The effects of COVID-19 on agriculture supply chain, food security, and environment: a review

The effect of COVID-19 on the agriculture supply chain

COVID-19 severely disturbed the agriculture market due to the shortage of labor and agricultural inputs (Balgah et al., 2023). The agriculture sector was disturbed as it hindered the supply chain from farmers to retailers (Alabi & Ngwenyama, 2022), resulting in worldwide food insecurity. The restrictions on travel and transportation also reduced the supply of farming inputs and reduced crop production. Moreover, the pandemic was also seen to be responsible for lowering overall household incomes, which reduced the demand for food (Özkan, 2021). Due to the lockdown, many food crop productions were reduced due to limited labor availability (Stephens et al., 2022), leading to food insecurity. On the other hand, due to transport restrictions in some parts of the world, large amounts of food were dumped and wasted (Pisa, 2022). Due to both lower food production and large food waste, food prices for staple food items, including dairy products, increased dramatically (Cui et al., 2023). Particularly, these price hikes were prominent in low-income countries due to disturbances in the whole food supply chain (Soon-Sinclair, Nyarugwe & Jack, 2023). Moreover, labor shortages due to sickness and the immobility of expatriate labor also reduced food processing units during COVID-19 (Balgah et al., 2023). The shape of the demand curve was changed due to fewer operational restaurants and changes in eating habits. Moreover, the disturbance of demand and supply in the food market generated buffer stocks, which increased food stocks (Murti, 2021).

Balgah et al. (2023) did a meta-analysis and stated that the pandemic had a severe impact on Africa’s agricultural environment. Through a comprehensive assessment and synthesis of current data, their study shed light on the agriculture sector’s multiple issues, which included disruptions across both supply chains and demand dynamics. For instance, industrial closures and transportation restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the global agriculture supply chain. Moreover, low income from lesser economic activities became a reason for low demand for products. Their comprehensive research presented persuasive evidence of the pandemic’s far-reaching consequences, emphasizing the critical need for targeted actions to alleviate its negative effects on agricultural sustainability and food security across the continent. In another study, Uyanga et al. (2024) also conducted a similar analysis and indicated similar negative effects. In another study on the US and Mexico, Quandt et al. (2022) showed that in rural areas, particularly, farmers were put under a lot of pressure during the pandemic as they had to jump through many hoops to get their work done in a timely as well as safe manner. The researchers interviewed 12 workers, and the results showed there could have been better resources available for these workers to deal with the stressors of the pandemic at work and home as they tried to take all the necessary precautions.

This section explains that the agriculture supply chain is disturbed due to lower production because of labor and agriculture input shortages during COVID-19. The shortage of inputs was observed due to travel restrictions and transportation limitations and resulted in a shortage of food, which led to a hike in food prices. The sickness of labor was also responsible for a reduction in food processing units. Moreover, perishable food was dumped due to a lack of storage facilities and restricted transportation during pandemic peaks. Thus, the supply shocks were responsible for food insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, demand-side shocks were also observed in poor households due to limited income because of job losses and lower employment opportunities during lockdowns, which reduced their purchasing power to buy food. Moreover, some perishable food is also dumped and wasted due to transport restrictions in some parts of the world.

Food insecurity during COVID-19

Food is a fundamental need of human health, and during COVID-19, it was particularly important to ensure food security and nutritional health for the masses (Ben-Hamadou, 2021). In the same manner, water is also a major necessity of life, and the literature argued that staying hydrated was crucial to ensuring a healthy immune system against the pandemic (Fincher, Jepson & Connors, 2023). Nevertheless, COVID-19 has disturbed food security to a great extent due to market disruptions, and it is difficult to ensure food security even with the production of basic food items due to labor shortages in the agriculture sector during peak COVID-19 periods. The pandemic disturbed food supply chains and food trade due to trade constraints (Park & Liu, 2022). For instance, the shutdown of international transport became responsible for reducing food imports and exports and disturbing the international food supply chain (Jin et al., 2022). Yu-han et al. (2023) did a simulation analysis and showed that declining remittance income also reduced food security. Moreover, food prices were also rising due to a shortage of food supply, which increases food insecurity. They suggested post-pandemic strategies to make the food industry more resilient so that sustainable growth could be ensured as the world recovers from COVID-19.

