At the beginning of April, I attended the annual editorial meeting of independent plant science journal New Phytologist. New Phytologist is one of the world’s highest ranked plant science journals – I have been an editor for the journal since 2007.

One of the topics for discussion was a symposium we are planning on running next year on extending the thermal limits of life. The multi-day symposium will bring together experts across a range of disciplines to explore how extreme heat, including events where air temperatures exceed 50 degrees Celsius, affects food production systems and natural ecosystems. It will be an opportunity to use our knowledge of the impact of heat on plants, insects and microbes to develop strategies that will enable society to prepare for a hotter world.

The original plan was to hold the symposium at the Desert Botanical Gardens in Phoenix, Arizona. The location was perfect – offering access to examples of how plants cope with extreme heat. However, given recent shifts in US Government policy on foreign citizens travelling to the country, we have decided that the safest decision for all attendees is to hold the event in another location where extreme heat occurs frequently – likely in Cordoba, Spain.

The need to move the symposium is unfortunate, particularly as the American science community in the USA is having to deal with proposed funding cuts that – if approved by Congress – greatly weaken efforts to maintain food production in the face of global climate change. The cuts include:

• a USD 5 billion cut (18 per cent) to the Department of Agriculture (USDA), with the sharpest reductions occurring in USDA’s world-leading work on climate resilience of food systems and renewable energy
• halving the budget of the National Science Foundation
• cutting applied research in the Department of Energy’s ‘Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy’ by 74 per cent
• reducing NASA’s budget by 24 per cent, with cuts to their ability to use satellites to monitor the impacts of climate on terrestrial land surfaces
• a 24 per cent cut to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration focusing on climate monitoring technologies and services
• a 30 per cent cut to the US Geological Survey, including cessation of work on water quality and predicting landscape impacts from climate change.

As noted last week in Science, there are growing calls for Congress to reject the proposal, as the “cuts would severely damage the ability of the United States to remain globally competitive in science and technology”. We can only hope.

While in the UK for the New Phytologist meeting, I met with Head of the Lincoln Institute of Agri-Food Technology Simon Pearson, Director of Ceres Agri-tech Louise Sutherland and Academic Director at the University of Exeter’s Initiative in the Digital Economy Roger Maull. In the surrounds of the Farmers Club in Whitehall we discussed the importance of research and technology development for meeting geopolitical, national security and climate challenges. One area of discussion was the UK’s investment in development of robotic systems for agriculture – particularly in a post-Brexit UK where availability of a skilled workforce to grow and harvest food has become more challenging. My past visits to Lincoln have highlighted their leadership in developing not just the robots, but also the sensors and artificial intelligence tools needed to automate food production. While Australia’s needs differ from that of the UK, there are some parallels in the need for technologies to automate agricultural production. Hopefully Australia won’t require events equivalent to Brexit to motivate us to invest at scale in R&D to improve our ability to grow and harvest the food needed by the nation and our trading partners.

Back in Canberra and on the last day of April, I attended the Australian-French Association for Research and Innovation (AFRAN Team) event on agrifood systems. The opening session was chaired by ABARES Executive Director Jared Greenville, with input from AFII-alumna Alison Bentley (in her new role as Deputy Director of CSIRO Agriculture and Food), Sydney Institute for Agriculture Director Damien Field and INRAE Research Director International Relationships Jean-François HOCQUETTE. One of my key takeaways was that while agriculture is often seen as being a commodity, export-focused sector, what it produces – food – is not simply a commodity. Rather, food is culturally important, and central to health and well-being of society. Additionally, Francesca Goodman-Smith from End Food Waste Australia spoke about the scale of food loss and waste, along with the extraordinary benefits we could achieve if we ended food waste globally. This included reducing 8-10 per cent of CO2 emissions and saving $940 billion globally.  Food for thought.

Finally, during April, AFII made a submission to the Australian Government’s Strategic Examination of Research and Development on the important contribution universities can make to Australia’s growth and prosperity when we have a strong R&D system.