism to TABLE 1 | COVID-19 related impacts on food systems and nature. Ecosystems and biodiversity Pollution Climate change Economic impacts Less funds for enforcement: evidence of increase in poaching, fly tipping, etc. (−) Less funds to ensure compliance with waste disposal and agrichemical use (−) Less funds to ensure compliance on climatesmart agriculture (−) Falling incomes reduce pressure on commercial capture fisheries (+) Lower prices for inputs such as fertilizer, but may lead to overuse (+/−) Less biofuel demand lowering forest clearancerelated emissions (+) Unemployment increases pressure on subsistence fisheries and wild food harvesting (−) Less work absenteeism due to lower local pollutants (+) More land clearance to increase provision of food as a result of higher self-sufficiency (−) Less biofuel demand reduces pressure for forest clearance and habitat loss (+) Lower emissions due to lower activity (+) More land clearing to increase provision of food to replace wild meat in some places but more hunting of wildlife in others (+/−) Emissions impacts during recovery phase depend on nature of fiscal stimulus (+/−) Health-related impacts Diet shifts due to lower incomes (?) Diet shifts due to lower incomes (?) Diet shifts due to lower incomes (?) Labour shortages reduce crop and livestock productivity, reducing food availability (−) Higher mortality rates from COVID-19 in areas where pollution levels are high (−); but lower pollution levels due to lower activity (+) Lasting shift in production and consumption patterns (?) Less human resources to manage land (−) Indoor air pollution worsens as people, primarily women and children, spend more time indoors (−) Greater control of use of wildlife in some places (+); less control and more use in others (−) Restrictions on movement making access to sanitation and safe water difficult (−) Social impacts Increased pressure on common resources as workers return from urban areas and from overseas (−) Possibility of changing use of transport for work and social reasons over the long term with lower local air emissions (+) Lower GHG emissions under travel restrictions (+); higher emissions due to reduced mass-transit use (−) Increased pressure on land as workers return from urban areas and from overseas (−) Possible long-term changes in travel/ transport for all uses, with lower GHG emissions (+) 6 Real time reports on the impacts of Covid19 and the measures against the pandemic on the everyday life of people are presented on Twitter @CovidFoodFuture or on Medium https://link.medium.com/VkoF73QRRdb 7 Financial Times, 2–3 May, 2020. Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org July 2021 | Volume 9 | Article 6744324 Markandya et al. COVID and Food Systems fund law enforcement, biomonitoring and staff salaries. Several months without tourism revenue has pushed many protected areas into a financial crisis. The release of staff and the suspension of law enforcement can easily lead to an increase in poaching and encroachment, firstly because there is little law enforcement, and secondly because community members have lost their income and have few other alternatives (Lindsey et al., 2020). Primate sanctuaries and rescue centres are also affected. Despite being closed to tourism, animals must still be fed and operations cannot simply be stopped. All these developments have a negative effect on activities associated with the green economy. The problems are not confined to protected areas controlled or managed by the state but extend to community-managed areas, where the effects could be even more severe as they often have no state/tax revenue (Lindsey et al., 2020). Populations that depend on these areas are being hit hard, workers are losing their jobs (ibid). Behavioural changes in the very communities that were protecting wildlife and engaged in its conservation may become part of the problem if alternative employment and income opportunities are not found. There have been some signs, such as in Tamil Nadu, India that wild animal hunting has increased to fill gaps in income and the availability of meat (Sathishkumar and Rajan, 2020). An African Union policy brief (African Union, 2020) reports that lockdowns will increase wildlife poaching. Many wildlife management authorities in Africa are semi-autonomous, largely relying on revenue from the tourism industry. However, an unprecedented decline in the number of international visitors is reducing revenue (Lindsey et al., 2020). Conservation in many places depends upon tourism revenue (Buckley, 2020). Many wildlife trusts will lose significant funding, further pushing communities into protected areas in search of livelihoods. Meanwhile, there are a growing number of calls to ban the trade and consumption of wildlife globally because of evidence that suggests COVID-19 originated in wild bats (Global Wildlife Conservation 2020). However, the links between wildlife, health, gender equality and the environment are complex (Keesing et al., 2010;Ostfeld, 2010;United Nations Environment Programme, 2020a) and bans could have unintended consequences for rural communities (see Section on Environmental Compliance Measures). The African Union also reports the postponement and in some cases outright cancellation of many sustainable forest management activities (African Union, 2020). Another concern is that forest products will be seen as a means of recovery from the economic downturn created by COVID-19. Governments may resort to licensing extractive industries on public lands to raise the desperately needed financial resources to support socioeconomic development after the pandemic (Buckley, 2020). Deforestation of the Amazon, which soared in 2019 under the Bolsonaro administration, accelerated further in 2020 as South America battled the pandemic. In April, 405 square kilometres of rainforest wilderness was razed, an area almost four times the size of Paris. The Brazil space research agency reports this to be an increase of 64 per cent from April 2019. Deforestation further impacts indigenous people living in those areas, where there is poor access to health care facilities, especially for indigenous women seeking access to sexual and reproductive services, the elderly and for those with underlying illnesses. Despite all these negative effects, there are also some positives. In Outamba Kilimi National Park, Sierra Leone, the rate of illegal timber harvesting has plummeted to zero, due to the drop in international demand. However, this situation must be carefully monitored, since local enterprises may take advantage of the lull to restock their timber yards with illegal logs in anticipation of the end of the pandemic (Inveen, 2020). Ecosystems Supporting Agri-Food Systems In addition to providing habitat for biodiversity, ecosystems support food and energy sectors that contribute to human health, livelihoods, and wellbeing. The provision of these ecosystem services are also being impacted by the pandemic. Examples are biofuel, rice production, and fisheries. Biofuel Demand Less demand for all fuels, including biofuels, owing to falling demand for transportation and lower oil prices has reduced demand and prices of feed stocks (Schmidhuber and Qiao, 2020). Biofuels contribute to powering transportation systems, but they also drive conversion of land use to biofuel crops. The fall in travel associated with the pandemic should also reduce biofuel demand and thus the incentive to clear land for growing fuel crops, but so far, there is no evidence that this has changed the pressure on forest clearance. The question of what happens to land that was used for biofuel production merits further investigation. Rice Production UN agencies have highlighted the adverse effect of COVID-19 on rice production and exports (United Nations Environment Programme, 2020c;Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2020d). Pandemic-induced panic buying has encouraged some rice exporting countries to impose bans on exports, which has affected importing countries. Meanwhile, extended lockdowns in major rice producing countries have delayed the acquisition of inputs