Land-based climate change mitigation measures can affect agricultural markets and food security.
Journal
Nature food
ISSN: 2662-1355
Titre abrégé: Nat Food
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101761102
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2022
02 2022
Historique:
received:
14
12
2020
accepted:
18
01
2022
medline:
1
5
2023
pubmed:
1
2
2022
entrez:
28
4
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Earlier studies have noted potential adverse impacts of land-related emissions mitigation strategies on food security, particularly due to food price increases-but without distinguishing these strategies' individual effects under different conditions. Using six global agroeconomic models, we show the extent to which three factors-non-CO
Identifiants
pubmed: 37117964
doi: 10.1038/s43016-022-00464-4
pii: 10.1038/s43016-022-00464-4
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
110-121Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.
Références
Blanco, G. et al. Drivers, Trends and Mitigation (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).
Fuss, S. et al. Negative emissions—part 2: costs, potentials and side effects. Environ. Res. Lett. 13, 063002 (2018).
doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/aabf9f
Popp, A., Lotze-Campen, H. & Bodirsky, B. Food consumption, diet shifts and associated non-CO
doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.02.001
Harmsen, J. H. M. et al. Long-term marginal abatement cost curves of non-CO
doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2019.05.013
Hasegawa, T. & Matsuoka, Y. Climate change mitigation strategies in agriculture and land use in Indonesia. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change 20, 409–424 (2015).
doi: 10.1007/s11027-013-9498-3
Global Mitigation of Non-CO
Hasegawa, T. et al. Risk of increased food insecurity under stringent global climate change mitigation policy. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 699–703 (2018).
doi: 10.1038/s41558-018-0230-x
Fuss, S. et al. Betting on negative emissions. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 850–853 (2014).
doi: 10.1038/nclimate2392
Gambhir, A., Butnar, I., Li, P.-H., Smith, P. & Strachan, N. A review of criticisms of integrated assessment models and proposed approaches to address these, through the lens of BECCS. Energies 12, 1747 (2019).
doi: 10.3390/en12091747
Gough, C. et al. Challenges to the use of BECCS as a keystone technology in pursuit of 1.5 °C. Glob. Sustain. 1, e5 (2018).
doi: 10.1017/sus.2018.3
Hasegawa, T. et al. Consequence of climate mitigation on the risk of hunger. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49, 7245–7253 (2015).
pubmed: 25982947
doi: 10.1021/es5051748
Hasegawa, T. et al. Food security under high bioenergy demand toward long-term climate goals. Climatic Change 163, 1587–1601 (2020).
doi: 10.1007/s10584-020-02838-8
Fujimori, S. et al. A multi-model assessment of food security implications of climate change mitigation. Nat. Sustain. 2, 386–396 (2019).
doi: 10.1038/s41893-019-0286-2
Fujimori, S. et al. Inclusive climate change mitigation and food security policy under 1.5 °C climate goal. Environ. Res. Lett. 13, 074033 (2018).
doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/aad0f7
Frank, S. et al. Agricultural non-CO
doi: 10.1038/s41558-018-0358-8
Doelman, J. C. et al. Afforestation for climate change mitigation: potentials, risks and trade-offs. Glob. Change Biol. 26, 1576–1591 (2020).
doi: 10.1111/gcb.14887
Humpenöder, F. et al. Investigating afforestation and bioenergy CCS as climate change mitigation strategies. Environ. Res. Lett. 9, 064029 (2014).
doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/9/6/064029
Golub, A. A. et al. Global climate policy impacts on livestock, land use, livelihoods, and food security. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 20894–20899 (2013).
pubmed: 23019587
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1108772109
Hussein, Z., Hertel, T. & Golub, A. Climate change mitigation policies and poverty in developing countries. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 035009 (2013).
doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/035009
Peña-Lévano, L. M., Taheripour, F. & Tyner, W. E. Climate change interactions with agriculture, forestry sequestration, and food security. Environ. Resour. Econ. 74, 653–675 (2019).
doi: 10.1007/s10640-019-00339-6
Fujimori, S. et al. SSP3: AIM implementation of Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 268–283 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.06.009
Thompson, W. et al. Long-term crop productivity response and its interaction with cereal markets and energy prices. Food Policy 84, 1–9 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2018.12.001
Sands, R. D., Förster, H., Jones, C. A. & Schumacher, K. Bio-electricity and land use in the Future Agricultural Resources Model (FARM). Climatic Change 123, 719–730 (2013).
doi: 10.1007/s10584-013-0943-9
Calvin, K. et al. The SSP4: a world of deepening inequality. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 284–296 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.06.010
Fricko, O. et al. The marker quantification of the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway 2: a middle-of-the-road scenario for the 21st century. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 251–267 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.06.004
van Vuuren, D. P. et al. Energy, land-use and greenhouse gas emissions trajectories under a green growth paradigm. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 237–250 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.008
Hasegawa, T., Fujimori, S., Takahashi, K. & Masui, T. Scenarios for the risk of hunger in the twenty-first century using Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 014010 (2015).
doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/10/1/014010
Hasegawa, T., Fujimori, S., Takahashi, K., Yokohata, T. & Masui, T. Economic implications of climate change impacts on human health through undernourishment. Climatic Change 136, 189–202 (2016).
doi: 10.1007/s10584-016-1606-4
Riahi, K. et al. The Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and their energy, land use, and greenhouse gas emissions implications: an overview. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 153–168 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.009
Stehfest, E. et al. Key determinants of global land-use projections. Nat. Commun. 10, 2166 (2019).
pubmed: 31092816
pmcid: 6520344
doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-09945-w
Hasegawa, T. et al. Extreme climate events increase risk of global food insecurity and adaptation needs. Nat. Food 2, 587–595 (2021).
doi: 10.1038/s43016-021-00335-4
Hasegawa, T., Fujimori, S., Takahashi, K. & Masui, T. Scenarios for the risk of hunger in the twenty-first century using Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 014010 (2015).
doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/10/1/014010
von Lampe, M. et al. Why do global long-term scenarios for agriculture differ? An overview of the AgMIP Global Economic Model Intercomparison. Agric. Econ. 45, 3–20 (2014).
doi: 10.1111/agec.12086
Harmsen, M. et al. The role of methane in future climate strategies: mitigation potentials and climate impacts. Climatic Change 163, 1409–1425 (2020).
doi: 10.1007/s10584-019-02437-2
Gernaat, D. E. H. J. et al. Understanding the contribution of non-carbon dioxide gases in deep mitigation scenarios. Glob. Environ. Change 33, 142–153 (2015).
doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.04.010
Daioglou, V., Doelman, J. C., Wicke, B., Faaij, A. & van Vuuren, D. P. Integrated assessment of biomass supply and demand in climate change mitigation scenarios. Glob. Environ. Change 54, 88–101 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.11.012
Popp, A. et al. Land-use futures in the shared socio-economic pathways. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 331–345 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.10.002
Rogelj, J., Meinshausen, M., Schaeffer, M., Knutti, R. & Riahi, K. Impact of short-lived non-CO
doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/10/7/075001
Grubler, A. et al. A low energy demand scenario for meeting the 1.5 °C target and sustainable development goals without negative emission technologies. Nat. Energy 3, 515–527 (2018).
doi: 10.1038/s41560-018-0172-6
van Vuuren, D. P. et al. Alternative pathways to the 1.5 °C target reduce the need for negative emission technologies. Nature Clim. Change 8, 391–397 (2018).
doi: 10.1038/s41558-018-0119-8
Wise, M. et al. Implications of limiting CO
pubmed: 19478180
doi: 10.1126/science.1168475
Calvin, K. et al. Trade-offs of different land and bioenergy policies on the path to achieving climate targets. Climatic Change 123, 691–704 (2014).
doi: 10.1007/s10584-013-0897-y
Fujimori, S., Hasegawa, T. & Oshiro, K. An assessment of the potential of using carbon tax revenue to tackle poverty. Environ. Res. Lett. 15, 114063 (2020).
doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/abb55d
Springmann, M. et al. Mitigation potential and global health impacts from emissions pricing of food commodities. Nat. Clim. Change 7, 69–74 (2017).
doi: 10.1038/nclimate3155
Stehfest, E. et al. Climate benefits of changing diet. Climatic Change 95, 83–102 (2009).
doi: 10.1007/s10584-008-9534-6
Hasegawa, T., Havlík, P., Frank, S., Palazzo, A. & Valin, H. Tackling food consumption inequality to fight hunger without pressuring the environment. Nat. Sustain. 2, 826–833 (2019).
doi: 10.1038/s41893-019-0371-6
Leclère, D. et al. Bending the curve of terrestrial biodiversity needs an integrated strategy. Nature 585, 551–556 (2020).
pubmed: 32908312
doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2705-y
Fujimori, S. et al. Macroeconomic impacts of climate change driven by changes in crop yields. Sustainability 10, 3673 (2018).
doi: 10.3390/su10103673
Reilly, J., Hohmann, N. & Kane, S. Climate change and agricultural trade. Glob. Environ. Change 4, 24–36 (1994).
doi: 10.1016/0959-3780(94)90019-1
Bodirsky, B. L. et al. Reactive nitrogen requirements to feed the world in 2050 and potential to mitigate nitrogen pollution. Nat. Commun. 5, 3858 (2014).
pubmed: 24819889
doi: 10.1038/ncomms4858
Vitousek, P. M., Menge, D. N. L., Reed, S. C. & Cleveland, C. C. Biological nitrogen fixation: rates, patterns and ecological controls in terrestrial ecosystems. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 368, 20130119 (2013).
