What’s Left to Grow On? Rethinking Land, Food, and the Future

With growing concern about sustainability and climate change, we are constantly flooded with advice on how to use soil more efficiently. Often, this is framed in a way that makes consumers feel guilty for the collapse of our world. Do you eat meat? Shame on you! You could feed yourself for a whole week with the vegetables used to nourish those animals. Wait! Eating tofu instead? Do you know how many pesticides are used to grow soy?

"Okay, I’ll try to buy organic", you think. But after spending money you don't really have on a ridiculously expensive piece of fermented soy, you come across a new article. The author argues that organic products aren't making efficient use of the already worryingly limited amount of arable land.

"You should eat more locally."

By then, you realize you live in Tirol, and "local food" means the cow your neighbour slaughtered yesterday. "Think more about the planet, you careless soul" whispers a voice in your head.

With all these contradictions swirling around, many questions arise: Is there really a lack of soil? How many people will we have to feed in the near future? And is land being used efficiently?

How Many Mouths, How Much Land?

According to the United Nations, the global population is projected to reach an astonishing 9.7 billion by 2050¹. Alongside this growth, even the most conservative estimates forecast a 35–56% increase in food demand from 2010 to 2050². Naturally, the question arises: how do we produce more food to feed all these mouths? International organizations like the FAO have expressed serious concerns about our limited resources³. This issue is especially urgent considering the reduction of available farmland due to urbanization and the rapid progression of climate change, which is wreaking havoc on soil through everything from torrential rains to desertification. According to the Statistical Yearbook 2024, from 2000 to 2022, agricultural land decreased by 91 million hectares—nearly the combined area of Germany and France.

Naturally, global experts propose innovative solutions. But what if, instead of chasing the latest technological breakthroughs, we focused on using the soil we already have more wisely? This doesn't just mean adopting more sustainable farming practices; it requires systemic political and social change. One glaring example lies in the millions of forgotten hectares cleared from jungles to cultivate oil crops. Yes, I'm talking about palm oil.

Is farmland feeding locals or falling short?

You might wonder: What does palm oil have to do with global food security? Let me share some data to clarify.

Oil palm trees (Elaeis guineensis), native to the Gulf of Guinea in Africa, were introduced to Southeast Asia in the 20th century. Although not indigenous to the region, the species thrives in equatorial climates with hot, wet rainforests and peatlands. Palm oil’s commercial appeal is immense, thanks to its exceptional characteristics. Oil palm trees boast the highest oil yield of any crop, producing approximately 2.9 tonnes of oil per hectare. For comparison, the next most productive crop, rapeseed, lags far behind at just 0.7 tonnes per hectare.

Beyond high yields, palm oil has other commercial advantages: a pleasant semi-solid texture at room temperature, excellent preservation due to its resistance to oxidation, stability at high temperatures, and neutrality in flavor and color. Combined with minimal political regulation, these benefits have led to 30 million hectares of palm oil plantations worldwide as of 2022⁴, concentrated mostly in Indonesia (15 million hectares) and Malaysia (5 million hectares).

Recently, I was fortunate enough to travel to Malaysian Borneo. Flying in a small plane toward a remote jungle village, I was struck by the sheer scale of monoculture agriculture. Imagine taking off and seeing nothing but oil palm trees stretching to the horizon. It’s breathtaking—and unsettling.

Endless green, but at what cost? Aerial view of palm oil monocultures in Malaysian Borneo

As we discussed earlier, palm oil production is centered in some of the world's most undernourished regions. These are places where local food production will become increasingly crucial in the coming decades. You might argue that palm oil also provides nutrients to Malaysians and Indonesians. However, data show that a significant proportion of the palm oil produced is exported to countries like China, Russia, and India. Together with Europe and North America, these regions accounted for 31.43% of global palm oil imports in 2022⁴.

Worse still, a large share of palm oil goes into low-nutritional products like margarine, chocolates, pizzas, pastries, and ice cream. According to WWF estimates, about 33% of imported palm oil in Germany in 2013 was used for ultra-processed foods⁵. Yes, part of a crop responsible for destroying primary forests is being used to satisfy the cravings of a consumerist society. When it comes to sustainability, it’s essential to emphasize the need to rethink our consumption habits. This goes beyond individual shopping choices; it means reevaluating entire food systems to promote local production and responsible consumption.

Adding even more gravity to the issue, Indonesia and Malaysia are part of Sundaland, a biodiversity hotspot⁶. This makes palm oil cultivation especially damaging, with severe effects on biodiversity, agriculture, and local ecosystems. Roughly one-third of global agriculture relies on pollinators. Biodiversity is also vital for soil formation, nutrient cycling, pest control, and, of course, preserving the cultural and spiritual value of our rainforests⁷.

Nepenthes veitchii, or Veitch's pitcher-plant, is a Nepenthes species from the island of Borneo. Source: Nuria M. Wentzien.

The problem isn’t palm oil—it’s the system

Many debates have emerged around the sustainability of palm oil. Fueled by misinformation, the discussion has become polarized. Some vilify palm oil as inherently evil; others defend it as the most sustainable oil crop because it uses less land. But this debate misses the larger point: we’re operating within a system that prioritizes short-term profit over long-term sustainability and social justice. Rainforests are cleared to produce crops that don't improve food security or local well-being.

It's tempting to conclude that responsible consumers should simply avoid palm oil. But the demand for ultra-processed foods won’t disappear, and other oils would replace palm oil—potentially with even worse consequences. Real change depends on governments and public institutions enacting strict regulations on land use and international trade. Rather than feeling guilty about what we eat, we should focus on demanding better policies, clearer priorities, and a genuine commitment to a sustainable future.

Share it in your social media!

References

1. United Nations. (2023). Population. https://www.un.org/en/global-issues/population

2. FAO. (2011). Global agriculture towards 2050. High Level Expert Forum. https://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/wsfs/docs/Issues_papers/HLEF2050_Global_Agriculture.pdf

3. FAO. (2021). The state of the world's land and water resources for food and agriculture. FAO Open Knowledge Repository. https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/e51e0cf0-4ece-428c-8227-ff6c51b06b16/content

4. FAOSTAT. (2022). Palm oil global production dataset. FAO Statistics Division.

5. WWF. (2013). Searching for alternatives: Palm oil report. WWF Germany. https://web.archive.org/web/20230510164548/https://www.wwf.de/fileadmin/fm-wwf/Publikationen-PDF/Landwirtschaft/WWF-Report-Palm-Oil-Searching-for-Alternatives.pdf

6. Myers, N., et al. (2000). Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature, 403(6772), 853–858. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-06579-2

7. The Royal Society. (2023). Why is biodiversity important? https://royalsociety.org/news-resources/projects/biodiversity/why-is-biodiversity-important