like fertilizers and seeds by local farmers (Esiobu, 2020). Restrictions on the movement of farm labourers could affect planting and harvesting, reducing future yields (World Bank, 2021). These supply disruptions will increase prices. Price surges disproportionately harm poorer households, for which rice is a staple and accounts for a significant proportion of monthly spending. Commercial and Subsistence Fisheries Fisheries have also suffered mixed impacts from the pandemic. A drop in demand has hurt commercial fisheries but may improve wild fish stocks in the short term (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2020e). Commercial fisheries may also suffer labour shortages and transportation disruption (Marschke et al., 2021). Studies show that in island countries and coastal areas, people who are unemployed may turn to fishing for food and income, increasing pressure on near-shore fish stocks. The pandemic may also exacerbate unregulated and unreported small-scale fishing in some areas, while in other areas Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org July 2021 | Volume 9 | Article 6744325 Markandya et al. COVID and Food Systems the drop in demand may increase poverty in fishing communities (Bennett and Robinson, 2000). Pollution COVID-19 has been linked to harmful emissions in air, water and the land. Although these impacts do not directly implicate agriculture or food systems, they have important economic, health and social consequences. They also point to potential measures that can be applied in the agricultural sector and for food systems as part of rebuilding better, as discussed later. Air Emissions Emissions of nitrogen dioxide (NO x ) and particulate matter (PM) have declined notably across many countries (Berman, 2020). NO x satellite measurements of air quality for China, South Korea, Italy, Spain, France, Germany, Iran, and the United States (early epicentres of the virus) all show reductions from 20 to 40 per cent in NO x at times during the first half of 2020. On particulate matter, a study focused on China reported a 35 per cent reduction in PM 2.5 (Shi and Brassuur, 2020) while the reduction in India was estimated to be 43 per cent for PM 2.5 and 16 per cent for NO x (Sharma et al., 2020). Reductions in PM concentrations have not been observed throughout the world. The European Environment Agency reports that although NO x concentrations have declined across the continent, a consistent reduction has not yet been observed across European cities (EEA, 2020). This is likely due to the fact that the main sources of this pollutant are more varied. In Europe, they include the combustion of fuel for heating residential, commercial and institutional buildings, as well as industrial activities. A significant fraction of particulate matter is also formed in the atmosphere from reactions of other air pollutants, including ammonia, which, in Europe is typically emitted by the application of agricultural fertilizers in the spring. Unfortunately, reductions in NO x have coincided with increases in surface ozone. An analysis of China noted that the decline in PM 2.5 has been accompanied by an increase in concentrations of secondary pollutant surface ozone in the country of 150–200 per cent (Shi and Brassuur, 2020). Similarly, ozone concentrations in India have increased by 16 per cent (Sharma et al., 2020). This increase is probably a direct consequence of the declines in NO x on the presence of volatile organic compounds, since photochemical reactions between these two pollutants can result in higher ozone levels when NO x concentrations decline. Changes in emissions of these harmful pollutants could significantly reduce premature mortality and morbidity, as well as losses from absenteeism. 8 Links between concentrations of these pollutants and these health and work-related impacts at the global level are well documented (World Bank and Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, 2016) but there is not as yet an evaluation of the gains in terms of lives saved or reduced health and absenteeism costs associated with the current reductions. Air pollution and higher concentrations of these pollutants have been linked to increased hospitalization and death from COVID-19 infection. New research has found that long-term exposure to air pollution may be “one of the most important contributors to fatality caused by the COVID-19 virus”around the world (Ogen, 2020). The study examined COVID-19 fatalities in four European countries that have been hit hard by the virus (Germany, France, Italy and Spain). It found 78 per cent of deaths occurred in just five regions in northern Italy and Spain. These regions had the highest concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ), a pollutant harmful to human respiratory systems. Moreover, the geography of these regions meant they also suffered from downward air pressure, which can prevent the dispersal of airborne pollutants. The findings of another recent study on the United States are similar: an analysis of 3,080 counties found that even a small increase in long-term exposure to air pollution could have a significant impact on the severity of COVID-19 symptoms (King, 2020). It suggests that lowering the average amount of airborne PM in Manhattan by just 1 μg over the past 20 years could have led to 248 fewer deaths from the disease so far. In addition to weakening our respiratory systems and making us more susceptible to COVID-19, air pollution might also be functioning as a vector for transmission for the virus. Scientists in Italy have detected coronavirus on particles of air pollution, which could, they believe, help the virus spread (Setti et al., 2020). However, these findings are preliminary. The third link between COVID-19 and air quality relates to increased exposure to indoor air. The increase in the number of people remaining indoors as a result of the coronavirus pandemic makes managing indoor air pollution even more important. In developing countries, there are also emissions from the combustion of wood and coal inside homes. The Stockholm Environment Institute notes that in many developing countries, COVID-19-related measures requiring people to stay indoors and at home could increase exposure to indoors emissions. For example, exposure to air pollution among members of households who spent more time at home and use coal for cooking in Accra, Ghana, was twice as high as members who spent more time outside (SEI, 2020). Globally, three billion people still cook using unclean fuels and technologies leading to household air pollution further undermining their health. According to the WHO, “3.8 million people a year die prematurely from illness attributable to the household air pollution caused by the inefficient use of solid fuels and kerosene for cooking.”Exposure is particularly high amongst women and young children who spend the most time near the domestic hearth, further reducing their immunity against zoonotic diseases including COVID-19 (World Health Organization, 2018). Access to Water In many communities around the world, a lack of a clean water supply and adequate sanitation deprives people of their most basic protections against the spread of the virus. This means that where handwashing is limited and waterborne diseases are already common COVID-19 could spread more easily (United 8 Given the reductions in output and demand for labor due to the virus, the effect on absenteeism will not be as important as it is under normal conditions. Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org July 2021 | Volume 9 | Article 6744326 Markandya et al. COVID and Food Systems Nations Environment Programme, 2020d). This aspect is also related to gender (United Nations Children’s Fund, 2016). In many parts of the world, women and girls spend hours every day fetching water or waiting in crowded queues for water vendors, potentially increasing their risk of exposure to the virus. Their health and consequently their wellbeing could be further compromised if they struggle with these tasks because they are ill or have to care for people who are sick. Climate Change GHG Emissions The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that global GHG emissions fell by about 8 per cent in 2020 due to contractions in demand for travel, transport and energy (International Energy Agency, 2020a). The UNEP Emissions Gap Report in 2019 estimated that to limit global warming to 1.5°C, emissions would need to continue to fall by 7.6 per cent on average every year for the next 10 years (United Nations Environment Programme, 2019). These figures show the scale of the challenge we face in order to reduce GHG emissions. There is also some evidence of a rebound effect, whereby this fall in emissions may be reversed in the extremely short term, partly as fear of infection makes people avoid public transport and switch to private vehicles with higher per capita emissions (a trend already partly observed in China). A similar reversal was observed after the 2008 crises. In April, 2020 when most countries were in lockdown, fossil fuel emissions were 17 per cent lower compared to the comparable 2019 figure (Le Quéré et al.,). However, the easing of restrictions has reduced this figure to just 5 per cent below the 2019 average and emissions in China have already rebounded to pre-pandemic levels (Integrated Carbon Observation System, 2021). As such, any fall in emissions due to the pandemic should be seen as temporary. Deforestation and Land Clearing FAO has argued that COVID-19 could increase widespread forest loss (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2020c). The CEO of Conservation International notes, “poaching and deforestation in the tropics have increased since COVID-19 restrictions came into force around the world, according to recent reports from Conservation International field offices”, stressing that “a surge in agricultural expansion and illegal mining has accelerated forest loss in Brazil and Colombia”(Price, 2020). Preliminary evidence suggests that this is due to the reduced presence of government, policing organizations and NGOs in areas prone to illegal logging (Amador-Jimenez et al., 2020;Fair 2020). The links between the pandemic, enforcement of landclearing prohibitions and demand for land for food and fuel crops are complex and merit further investigation. Compound Human Health Impacts Diet-related health conditions appear to increase the mortality and morbidity of people who become infected with COVID-19. Just as air pollution may worsen infection rates and symptoms, non-communicable diseases (NCDs) like diabetes, heart disease and obesity have been linked to increased rates of infection, hospitalization, intensive care and death (Popkin et al., 2020). Studies from Mexico, China and the United States have identified a connection between NCDs and the severity of COVID-19 infections (Azarpazhooh et al., 2020;Hernandez-Galdamez et al., 2020;Popkin et al., 2020). These compound morbidities are highlighted here because of the relationship between food systems and NCDs (Global Panel on Agriculture and Food Systems for Nutrition, 2016;Branca et al., 2019). It appears that healthier diets and the consequent lower incidence of NCDs could increase global resilience to COVID-19. Researchers have noted that tackling hunger and obesity requires a food systems approach (Steiner et al., 2020). Poor access to nutritious foods and the availability of inexpensive, high-calorie foods are associated with an increasing prevalence of NCDs globally. The connection between obesity and the severity of the pandemic provides further evidence for the urgent need for systemic improvements to food systems but is also an area where further research is required. COPING STRATEGIES AND THEIR IMPACTS Strategies are classified in this section under the following headings: monetary and fiscal stimuli; international aid and transfers; targeted support for agriculture; and targeted support for the environment. Response Through Monetary and Fiscal Stimuli The fiscal and monetary stimulus provided by governments as part of the global response to the pandemic has been unprecedented. Globally, in late 2020 the level of fiscal stimulus stood at approximately $11.7 trillion as of September 2020, equivalent to nearly 14 per cent of global GDP (International Monetary Fund, 2020a). Fiscal support packages cover a wide range of measures that aim to replace lost household income and business revenues. They include easing or delaying payment obligations for taxes, utilities, rents and servicing debt (International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and World Bank, 2020). As of June 2020, the G20 countries were estimated to be providing $7.6 trillion in fiscal support, equivalent to 11.2 per cent of their combined GDP for 2019. Of this sum, $4.1 trillion has supported direct government spending, $2.6 trillion for credit enhancements and $0.8 trillion for tax relief (Segal and Gerstel, 2020). Several central banks have also loosened their monetary policy in the wake of the pandemic (International Monetary Fund, 2021). In most advanced economies, this has brought already low interest rates close to or below zero (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2020a). Countries have also implemented extraordinary measures to ease tight credit markets by purchasing corporate debt. This approach follows in the footsteps of the financial crisis of 2008 and marks the second time major economic problems in the private sector have been tackled by a massive increase in public debt. Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org July 2021 | Volume 9 | Article 6744327 Markandya et al. COVID and Food Systems Policymakers in emerging market and developing economies (EMDEs) have also used a range of monetary and fiscal measures to respond to the pandemic. In terms of monetary policy, they have supported the flow of credit, with several central banks sharply lowering interest rates and some complementing this with asset purchase programmes similar to those in advanced economies. In terms of fiscal policy, most EMDEs have announced fiscal policy support to confront the immediate health crisis and save lives, limit the scale of the economic contraction and accelerate the eventual recovery. At least three-quarters of EMDEs have increased funding for health care systems to expand testing and hospital capacity. Fiscal support has targeted the expansion of the coverage of social protection, including wage subsidies to protect jobs, cash transfers to households and increased access to unemployment benefits. Measures have also been implemented to ensure continued access to critical public services for vulnerable groups, including low-income households and the elderly (Argentina, Indonesia, Pakistan, the Philippines and Russia). Lastly, several countries have supported strained food systems through subsidies for inputs and cash transfers for food purchases (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2020c;ONE n.d.;World Trade Organization, 2020b). However, in some of the worst affected EMDEs, the fiscal response is constrained by the insufficient tax base and the lack of borrowing potential. In India the pandemic led to a significant contraction in tax revenues, causing the fiscal deficit for 2020–21 to balloon much higher than the budgeted 3.5 per cent. 9 This limits the scope of government support and highlights the need for access to additional resources and to make public spending more efficient. Many developing and low-income countries are likely to face fiscal constraints as a result of high existing debt-toGDP ratios and the risk of inflationary pressure (Institute of International Finance, 2020). India, for example, has put together a 20 trillion Rupee ($266 billion) relief package, which is among the largest in the world and amounts to roughly 10 per cent of the country’s GDP. Response Through Aid Transfers and Debt Relief Specific funds for poor countries to address COVID-19 include: •Lending of up to $150–160 billion from the World Bank, particularly for efforts to support vulnerable populations in client countries. 