Food security depends on the amount and variety of food available in a country to meet the minimum dietary needs of society. COVID-19, along with other global problems, reduced food security. The transportation and travel restrictions due to COVID-19 severely impacted food security due to disturbances in the whole food supply chain, from production to consumers (Belu, 2021). Moreover, the improper government distribution system in times of food shortage and tight preventive COVID-19 policies made the issue of food insecurity more challenging (Nagpaul, 2022). Thus, food production declines along with trading problems led to food insecurity issues during the COVID-19 peaks. Side by side, low investment and production were observed due to limited government support during the pandemic in low-income countries (Gertz, 2021). Due to low investment in the food sector, food in terms of agricultural products and meat was limited during the pandemic. Thus, the pandemic became a great threat to food security (Martinez, 2021). Moreover, food insecurity pushes more people to the poverty line in developing countries (Yeboah, Shaik & Musah, 2021). Millions of people were already suffering from poverty and food insecurity before COVID-19. However, COVID-19 created more food shortages, and food security became a problem for billions of people around the globe by putting more constraints on agricultural production (Begg, 2020).

Due to limited production and supply of food, food prices have jumped sharply, which has a great impact on the prices of non-food products as well (Dyer, 2021). In addition, developed countries restricted the food trade with developing countries for preventive measures (Yu & Xiao, 2023), which made the demand and supply of foodstuffs more volatile. Thus, importing restrictions would create food insecurity, which again gave rise to food prices, and households would have less food than they needed due to limited income during the pandemic (O’Hara & Toussaint, 2021). Particularly, poor households were affected as their income spending proportion on food was high compared to rich households. Moreover, low-income households are more associated with the agriculture sector in terms of their income. Thus, families involved in this sector were more affected by COVID-19 because of their income dependence on the agriculture sector (Mahmud & Riley, 2022). Even, agricultural products were not a source of COVID-19 spread (Shahidi, 2020).

Restaurants were another victim in the food sector, which is affected by social distancing. Thus, food demand by restaurants significantly declined during COVID-19 peaks (Yacoub & ElHajjar, 2021). The pandemic led to hikes in wheat and rice prices (Haase, Zimmermann & Huss, 2023), along with other necessary food items like cooking oil, vegetables, and fruits (Lal et al., 2020). The local production stoppage had a great impact on perishable food because it is expensive and difficult to store these goods in order to maintain a steady supply of perishable food. Thus, the stock of stored food did not match the needs of households during the pandemic (Deaton & Deaton, 2020). For instance, bulk-stored meat and some perishable vegetables expired during the peak of COVID-19. Thus, these food stocks were dumped into the soil, resulting in waste. Similarly, the milk was also dumped due to lower transportation during the pandemic (Alabi & Ngwenyama, 2022).

In a survey study, Semakula et al. (2024) investigated the households in Uganda during COVID-19 and found that 42.2% of households were worried about food security and 32.1% of households faced hunger. 25.2% of households skipped one meal, and 32.1% reduced their food consumption. Sridhar et al. (2024) explored a district of Zambia and found that most households reduced food consumption during the pandemic. However, the government or other agencies could help only 6.6% of households to support their dietary needs. Nkoko, Cronje & Swanepoel (2024) stated that the pandemic severely affected food insecurity among farming households in Lesotho, and household size, income, and education also affected food insecurity.

