Fact Check: WEF did not demand ban on homegrown food to meet ‘net zero’ goal
A viral post falsely claims that the World Economic Forum called for a global ban on homegrown food to meet climate goals. It also erroneously claimed that the WEF supported research to study the carbon footprint of urban agriculture
Claim :
World Economic Forum demands global ban on homegrown food to achieve climate goalFact :
WEF did not advocate a ban not funded the research to study carbon footprint of urban agriculture
The Global Hunger Index 2023 report has listed India at the 111th position among 125 nations indicating that the country is in the “serious” category of hunger. During Covid-19 induced lockdown many people in Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, and Bihar took to home gardening to meet the needs of daily vegetable consumption.
Home gardening is traditionally considered for household consumption, however, experts argued that the practice of growing plants and vegetables in the backyard could become a potential source of income too.
Recently, a lengthy post claiming “World Economic Forum (WEF) demands global ban on homegrown food to meet ‘net zero’ quickly went viral on various social media platforms.
Fact Check:
During the investigation, the Telugupost fact check team found the claim that the Switzerland-based group, World Economic Forum, established as a not-for-profit foundation, did not advocate for a ban on homegrown foods.
We began our investigation by going through the Slay News article as the viral claim is based on it. The media outlet has claimed that the WEF funded the researchers at the University of Michigan to study whether the carbon footprint from homegrown food is affecting the planet and the findings were published in the journal Nature Cities in 2024.
The international study titled, “Comparing the carbon footprints of urban and conventional agriculture” found that the fruits and vegetables grown in urban farms and gardens have a carbon footprint that is, on average, six times greater than conventionally grown produce.
The research scientists used data from 73 urban farms and gardens in five countries and is the largest published study to compare the carbon footprints of urban and conventional agriculture.
As we continued our search, we came across a video posted by the University of Michigan, in which study co-lead author Jason Hawes, a doctoral student at U-M's School for Environment and Sustainability says, “Our study provides quantitative evidence for best practices that can make urban farming and urban agriculture in general more carbon friendly.
It is now clear that the researchers have suggested best practices crucial to making low-tech urban agriculture more carbon-competitive with conventional agriculture. However, the study does not demand an end to urban farming.
In another place, Hawes said “Urban agriculturalists have developed a variety of really interesting ways to reduce financial costs and their carbon footprint, including reusing materials, promoting soil carbon retention and reducing fuel use.”
We also came across a report on the University of Michigan’s website discussing the carbon footprint of urban-farmed food. The report has also mentioned the entities behind the funding for the project. However, we did not find WEF in the list of organisations below.
“Support for the project was provided by the UK Economic and Social Research Council, German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, French National Research Agency, U.S. National Science Foundation, Poland’s National Science Centre, and the European Union’s Horizon 202 research and innovation program,” it said.
During our investigation, we also came across other fact-checkers who have debunked similar claims attributed to the World Economic Forum.
In the light of the above investigation, we found no evidence which suggests that the WEF sponsored the research scientists of Michigan University or the global forum gave a call for a ban on urban agriculture (UA) or homegrown food to achieve a ‘Net Zero’ emissions goal.