10 •The IMF has doubled access to its urgent facilities (Rapid Credit Facilityand Rapid Financing Instrument), allowing it to meet around $100 billion of demand for financing. The IMF has also offered immediate relief for servicing debts to 29 countries under its revamped Catastrophe Containment and Relief Trust, as part of its response to help address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. •The European Union is making €15 billion available to help poor countries (particularly those with weak health care) fight the coronavirus epidemic and assist with the long-term economic recovery. 11 •The G20 countries have agreed to suspend debt servicing on around $11 billion of official bilateral credit to poorer countries. The IMF, the World Bank and the G20 have also called for private-sector creditors to replicate this measure, which could add a further $7 billion of relief. Individual countries are also ramping up aid programmes for COVID-19. While the amounts involved are clearly substantial, they must be considered in the context of the size of the crisis and the impact it will have on international aid in general. It is probable that COVID-support will drive overall reductions in global aid. 12 Furthermore, emergency support will also shift the focus away from other development programmes. 13 Global official development assistance levels could drop sharply by around $25 billion by 2021, with the prospect of a protracted economic recession causing donors to reallocate their external budget to domestic spending and revival. 14 This would amount to about 16 per cent of total official development assistance for 2019. In other words, spending in response to the pandemic may not result in additional net resources for developing countries. Similarly, shift in budgets towards acute health could see a reduction in support for environmental protection and agriculture. There is already some evidence of less funding for the environment as stated in the previous section. Furthermore, many investments have not been designed to address persistent underlying inequalities. In support of gender mainstreaming efforts in countries responses, the UN InterAgency Network on Women and Gender Equality (IANGWE) has published guidelines for integrating gender equality in the implementation of the UN framework for the socioeconomic response to COVID-19; and UNDP and UN Women have published a “COVID-19 Global Gender Response Tracker”, which monitors policy measures enacted by governments worldwide to tackle the COVID-19 crisis, and highlights responses that have integrated a gender lens. The tracker which is still a work-in-progress shows that in July 2020, of the measures taken in response to COVID pandemic, only 42% are gender-sensitive. The tracker, includes 2,500 measures across over 206 countries to examine government measures taken in response to COVID-19 with a gender lens. The measures are 9 https://theprint.in/economy/pandemic-pushes-indias-fiscal-deficit-to-9-5-in2020-21-estimated-at-6-8-in-2021-22/595806/ ; https://www.businesstoday.in/ current/economy-politics/govt-keeps-expenses-check-amid-covid-19-spendingapril-oct/story/423404.html 10 https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2020/04/17/world-bankimfspring-meetings-2020-development-committee-communique 11 https://www.euractiv.com/section/development-policy/news/eu-announces-e15billion-to-fight-virus-in-developing-countries/ 12 https://devinit.org/resources/how-aid-changing-covid-19-pandemic/ 13 https://www.un.org/development/desa/en/news/sustainable/sustainabledevelopment-goals-report-2020.html 14 https://devinit.org/resources/coronavirus-and-aid-data-what-latest-dac-datatells-us/ Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org July 2021 | Volume 9 | Article 6744328 Markandya et al. COVID and Food Systems spread across three areas: those that tackle violence against women and girls, support unpaid care, and strengthen women’s economic security. Support for Agriculture and the Environment in Responses to COVID-19 As noted, the bulk of fiscal support has taken the form of cash transfers and additional resources for health services. The IMF Policy Tracker for COVID-19 cites a few examples of fiscal policies specifically targeting the agricultural sector but none focused on the environment. 15 Of those that target the agrifood system in general very few pay attention to the environmental aspects of food production and consumption. The support mentioned for Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria are partial exceptions. 16 Some other examples of national interventions to support agriculture and the environment are detailed below. Support for Agricultural Inputs The FAO recommends four measures to ensure supply of agricultural inputs: reduce farmer income uncertainty; support digitization of input markets; ease movement restrictions for procuring ag inputs; maintain government support for investment in ag inputs (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2020g). Some countries have heeded this advice. In India, the national relief package includes the provision of 300 billion rupees ($4.5 billion) of additional emergency working capital funding for small and marginal farmers to meet post-harvest spring (Rabi) and current autumn (Kharif) requirements. Several countries, including Angola, Haiti, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia and Senegal, are providing similar financial assistance, supported in part by agencies like the World Bank to address the reduction in access to finance among farmers (World Bank, 2020b). Support to Develop Local Supply Chains Transport problems have caused delays to the provision of inputs and migrant labour has become less accessible. These transport problems were caused by lockdowns and COVID-19 related travel restrictions which impacted the free movement of vehicles. 17 In response, communities are developing local supply chains with some support from governments. In India, the Mayurbhanj District Administration launched the “Mayur fresh on wheels”initiative, with small vans delivering vegetables to people’s houses with the slogan “Stay at home, eat safe”. The initiative cuts out intermediaries by promoting farm-to-door delivery. India has also implemented the Farmers’Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Ordinance 2020, which will promote barrier-free trade and commerce between and inside states of farm produce outside the physical premises of official markets. In other countries, local initiatives are supporting direct market linkages between sellers and consumers. For example, vegetable supply bases around cities in China are ensuring smooth supplies of produce despite lockdowns (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2020b). In Kenya, the World Bank is providing $1 billion through a development policy financing facility that will support significant reforms and deregulation in the agricultural sector. This includes facilities to allow farmers to buy inputs such as fertilizers and seeds electronically using vouchers on their mobile phones. However, the scheme has been criticized by advocates of local food systems for promoting the seeds and fertilizers of multinational companies at the expense of local supply chains. 