This section describes that some country-specific and regional studies confirmed food insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic. Food insecurity stems from disturbances in the whole food supply chain, from production to retailers, due to shortages of labor, disruptions in transportation, trade restrictions, improper government distribution systems, low investment in the food sector, and tight preventive COVID-19 policies. Particularly, restricted international transportation reduced the supply of imported food and upset the international food supply chain. Thus, food insecurity increased within nations reliant on imported food. On the other hand, some perishable food items were also wasted and dumped due to transport restrictions in some parts of the world. Thus, food insecurity increases hunger globally.

Remedial measures for food security

Food security might be achieved with the concept of food self-sufficiency by using domestic resources (de Paulo Farias & dos Santos Gomes, 2020). Food self-sufficiency is meant to complete food production from local resources. However, food imports may also help in ensuring food security. The literature has shed light on the pros and cons of self-sufficiency (Bikernieks, 2022). During the international food crisis, Clapp (2017) explained the trade-off between self-sufficiency and international trade of food due to the volatile market during the crisis. The author argued that rejection of international trade would result in food insecurity. However, a balanced approach might be adopted to increase the capacity of domestic food production, along with some degree of freedom in food imports following international rules. In the same way, Fontan Sers & Mughal (2020) analyzed the concept of rice self-reliance in Africa during COVID-2019 and found that most rice has been produced domestically, but still, Africa depended on rice imports during the pandemic because COVID-19 reduced the consistency in the rice supply chain. Consequently, demand and supply could not reach equilibrium with locally produced rice. Moreover, rice price volatility during COVID-19 caused food insecurity among the African population. It was suggested to enhance innovation to increase agricultural productivity and to finance such innovation with government support.

In another study on the Gulf market, Woertz (2020) analyzed food self-sufficiency and security during COVID-19. Water scarcity was a major hurdle in the way of food self-sufficiency. Thus, the Gulf market depends on food imports to ensure food security. During the pandemic, it was also very important to ensure good management of food stocks. In this way, the Gulf market performed well in terms of food security. However, the marginalized groups of the population were affected due to their low income and high food prices. In the same way, Deaton & Deaton (2021) investigated Canada during COVID-19 and found that there was no significant problem with food security during COVID-19. Moreover, food prices were relatively stable compared to other parts of the world during COVID-19 in Canada. The shortage of food was covered with food imports and expat labor to enhance domestic food production. However, all kinds of foods were not in regular supply, which was managed by the households with a change in dietary habits. Niles et al. (2024) surveyed two states of the USA and found that home and wild food procurement helped to reduce food insecurity. On the other hand, some recent studies highlighted the importance of social protection programs, community-level interventions, and policy responses to reduce food insecurity during the pandemic (de Haro Mota, Ortiz-Jiménez & Blas-Yañez, 2024; Hangoma et al., 2024; Miller et al., 2024). Moreover, Orjiakor (2024) stated that targeted supportive programs helped to reduce food insecurity during the pandemic.

The literature suggested some strategies for ensuring food security, including food self-reliance within a region and the need for a balanced approach between domestic production and international trade. For instance, increasing domestic resources for food production and reducing reliance on imported food may improve food security during any kind of pandemic. Moreover, wild food procurement also helped to reduce food insecurity. The food insecurity issue made us realize the importance of innovation, government support, and effective management of food stocks to address the multifaceted issues in the way of food security.

The effects of COVID-19 on the environment

There can be a two-way association between COVID-19 and the environment. At first, the air is a source of virus and bacteria transfers among animals and human beings (Zhou et al., 2020). For instance, Bossak & Andritsch (2022) reported that high levels of Particulate Matter (PM) in the atmosphere would increase the spread of COVID-19. PM is a microorganism that is a composition of liquid and solid (Prinz & Richter, 2020), which is toxic to human health. PM can be inhaled easily and can be the cause of many respiratory diseases (Zhang et al., 2020). Side by side, PM, including PM2.5 and PM10, is a fine carrier of COVID-19, which can transfer COVID-19 disease from one person to another. Particularly, PM2.5 has more ability to enhance respiratory disorders and neurocognitive and cardiovascular illnesses (Kandari & Kumar, 2021).

