You hit the nail on the head. Today I was reading this (free) book chapter on the Sustainable Development Goals Series. Three quotes really stuck out to me.

1. Agri-food systems' pervasive externalities imply a divergence between the market price of foods and their social cost.

2. The COVID-19 pandemic has made clear that healthfulness, equity, resilience, and sustainability are interlinked, pre-competitive issues.

3. When faced with massive, systemic, even existential challenges, our ancestors envisioned and achieved remarkable innovations that ultimately begat the agri-food systems we have today, for good or for ill. It is time to do so again.

As we address these problems, we should really keep in mind the interconnectedness of water, food, health, environment, and society.

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-88802-2_...

> Agri-food systems' pervasive externalities imply a divergence between the market price of foods and their social cost.

We produce more food on less land than ever. Nutrient dense food is available year round at an affordable cost to almost everyone for the first time in history. Increasingly big ag is switching to drip irrigation and no till where that is appropriate. There's are also a growing body of research into how to manage large farms with lower fertilizer inputs. Things are changing and improving, just unevenly and incrementally.

The ability for the world to produce a huge surplus of calories and to trade them as commodities across borders IS resilience.

You're right. There are a lot of industry actors making positive changes. It seems the authors are referring to supply chain resiliency in this case, but yes, an abundance of calories and protein grams due to global trade has enormous benefits.

One hidden issue that we will face is the rise of income in low-middle income countries. As their purchasing power increases, they will likely demand more meat and other, more expensive, food options. As we decrease our productivity for the sake of environmental impact, the invisible hand will force the price of food higher. I'm not saying we shouldn't promote regenerative ag, just that this will pose a major problem that we shouldn't ignore.

I wouldn’t bet on prices being a lot higher in the long run, especially if there are more customers. For all we know, convincing vat meat might get cheap and delicious.

More customers is exactly why food prices will go up. This isn't really much of a debate in the realm of developmental economics. Income goes up, demand goes up, and production doesn't keep up at the same rate. The result is higher prices.

Cell-based meat currently only solves the ethical dilemma of meat. It's economies of scale are not strong. You need a lot of energy (GHG heavy), refined inputs, and no one talks about the ironic use of FBS.

As a matter of fact, since you bring up long term, cell based falls short of regenerative animal ag in terms of cost of and GHG mitigation over 100 year span.

"The ability for the world to produce a huge surplus of calories and to trade them as commodities across borders IS resilience."

HN bot remind me in one year.

I think this is pretty obvious. Prior to global trade and the green revolution a bad harvest locally could mean starvation. The war in Ukraine will make basic food stuffs a lot more expensive in the Middle East and Africa, which is tragic but it's not really the same thing.

Yeah we need to ditch the legacy water allocation methods and meter everyone. Then we can just jack up the price as necessary.

That was discussed in California a few years ago when the water situation was bad.

It turns out to be very complex, and intertwined with other states etc.

Some marginal changes were made, and then the next winter was very wet.

Elinor Ostrom (Nobel prize for economics in 1993) discussed exactly this scenario on her book Governing the Commons. Her book covers scenarios where a common good is preserved or destroyed, depending on the individual actors and the organization that they were able to achieve. She gives an example of farmers in the LA water basin self-organizing to preserve the groundwater.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/governing-the-commons/A...

I think Daniel day Lewis said it best. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=s_hFTR6qyEo

Thing is, these externalities will hurt the people causing them. That turns the problem into a tragedy of the commons, rather than pure externalities. That gives some hope for a fix. Because tragedy of the commons has easier incentives than basic outside externalities.