18 Freer Movement of Trade These measures are in addition to others that seek to ensure global supply chains remain open and function efficiently. Net food importers face dangerous supply risks (Giordano and Ortiz de Mendívil, 2020). A deficit in its domestic maize supply had led Kenya to import maize from Uganda. However, since April, mandatory coronavirus tests for drivers at the border between the two states have seen queues of lorries stretching up to 30 km. 19 After some countries moved to restrict exports of food products, 20 a powerful consortium of WTO member states (including the United States, China and the European Union) issued a joint statement on April 22, 2020 discouraging export restrictions and noting that they could lead to food insecurity. Its signatories committed not to impose export restrictions and to supporting WTO research and dialogue to ensure the function of agri-food supply chains (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2020a). Cash Support Programmes for Informal Workers As many as 84 countries have introduced or adapted social protection programmes; this includes 97 targeted cash transfer schemes, though only 10 countries, mainly in Latin America, specifically targeted informal workers. The amounts ranged from $39 in Colombia to $153 in Thailand. They were mostly one-off payments, except in Brazil with a monthly payment for three months (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2020b). Food Support Programmes Some countries have also provided specific support in the form of free or subsidized food and some public bodies are proactively 15 https://www.imf.org/en/Topics/imf-and-covid19/Policy-Responses-toCOVID-19 16 https://www.imf.org/en/Topics/imf-and-covid19/Policy-Responses-toCOVID-19 17 https://www.iea.org/articles/changes-in-transport-behaviour-during-the-covid19-crisis 18 https://www.oaklandinstitute.org/blog/world-bank-covid-19-assistance-kenyabenefits-multinational-agribusiness-agrochemical 19 https://www.one.org/africa/about/policy-analysis/covid-19-tracker/countrydeep-dives/ 20 https://public.tableau.com/profile/laborde6680#!/vizhome/ ExportRestrictionsTracker/FoodExportRestrictionsTracker Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org July 2021 | Volume 9 | Article 6744329 Markandya et al. COVID and Food Systems working from home will need to be complemented with others to improve access to the infrastructure that makes this possible. A second policy that could reduce GHG emissions is buying locally, avoiding long-distance transport. While such a policy has the potential to reduce transport emissions, it could prove devastating for developing countries that export fresh produce, such as fruit, flowers and livestock products. Moreover, when all life-cycle emissions are taken into account, it may not actually reduce emissions. As such, food system investments should follow the results of life cycle assessments and economic impact analyses. Third, in light of the significant labour supply shock caused by the pandemic, it is important to note that green industries will not be able to hire unemployed workers unless there is a strong programme for retraining and relocation. The measures described here add up to a substantial program of action, also with a large budget. Although the costs of these measures have not been worked out in detail, one comparison of the figures suggests that the cost of preventing further pandemics over the next decade by protecting wildlife and forests would be just 2 per cent of the estimated financial damage caused by COVID-19, proof that prevention is better than cure (Dobson et al., 2020). CONCLUSION The global sustainable development agenda has at its core promoting the resilience and sustainability of food systems via a framework of policies and measures. Strategies to achieve the 2030 agenda have to be designed so as to: i) account for environmental thresholds and trade-offs; ii) promote food security and healthy diets; iii) enhance and protect rural livelihoods; and iv) address the inequalities and injustices that have emerged during the crises and that will continue to prevail during the post-pandemic transition. To be sure, this is challenging, as thresholds are difficult to establish and compromises on trade-offs are hard to reach, but it can be made easier through better evidence. Support will most certainly be needed from the International community, including the United Nations agencies to ensure effective implementation of this framework. One way of doing this will be to provide support to countries to monitor the environmental impacts of COVID-19. The effectiveness of recovery and stimulus packages should be measured against indicators for progress on the SDGs. Additionally, a United Nations agency could also take the lead in expanding the environmental dimensions of the One Health approach to improve the understanding of linkages and impacts when it comes to zoonotic diseases. AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS AM was the coordinating Lead Author for the paper. He reviewed the literature, contributed to writing it and responded to internal comments. JS contributed to the writing of the paper, review of the literature and response to internal comments. SH coordinated the project from which this study has been extracted. He also contributed to editing the paper. AM was the project director. He provided a lot of the materials and reviewed drafts of the paper. ST contributed materials for the paper, especially from India and reviewed drafts. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This paper is the product of a UNEP project to investigate the links between COVID, the agri-food system and the environment. The authors acknowledge the contribution of all those working to understand the ramifications of this pandemic and their efforts to determine solutions for the welfare of our communities and environment. Special thanks are extended for comments and suggestions provided by: Doreen L. Robinson, Chief for Wildlife, UNEP Ecosystems Division; Sirini Withana, Economic and Trade Policy Unit, UNEP Economy Division; James Lomax, Food Systems and Agriculture Adviser, UNEP Ecosystems Division; Susan Mutebi-Richards, Gender Reviewer, Gender and Safeguards Unit, Policy and Programme Division; Jian Liu, Chief Scientist and Director, UNEP Science Division; Edward Barbier, University Distinguished Professor in the Department of Economics, Colorado State University, Senior Scholar in the School of Global Environmental Sustainability; Peter May, Professor titular CPDA/UFRRJ. Thanks are also due to three referees from the journal who made many suggestions that improved the paper. REFERENCES African Union (2020). African Forests and the COVID-19 Pandemic. Policy Brief. Agrawala, S., Dussaux, D., and Monti, N. (2020). “What Policies for Greening the Crisis Response and Economic Recovery? Lessons Learned from Past Green Stimulus Measures and Implications for the COVID-19 Crisis,”in OECD Working Paper No. 164 (Paris: OECD). Amador-Jiménez, M., Millner, N., Palmer, C., Pennington, R. T., and Sileci, L. (2020). The Unintended Impact of Colombia’s Covid-19 Lockdown on Forest Fires. Environ. Resource Econ. 76 (4), 1081–1105. doi:10.1007/s10640-02000501-5 Anand, S. S., Hawkes, C., de Souza, R. J., Mente, A., Dehghan, M., Nugent, R., et al. (2015). Food Consumption and its Impact on Cardiovascular Disease: Importance of Solutions Focused on the Globalized Food System. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 66 (14), 1590–1614. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2015.07.050 Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0735109715046215?via% 3Dihub. Azarpazhooh, M. R., Morovatdar, N., Avan, A., Phan, T. G., Divani, A. A., Yassi, N., et al. (2020). COVID-19 Pandemic and burden of Non-communicable Diseases: An Ecological Study on Data of 185 Countries. J. Stroke Cerebrovasc. Dis. 29 (9), 105089. doi:10.1016/ j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2020.105089 Backhans, A., and Fellström, C. (2012). Rodents on Pig and Chicken Farms - a Potential Threat to Human and Animal Health. Infect. Ecol. Epidemiol. 2 (1), 17093. doi:10.3402/iee.v2i0.17093 Barbier, E. B. (2020). Greening the post-pandemic Recovery in the G20. Environ. Resource Econ. 76, 685–703. doi:10.1007/s10640-020-00437-w Batini, N., Lomax, J., and Mehra, D. (2020). Why Sustainable Food Systems Are Needed in a post-COVID World. Available at: https://www.unenvironment. Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org July 2021 | Volume 9 | Article 67443216 Markandya et al. COVID and Food Systems org/news-and-stories/story/why-sustainable-food-systems-are-needed-postcovid-world (Accessed October 9, 2020). Bennett, E. L., and Robinson, J. G. (2000). “Hunting of Wildlife in Tropical Forests –Implications for Biodiversity and Forest Peoples (English),”in World Bank Environment Department Paper No. 76 (Washington, D.C.: World Bank). Berman, R. (2020). The Dual Effects of COVID-19 Lockdowns on Air Quality. Available at: https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/the-dual-effects-ofcovid-19-lockdowns-on-air-quality (Accessed October 9, 2020). Bonwitt, J., Dawson, M., Kandeh, M., Ansumana, R., Sahr, F., Brown, H., et al. (2018). Unintended Consequences of the ’bushmeat Ban’in West Africa during the 2013-2016 Ebola Virus Disease Epidemic. Soc. Sci. Med. 200 (12), 166–173. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.12.028 Branca, F., Lartey, A., Oenema, S., Aguayo, V., Stordalen, G. A., Richardson, R., et al. (2019). Transforming the Food System to Fight Non-communicable Diseases. BMJ 364, l296. doi:10.1136/bmj.l296 Briggs, H. (2020). Coronavirus: Fears of Spike in Poaching as Pandemic Poverty Strikes. Available at: https://www.conservation.org/blog/poaching-deforestation-reportedlyon-the-rise-since-covid-19-lockdowns (Accessed October 9, 2020). Brown, C. S., Ravallion, M., and van de Walle, D. (2020). Can the World’s Poor Protect Themselves from the New Coronavirus? NBER Working Papers No. 27200. Cambridge, Massachusetts: National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. Buckley, R. (2020). Conservation Implications of COVID19: Effects via Tourism and Extractive Industries. Biol. Conservation 247 (4), 108640. doi:10.1016/ j.biocon.2020.108640 Caruso, G. D., Cucagna, M. E., and Ladronis, J. (2021). The Distributional Impacts of the Reduction in Remittances in Central America in COVID-19 Times. Res. Soc. Stratification Mobility 71, 100567. doi:10.1016/j.rssm.2020.100567 Chowdhury, M. B., and Chakraborty, M. (2021). The Impact of COVID-19 on the Migrant Workers and Remittances Flow to Bangladesh. South Asian Surv. 28 (1), 38–56. doi:10.1177/0971523121995365 Dash, D. P., Sethi, N., and Dash, A. K. (2020). Infectious Disease, Human Capital, and the BRICS Economy in the Time of COVID-19. MethodsX 8, 101202. doi:10.1016/j.mex.2020.101202 Development Initiatives (2020). Coronavirus and Aid Data: What the Latest DAC Data Tells Us. Available at: https://devinit.org/resources/coronavirus-and-aiddata-what-latest-dac-data-tells-us/ (Accessed October 9, 2020). Djiofack, C. Z., Dudu, H., and Zeufack, A. G. (2020). “Assessing COVID-19’s Economic Impact in Sub-saharan Africa: Insights from a CGE Model,”in COVID-19 in Developing Economies. Editors S. Djankov and U. Panizza (London: CEPR Press). Dobson, A. P., Pimm, S. L., Hannah, L., Kaufman, L., Ahumada, J. A., Ando, A. W., et al. (2020). Ecology and Economics for Pandemic Prevention. Sci. 369 (6502), 379–381. EEA (2020). Air Quality in Europe. Report 09/2020. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency. Espitia, A., Rocha, N., and Ruta, M. (2020). COVID-19 Ad Food Protectionism: The Impact of the Pandemic and Export Restrictions on World Food Markets. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, 9253. Esiobu, N. S. (2020). Does the Incidence of COVID-19 Pandemic Affect Rice Yield? Lessons from Southeast Nigeria. Recent Advances in Rice Research. doi:10.5772/ intechopen.93744 Fair, J. (2020). COVID-19 Lockdown Precipitates Deforestation across Asia and South America. Available at: https://news.mongabay.com/2020/07/covid-19lockdown-precipitates-deforestation-across-asia-and-south-america/ (Accessed October 9, 2020). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2020d). Why Export Restrictions Should Not Be a Response to COVID-19: Learning Lessons from Experience with Rice in Asia and the Pacific. Available at: http://www.fao.org/ policy-support/tools-and-publications/resources-details/en/c/1287457/. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2020f). Agrifood Markets and Trade in the Time of COVID-19. Rome: FAO. doi:10.4060/ca8446en Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2020a). Gendered Impacts of COVID-19 and Equitable Policy Responses in Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition. Rome: FAO. Available at: http://www.fao.org/3/ ca9198en/CA9198EN.pdf. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2020b). Impact of COVID-19 on Informal Workers. Rome: FAO. Available at: http://www.fao.org/ 3/ca8560en/CA8560EN.pdf. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2016). Improving Food Systems for Nutrition and Health. Rome: Viale delle Terme di Caracalla. Available at: http://www.fao.org/3/a-i6066e.pdf. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2020e). Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19). Q&A. Available at: http://www.fao.org/2019-ncov/ q-and-a/impact-on-fisheries-and-aquaculture/en/ (Accessed October 9, 2020). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2020g). Policy Responses to Keep Input Markets Flowing in Times of COVID-19. Rome: FAO. doi:10.4060/ca8446en Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2020c). The Impacts of COVID-19 on the forest Sector: How to Respond? the Impacts of COVID-19 on the forest Sector: How to Respond? Available at: http://www.fao.org/3/ ca8844en/CA8844EN.pdf. Food Security Portal (2020). COVID-19 Food Price Monitor. Available at: http:// tools.foodsecurityportal.org/COVID-19-food-price-monitoring (Accessed October 9, 2020). Giordano, P., and Ortiz de Mendívil, C. (2020). How Trade Policy Can Help Avoid A Food Crisis under COVID-19. Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. Retrieved from: https://publications.iadb.org/en/how-trade-policy-can-help-avoid-afood-crisis-under-covid-19. Global Panel on Agriculture and Food Systems for Nutrition (2016). Food Systems and Diets: Facing the Challenges of the 21st Century. London: IFRI. Available at: https://www.ifpri.org/publication/food-systems-and-diets-facing-challenges21st-century. Goel, R. K., Saunoris, J. W., and Goel, S. S. (2020). “Supply Chain Reliability and International Economic Growth: Impacts of Disruptions like COVID-19,”in CESifo Working Paper No. 8294 (Munich: CESifo). Available at: https://www. cesifo.org/en/cesifo/privacy-policy. Gonzalez, S., and Aronczyk, A. (2020). Food and Frameworks. Available at: https:// choice.npr.org/index.html?originhttps://www.npr.org/2020/03/25/ 821593542/episode-984-food-and-farmworkers (Accessed October 9, 2020). Gottlieb, C., Grobovˇ sek, J., Poschke, M., and Saltiel, F. (2020). “Working from home: Implications for Developing Countries,”in COVID-19 in Developing Economies. Editors S. Djankov and U. Panizza (London: CEPR Press). Available at: https://voxeu.org/content/covid-19-developing-economies. Gupta, A., Zhu, H., Doan, M. K., Michuda, A., and Majumder, B. (2020). Economic Impacts of the COVID−19 Lockdown in a Remittance-Dependent Region. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 103, 466–485. doi:10.1111/ajae.12178 Headey, D., Heidkamp, R., Osendarp, S., Ruel, M., Scott, N., Black, R., et al. (2020). Impacts of COVID-19 on Childhood Malnutrition and Nutrition-Related Mortality. The Lancet 396 (10250), 519–521. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31647-0 Hepburn, C., O’Callaghan, B., Stern, N., Stiglitz, J., and Zenghelis, D. (2020). Will COVID-19 Fiscal Recovery Packages Accelerate or Retard Progress on Climate Change?. Oxford Rev. Econ. Pol. 36, S359–S381. doi:10.1093/oxrep/graa015 Hernández-Galdamez, D. R., González-Block, M. Á., Romo-Dueñas, D. K., LimaMorales, R., Hernandez-Vicente, I. A., Hernández-Vicente, I. A., et al. (2020). Increased Risk of Hospitalization and Death in Patients with COVID-19 and Pre-existing Noncommunicable Diseases and Modifiable Risk Factors in Mexico. Arch. Med. Res. 51 (7), 683–689. doi:10.1016/j.arcmed.2020.07.003 Hook, A., Court, V., Sovacool, B. K., and Sorrell, S. (2020). A Systematic Review of the Energy and Climate Impacts of Teleworking. Environ. Res. Lett. 15 (9), 093003. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ab8a84 Institute of International Finance (2020). Global Debt Monitor. COVID-19 Lights a Fuse. Available at: https://www.iif.com/Portals/0/Files/content/Research/ Global%20Debt%20Monitor_April2020.pdf?. Integrated Carbon Observation System (2021). Supplementary Data: Temporary ReductioninDailyCO 2 Emissions during the COVID-19 Forced Confinement. Available at: https://www.icos-cp.eu/gcp-covid19 (Accessed October 9, 2020). International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and World Bank (2020). Macro Poverty Outlook Country-By-Country Analysis and Projections for the Developing World. Washington, D.C: Spring. Available at: http://pubdocs. worldbank.org/en/312551567719790821/mpo.pdf. International Energy Agency (2020a). Global Energy Review 2020. Paris: IEA. Available at: https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-review-2020/globalenergy-and-co2-emissions-in-2020. International Energy Agency (2020b). Sustainable Recovery: World Energy Outlook Special Report. Paris: OECD Publishing. Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org July 2021 | Volume 9 | Article 67443217 Markandya et al. COVID and Food Systems International Monetary Fund (2020b). Fiscal Monitor: Policies for the Recovery. Washington: FISCAL MONITOR. International Monetary Fund (2020a). Policy Responses to COVID-19. Available at: https://www.imf.org/en/Topics/imf-and-covid19/Policy-Responses-toCOVID-19 (Accessed October 9, 2020). International Monetary Fund (2021). World Economic Outlook Update. Washington DC: WORLD ECONOMIC OUTLOOK. Inveen, C. (2020). Coronavirus Comes to rescue of Sierra Leone’s Plundered Rosewood. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-healthcoronavirus-leone-logging/coronavirus-comes-to-rescue-of-sierra-leonesplundered-rosewood-idUSKBN21I1B0 (Accessed October 9, 2020). Keesing, F., Belden, L. K., Daszak, P., Dobson, A., Harvell, C. D., Holt, R. D., et al. (2010). Impacts of Biodiversity on the Emergence and Transmission of Infectious Diseases. Nature 468, 647–652. doi:10.1038/nature09575 King, A. (2020). Linking Air Pollution to Higher Coronavirus Death Rates. Available at: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/biostatistics/2020/04/linking-airpollution-to-higher-coronavirus-death-rates/ (Accessed October 9, 2020). Laurans, Y., Rankovic, A., Chabason, L., Barchiche, D., Elouardighi, K., and Treyer, S. (2020). Quelles initiatives politiques internationales pour la prévention des maladies infectieuses d’origine zoonotique? [What International Policy Initiatives for the Prevention of Infectious Diseases of Zoonotic Origin?]. Paris: IDDRI. Available at https://www.iddri.org/fr/publications-etevenements/autre-publication/quelles-initiatives-politiques-internationalespour-la. Le Quéré, C., Jackson, R. B., Jones, M. W., Smith, A. J. P., Abernethy, S., Andrew, R. M., et al. (2020). Temporary Reduction in Daily Global CO2 Emissions during the COVID-19 Forced Confinement. Nat. Clim. Chang. 10, 647–653. doi:10.1038/s41558-020-0797-x Lindsey,P.,Allan,J.,Brehony,P.,Dickman,A.,Robson,A.,Begg,C.,etal. (2020). Conserving Africa’s Wildlife and Wildlands through the COVID19 Crisis and beyond. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4 (10), 1300–1310. doi:10.1038/ s41559-020-1275-6 Marschke, M., Vandergeest, P., Havice, E., Kadfak, A., Duker, P., Isopescu, I., et al. (2021). COVID-19, Instability and Migrant Fish Workers in Asia. Maritime Stud. 20 (1), 87–99. doi:10.1007/s40152-020-00205-y May, P., Gebara, M. F., and Platais, G. (in press). Pandemics, Conservation and Human-Nature Relations. Mbow,C.,Rosenzweig,C.,Barioni,L.G.,Benton,T.G.,Herrero,M., Krishnapillai, M., et al. (2019). “Food Security,”in Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on Climate Change, Desertification, Land Degradation, Sustainable Land Management, Food Security, and Greenhouse Gas Fluxes in Terrestrial Ecosystems.Editors.P.R.Shukla, J. Skea, E. Calvo Buendia, V. Masson-Delmotte, and H.-O. Pörtner Available at: https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2019/08/2f.- Chapter-5_FINAL.pdf. Minten, B., Habte, Y., Seneshaw, T., and Tesfaye, A. (2020). The Transforming Dairy Sector in Ethiopia. Available at: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article? id10.1371/journal.pone.0237456 (Accessed October 9, 2020). Nandi, R., Nedumaran, S., Selvaraj, A., Datta Mazumdar, S., and Kumar, S. (2021). The COVID-19 Induced Disruptions across Groundnut Value Chain: Empirical Evidence from South India. Sustainability 13 (4), 1707. doi:10.3390/su13041707” Nellemann, C., Verma, R., and Hislop, L. (2011). Women at the Frontline of Climate Change : Gender Risks and Hopes : a Rapid Response Assessment. Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/search/publication? qWomen+at+the+Frontline+of+Climate+Change% 3A+Gender+Risks+and+Hopes. Ogen, Y. (2020). Assessing Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Levels as a Contributing Factor to Coronavirus (COVID-19) Fatality. Sci. Total Environ. 726, 138605. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138605 Oldekop, J. A., Horner, R., Hulme, D., Adhikari, R., Agarwal, B., Alford, M., et al. (2020). COVID-19 and the Case for Global Development. World Dev. 134, 105044. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105044 ONE (n.d.). ONE Africa COVID-19 Tracker: Country Deep Dives. Available at: https://www.one.org/africa/about/policy-analysis/covid-19-tracker/countrydeep-dives/ (Accessed October 9, 2020). Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2020c). Agricultural Policy Monitoring and Evaluation. Available at: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org// sites/5d209bd5-en/index.html?itemId/content/component/5d209bd5-en#. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development(2020b). COVID-19 and the Food Agriculture Sector: Issues and Policy Responses. Available at: http://www.oecd. org/coronavirus/policy-responses/covid-19-and-the-food-and-agriculturesector-issues-and-policy-responses-a23f764b/ (Accessed October 9, 2020). Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2020a). Economic Outlook, June 2020. Paris: OECD. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/ economic-outlook/. Ostfeld,R.S.(2010).BiodiversityLossandtheRiseofZoonoticPathogens. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 15 (Suppl. 1), 40–43. doi:10.1111/j.14690691.2008.02691 Oxfam Australia (2020). More people could die daily from COVID-19 linked hunger Than the virus itself: Oxfam. Available at: https://media.oxfam.org.au/ 2020/07/more-people-could-die-daily-from-covid-19-linked-hunger-than-thevirus-itself-oxfam/ (Accessed October 9, 2020). Patrick, K. (2020). A Mile-Long Line for Free Food in Geneva, One of World’s Richest Cities. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/30/world/ europe/geneva-coronavirus-reopening.html (Accessed October 9, 2020). PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (2014). How Sectors Can Contribute to Sustainable Use and Conservation of Biodiversity.CDBTechnical Series No. 79. Available at: https://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/cbd-ts-79-en.pdf. Popkin, B. M., Du, S., Green, W. D., Beck, M. A., Algaith, T., Herbst, C. H., et al. (2020). Individuals with Obesity and COVID-19: A Global Perspective on the Epidemiology and Biological Relationships. Obes. Rev. 21 (11), e13128. doi:10.1111/obr.13128 Price, K. (2020). Poaching, Deforestation Reportedly on the Rise since COVID-19 Lockdowns. Available at: https://www.conservation.org/blog/poachingdeforestation-reportedly-on-the-rise-since-covid-19-lockdowns (Accessed October 9, 2020). Roth, A. (2020). Poachers Kill More Rhinos as Coronavirus Halts Tourism to Africa. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/08/science/ coronavirus-poaching-rhinos.html (Accessed October 9, 2020). Sachs, J. D. (2020). How Inequality Fuels COVID 19 Deaths. Available at: https:// www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/inequality-fuels-covid19-mortality-byjeffrey-d-sachs-2020-06?barrieraccesspaylog (Accessed October 9, 2020). Saeed, A., Sinha, N., Joshi, A. R., and Shishir, N. N. (2020). Coronavirus: With South Asia in Lockdown, Poachers Are Brazenly Killing Endangered Animals and Birds. Available at: https://scroll.in/article/963797/coronavirus-withsouth-asia-in-lockdown-poachers-are-brazenly-killing-endangered-animals-andbirds (Accessed October 9, 2020). Sathishkumar, R., and Rajan, M. R. (2020). COVID-19: How Wildlife Hunting Increased in Tamil Nadu amid Lockdown. Available at: https://www. downtoearth.org.in/blog/wildlife-biodiversity/covid-19-how-wildlife-huntingincreased-in-tamil-nadu-amid-lockdown-71676 (Accessed October 9, 2020). Schmidhuber, J., Pound, J., and Qiao, B. (2020). COVID-19: Channels of Transmission to Food and Agriculture. Rome: FAO. doi:10.4060/ca8430en Schmidhuber, J., and Qiao, B. (2020). Comparing Crises: Great Lockdown versus Great Recession. Rome: FAO. doi:10.4060/ca8833en Science Media Centre (2020). Expert Comments about Meat Processing Plants and Slaughterhouses and COVID-19 Outbreaks. Available at: https://www. sciencemediacentre.org/expert-comments-about-meat-processing-plants-andslaughterhouses-and-covid-19-outbreaks/ (Accessed October 9, 2020). Segal, S., and Gerstel, D. (2020). Breaking Down the G20 COVID-19 Fiscal Response. Available at: https://www.csis.org/analysis/breaking-down-g20covid-19-fiscal-response-june-2020-update (Accessed October 26, 2020). SEI (2020). COVID-19 Pandemic Raises New Questions about the Health Impacts of Air Pollution. Available at: https://www.sei.org/featured/covid-19pandemic-raises-new-questions-about-the-health-impacts-of-air-pollution/ (Accessed October 9, 2020). Setti, L., Passarini, F., De Gennaro, G., Barbieri, P., Perrone, M. G., Borelli, M., et al. (2020). SARS-Cov-2RNA Found on Particulate Matter of Bergamo in Northern Italy: First Evidence. Environ. Res. 188, 109754. doi:10.1016/ j.envres.2020.109754Available at: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/ 2020.04.15.20065995v2. Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org July 2021 | Volume 9 | Article 67443218 Markandya et al. COVID and Food Systems Sharma, S., Zhang, M., Anshika, A., Gao, J., Zhang, H., and Kota, S. H. (2020). Effect of Restricted Emissions during COVID-19 on Air Quality in India. Sci. Total Environ. 728, 138878. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138878 Shi, X., and Brasseur, G. P. (2020). The Response in Air Quality to the Reduction of Chinese Economic Activities during the COVID-19 Outbreak. Geophys. Res. Lett. 47 (11), e2020GL088070. doi:10.1029/2020GL088070 Steiner, A., Aguilar, G., Bomba, K., Bonilla, J. P., Campbell, A., Echeverria, R., et al. (2020). Actions to Transform Food Systems under Climate Change. Wageningen: CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Tableau Public (2020). Food export Restrictions during the COVID-19 Crisis. Available at: https://public.tableau.com/profile/laborde6680#!/vizhome/ ExportRestrictionsTracker/FoodExportRestrictionsTracker (Accessed October 9, 2020). Taylor, L. H., Latham, S. M., and Woolhouse, M. E. J. (2001). Risk Factors for Human Disease Emergence. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 356 (1411), 983–989. doi:10.1098/rstb.2001.0888 The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) (2018). Measuring what Matters in Agriculture and Food Systems: A Synthesis of the Results and Recommendations of TEEB for Agriculture and Food’s Scientificand Economic Foundations Report. Geneva: UNEP. Available at: http://teebweb. org/our-work/agrifood/reports/measuring-what-matters-synthesis/. The Economist (2020). The Race to Feed Africa during a Pandemic. Available at: https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2020/04/23/the-race-tofeed-africa-during-a-pandemic (Accessed October 9, 2020). The Economist (2021). The Rise of Working from Home. Special report: The future of work. Available at: https://www.economist.com/special-report/2021/04/08/ the-rise-of-working-from-home. United Nations (2020). A UN Framework for the Immediate Socio-Economic Response to COVID-19. Available at: https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/ files/un_framework_report_on_covid-19.pdf. United Nations Children’s Fund (2020). Tracking the Situation of Children during COVID-19. Available at: https://data.unicef.org/resources/rapid-situation-trackingcovid-19-socioeconomic-impacts-data-viz/ (Accessed October 9, 2020). United Nations Children’s Fund (2016). UNICEF: Collecting Water Is Often a Colossal Waste of Time for Women and Girls. Available at: https://www.unicef. org/press-releases/unicef-collecting-water-often-colossal-waste-time-womenand-girls (Accessed October 9, 2020). United Nations Environment Programme and International Livestock Research Institute (2020). Preventing the Next Pandemic: Zoonotic Diseases and How to Break the Chain of Transmission. Nairobi: UNEP. Available at: https://www. unenvironment.org/resources/report/preventing-future-zoonotic-diseaseoutbreaks-protecting-environment-animals-and. United Nations Environment Programme (2020c). COVID-19 Is Disrupting a Food Industry Already Thrown into Turmoil by Climate Change. Available at: https:// www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/story/covid-19-disrupting-foodindustry-already-thrown-turmoil-climate-change (Accessed October 9, 2020). United Nations Environment Programme (2019). Emissions Gap Report 2019. Nairobi. Available at: https://www.unenvironment.org/resources/emissionsgap-report-2019. United Nations Environment Programme (2020a). Human Rights, the Environment and Covid-19 Key Messages. Available at: https://www.unenvironment.org/resources/ report/human-rights-environment-and-covid-19-key-messages. United Nations Environment Programme (2020d). UNEP Policy Brief on Building Back Better –Role of green Fiscal Policies. Available at: https:// greenfiscalpolicy.org/policy_briefs/unep-policy-brief-on-building-back-betterrole-of-green-fiscal-policies/ (Accessed October 9, 2020). United Nations Environment Programme (2020b). What COVID-19 Means for Ecotourism. Available at: https://www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/ story/what-covid-19-means-ecotourism (Accessed October 9, 2020). World Bank and Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (2016). The Cost of Air Pollution: Strengthening the Economic Case for Action. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. Available at: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/ 10986/25013. World Bank (2018). Decline of Global Extreme Poverty Continues but Has Slowed: World Bank. Available at: https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/ 2018/09/19/decline-of-global-extreme-poverty-continues-but-has-slowed-worldbank (Accessed October 9, 2020). World Bank (2021). Food Security And COVID-19. Policy Brief. Available at: https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/agriculture/brief/food-security-and-covid-19. World Bank (2020a). Global Economic Prospects. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. doi:10.1596/978-1-4648-1553-9 World Bank (2020b). In India, Women’s Self-Help Groups Combat the COVID-19 (Coronavirus) Pandemic. Feature Story. Available at: https://www.worldbank. org/en/news/feature/2020/04/11/women-self-help-groups-combat-covid19coronavirus-pandemic-india. World Cancer Research Fund International (2014). The Link between Food, Nutrition, Diet and Non-communicable Diseases. London: World Cancer Research Fund. Available at: https://www.wcrf.org/sites/default/files/PPA_ NCD_Alliance_Nutrition.pdf. World Food Programme (2020). WFP Chief Warns of Hunger Pandemic as COVID-19 Spreads (Statement to UN Security Council). Available at: https://www.wfp.org/news/wfp-chief-warns-hunger-pandemic-covid-19-spreadsstatement-un-security-council (Accessed October 9, 2020). World Health Organization (2018). Household Air Pollution and Health. Available at: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/household-air-pollutionand-health (Accessed October 9, 2020). World Trade Organization (2020b). Covid-19 and Agriculture: A Story of Resilience. World Trade Organization, 1–12. Retrieved from: https://www.wto.org/ english/tratop_e/covid19_e/agric_report_e.pdf. World Trade Organization (2020a). WTO Report Finds Growing Number of export Restrictions in Response to COVID-19 Crisis. Available at: https://www. wto.org/english/news_e/news20_e/rese_23apr20_e.htm (Accessed October 9, 2020). Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. Copyright © 2021 Markandya, Salcone, Hussain, Mueller and Thambi. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org July 2021 | Volume 9 | Article 67443219 Markandya et al. COVID and Food Systems