The literature also reported a positive environmental effect of COVID-19. Mandal & Pal (2020) reported that PM10 has been reduced significantly in stone quarrying and crushing areas during COVID-19 due to lockdowns and lesser production activities. Similarly, Lokhandwala & Gautam (2020) investigated and found that PM2.5 declined significantly during COVID-19 lockdowns and other precautionary measures in India. Mahato, Pal & Ghosh (2020) also reported that both PM2.5 and PM10 declined due to lockdowns in India. Pansini & Fornacca (2021) stated that PM2.5 concentrations had significantly declined in some European countries and China. Similarly, PM2.5 concentrations declined in the USA. Other than PM concentrations, COVID-19 had a significant effect on reducing other dangerous gases, like NOx and carbon emissions, because of lockdowns and other COVID restrictions. Similarly, it reduced sulfur dioxide and carbon monoxide emissions (Skiriene & Stasiškiene, 2021). Even, CO₂ emissions and overall GHG emissions declined sharply during the first phase of COVID-19 due to the shutdown of industrial activities and transportation (Mannarini et al., 2022). Along with air pollution, COVID-19 also reduced global warming and humidity (Lal et al., 2020). Marcucci et al. (2024) investigated Norway and found that a free delivery strategy during the pandemic increased online shopping habits and reduced CO₂ emissions. Damiani et al. (2024) investigated Tokyo and found that COVID-19 reduced mobility and changed the lifestyle of the urban population, which helped to improve air quality. Sahraei & Ziaei (2024) investigated the EU and UK and stated that COVID-19 reduced CO₂ and NO₂ emissions. Compared to 2019, emissions were reduced by 10.66% in 2020. Lee, Kuwayama & FitzGibbon (2024) investigated California and found that NO₂ emissions decreased by 54.2% on average in the year 2020 compared to 2019. This reduction of NO₂ was observed more in urban areas compared to rural areas. Zeydan & Zeydan (2024) investigated emissions from aviation in Turkey and found that a 33.8% to 50.3% reduction in different types of emissions in 2020 was observed compared to 2019, which was due to fewer local, international, and cargo flights.

China is the largest global CO₂ emitter due to heavy industrial and transportation activities. About half of GHG emissions in China declined during the first few COVID-19 phases because of fewer industrial and transportation activities (Zhu et al., 2020). Moreover, air quality is enhanced due to a reduction in PM concentrations and GHG emissions in England (Villeneuve & Goldberg, 2021). Furthermore, the ozone layer was improved during COVID-19 (Baldwin & Lenton, 2020; Siciliano et al., 2020). Furthermore, Travaglio et al. (2021) reported a significant reduction in GHG emissions in England. The shutdown of transportation alone led to a notable reduction in GHG emissions and PM concentrations due to a reduction in the consumption of petroleum products. Moreover, the industrial shutdown also contributed to a cleaner environment by reducing GHG emissions. Singh & Mishra (2021) found a half decline in pollution in Wuhan during COVID-19 compared to 2019. Ma et al. (2023) did analyses of a few months in China and found that SO₂ and CO declined significantly compared to the pre-COVID period in Shaanxi Province. Moreover, O3 concentration increased by more than 10% during the same period. Similarly, Zhang et al. (2021) found that O3 concentration increased significantly in the provinces of China due to precautionary measures for COVID-19 compared to pre-COVID periods. Huang & Brown (2021) found that pollution emissions declined in Germany. Balakrishnan & Beemamol (2023) analyzed the global CO₂ emissions and found a significant decline in these emissions compared to the pre-corona period, which might be due to the shutdown of national and international transportation.