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2013.0119
Hejazi, M. et al. Long-term global water projections using six socioeconomic scenarios in an integrated assessment modeling framework. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 81, 205–226 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2013.05.006
van Vuuren, D. P. et al. RCP2.6: exploring the possibility to keep global mean temperature increase below 2 °C. Climatic Change 109, 95–116 (2011).
doi: 10.1007/s10584-011-0152-3
Fricko, O. et al. The marker quantification of the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway 2: A middle-of-the-road scenario for the 21st century. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 251 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.06.004
Debeljak, M. et al. Potential of multi-objective models for risk-based mapping of the resilience characteristics of soils: demonstration at a national level. Soil Use Manag. 25, 66–77 (2009).
doi: 10.1111/j.1475-2743.2009.00196.x
Bai, Z. G., Dent, D. L., Olsson, L. & Schaepman, M. E. Global Assessment of Land Degradation and Improvement: 1. Identification by Remote Sensing (ISRIC—World Soil Information, 2008).
van Zeist, W.-J. et al. Are scenario projections overly optimistic about future yield progress? Glob. Environ. Change 64, 102120 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102120
Borgonovo, E. Sensitivity analysis with finite changes: an application to modified EOQ models. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 200, 127–138 (2010).
doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2008.12.025
Borgonovo, E. A methodology for determining interactions in probabilistic safety assessment models by varying one parameter at a time. Risk Anal. 30, 385–399 (2010).
pubmed: 20199656
doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01372.x
Marangoni, G. et al. Sensitivity of projected long-term CO
doi: 10.1038/nclimate3199
Fujimori, S., Hasegawa, T., Masui, T. & Takahashi, K. Land use representation in a global CGE model for long-term simulation: CET vs. logit functions. Food Sec. 6, 685–699 (2014).
doi: 10.1007/s12571-014-0375-z
Fujimori, S., Masui, T. & Matsuoka, Y. AIM/CGE [Basic] Manual (Center for Social and Environmental Systems Research, National Institute for Environmental Studies, 2012).
Woltjer, G. B. & Kuiper, M. H. The MAGNET Model: Module Description (LEI Wageningen UR, 2014).
Stehfest, E., van Vuuren, D., Bouwman, L. & Kram, T. Integrated Assessment of Global Environmental Change with IMAGE 3.0: Model Description and Policy Applications (PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, 2014).
Lucas, P. L., van Vuuren, D. P., Olivier, J. G. J. & den Elzen, M. G. J. Long-term reduction potential of non-CO
doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2006.10.007
Havlík, P. et al. Climate change mitigation through livestock system transitions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 3709–3714 (2014).
pubmed: 24567375
pmcid: 3956143
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1308044111
Kindermann, G. E., Obersteiner, M., Rametsteiner, E. & McCallum, I. Predicting the deforestation-trend under different carbon-prices. Carbon Balance Manag. 1, 15 (2006).
pubmed: 17150095
pmcid: 1766350
doi: 10.1186/1750-0680-1-15
Kyle, P. et al. GCAM 3.0 Agriculture and Land Use: Data Sources and Methods (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, 2011).
Calvin, K. et al. GCAM v5.1: representing the linkages between energy, water, land, climate, and economic systems. Geosci. Model Dev. 12, 677–698 (2019).
doi: 10.5194/gmd-12-677-2019
Wise, M. & Calvin, K. GCAM 3.0 Agriculture and Land Use: Technical Description of Modeling Approach (PNNL, 2011).
Armington, S. P. A theory of demand for products distinguished by place of production. Staff Papers 16, 159–178 (1969).
doi: 10.2307/3866403
Domínguez, I. P. et al. An Economic Assessment of GHG Mitigation Policy Options for EU Agriculture. Report No. JRC101396 (Publications Office of the European Union, 2016).
Sands, R. D., Malcolm, S. A., Suttles, S. A. & Marshall, E. Dedicated Energy Crops and Competition for Agricultural Land (US Department of Agriculture, 2017).
Lanz, B. & Rutherford, T. F. GTAPinGAMS: multiregional and small open economy models. J. Glob. Econ. Anal. 1, 1–77 (2016).
doi: 10.21642/JGEA.010201AF
The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2012 (FAO, 2012).
Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGAR) Version 4.2 (Joint Research Centre, European Commission, 2012); http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu
FAO Methodology for the Measurement of Food Deprivation: Updating the Minimum Dietary Energy Requirements (FAO, 2008).
Food Security Indicators (FAO, 2013).
Energy and Protein Requirements (FAO and World Health Organization, 1973).
Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP) Database Version 0.9.3 (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, 2012); https://tntcat.iiasa.ac.at/SspDb