Other than air quality, COVID-19 enhanced water quality due to limited industrial activities, urbanization, and the discharge of waste materials, crude oil, and plastic materials into water (Rami, 2021). Roy, Ghosh & Roy (2021) reported that the Ganga River got cleaner during the lockdown of COVID-19 in India. Suspended PM significantly reduced in water during COVID-19, which reduced water pollution. La Rosa et al. (2020) reported that China started filtering the water to stop the spread of COVID-19 by using chlorine. Manoiu et al. (2022) reported a significant decline in bio-chemicals in the water. Overall, water quality has improved during COVID-19 due to a reduction in water pollution, increasing rains, and the reduced use of water (Wong et al., 2023). In addition, the population of fish also increased due to fewer fishing activities and clean water (Cooke et al., 2021).

Along with other pollution controls, COVID-19 also had a significant positive effect on noise pollution. For instance, noise pollution from transportation and factories was reduced due to lockdowns due to precautionary measures for COVID-19. Thus, roadside noise pollution was reduced significantly in the cities during the COVID-19 period. Moreover, all economic activities were reduced, which resulted in all kinds of pollution, including noise pollution (Espejo et al., 2020). COVID-19 harmed forests as deforestation significantly increased to control COVID-19 spread (de Oliveira, 2021). However, COVID-19 also had a positive effect on ecology by increasing biodiversity and reducing pollution due to precautionary measures (Kalfatovic et al., 2020). Islam et al. (2024) showed that significant improvements were seen in air quality during COVID-19. Reduced transportation led to a significant drop in pollution, but some of these effects did not last long. As urban activities started increasing, pollution levels started rising, while other issues, including medical waste and noise pollution, were on the rise.

Along with the positive environmental effects of COVID-19, some negative effects were also noticed in the literature. For instance, in the treatment of COVID-19 patients, medical waste has increased (Tang, 2022). Thus, medical waste is a significant challenge for waste management systems. Maleki et al. (2024) stated that medical waste increased in Iran during COVID-19. They suggested that a proper medical waste management system would help reduce pollution from medical waste. Moreover, the use of gloves and facemasks increased to control viral infection, which increased healthcare waste (Fadare & Okoffo, 2020). Moreover, due to home deliveries to discourage on-shop shopping to control the crowds in shopping places, the use of packing material increased, which increased waste (Benson, Bassey & Palanisami, 2021). This sudden jump in waste is a threat to the ecosystem, which needs urgent attention to increase recycling practices. However, recycling plants stopped operation during the pandemic times, which reduced the recycling of waste (Argentiero, D’Amato & Zoli, 2022) and posed a threat to the concept of the circular economy. Thus, it increased the plastic pollution from solid waste, healthcare waste, and medical waste (Okoh, 2020). Moreover, toxins from medical and chemical waste increased during COVID-19, which increased soil pollution (Rezi & Rahayu, 2021). Thus, the improper disposal of waste is a great threat to soil quality and biodiversity. So, there is an urgent need for collaborative efforts by the government and private sector to join hands against this soil and plastic pollution.

This section reviews the positive and negative environmental effects of COVID-19. The positive aspects include improvement in air quality by reducing PM concentration, SO₂, NO₂, NO, CO, CO₂ and GHG emissions due to the reduction in the use of petroleum products and due to declines in industrial, transport, and other urban activities during COVID-19 lockdowns. Moreover, water quality was improved due to a reduction in industrial activities, urbanization, wastewater, and the discharge of waste materials, crude oil, and plastic materials into water. The improved quality of the water also enhanced fish populations. In addition, noise pollution was reduced due to shrinking transportation and other urban activities. Thus, roadside noise pollution was controlled in cities. Further, COVID-19 also has a positive effect on ecology by increasing biodiversity. However, COVID-19 had some negative environmental consequences along with the mentioned positive effects. For instance, wastes from medical, healthcare, personal protective equipment, and packaging were increased, which resulted in soil and plastic pollution. Moreover, recycling plants were shut down due to the lockdown, which reduced the recycling of waste.