The distribution of food security impacts of biofuels, a Ghana case study
Brinkman, Marnix ; Levin-Koopman, Jason ; Wicke, Birka ; Shutes, Lindsay ; Kuiper, Marijke ; Faaij, André ; Hilst, Floor van der - \ 2020
Biomass and Bioenergy 141 (2020). - ISSN 0961-9534
Biofuel mandate - CGEmodel - Developing country - Food security - Household - Nutrition
The demand for biofuels is expected to increase significantly in the coming years. However, there are major concerns on the impact of increased biofuel production on food security. As biofuel affects food security in various ways, it is important to assess the impacts on the four pillars of food security, availability, access, utilisation and stability. The objective of this study is to ex-ante quantify impacts of biofuel production on the four pillars of food security for urban and rural households in a developing country. We illustrate this for Ghana, which proposed a 10% biodiesel and 15% ethanol mandate for 2030 and which faces food security issues. We used the computable general equilibrium (CGE) model MAGNET in combination with a household and a nutrition module to quantify 13 food security indicators. The results show that the largest food security effects of the biofuel mandate are negative impacts on food prices and import dependency. However, the projected food security impacts of the biofuel mandate in 2030 are relatively small compared to the projected food security effects of economic development in Ghana towards 2030. Our approach enables ex-ante quantification of the effects of biofuel on the four pillars of food security and the differentiation of the effects between urban and rural households. Although improvements can be made, the approach means a big step forward compared to the state-of-the-art knowledge on food security impacts of biofuel production and it could contribute to identify options to minimise negative and optimise positive food security effects.
Reply to: An appeal to cost undermines food security risks of delayed mitigation
Hasegawa, Tomoko ; Fujimori, Shinichiro ; Havlík, Petr ; Valin, Hugo ; Bodirsky, Benjamin Leon ; Doelman, Jonathan C. ; Fellmann, Thomas ; Kyle, Page ; Koopman, Jason F.L. ; Lotze-Campen, Hermann ; Mason-D’Croz, Daniel ; Müller, Christoph ; Ochi, Yuki ; Pérez Domínguez, Ignacio ; Stehfest, Elke ; Sulser, Timothy B. ; Tabeau, Andrzej ; Takahashi, Kiyoshi ; Takakura, Junya ; Meijl, Hans van; Zeist, Willem Jan van; Wiebe, Keith ; Witzke, Peter - \ 2020
Nature Climate Change 10 (2020)5. - ISSN 1758-678X - p. 420 - 421.
Agricultural non-CO2 emission reduction potential in the context of the 1.5 °C target
Frank, Stefan ; Havlík, Petr ; Stehfest, Elke ; Meijl, Hans van; Witzke, Peter ; Pérez-Domínguez, Ignacio ; Dijk, Michiel van; Doelman, Jonathan C. ; Fellmann, Thomas ; Koopman, Jason F.L. ; Tabeau, Andrzej ; Valin, Hugo - \ 2019
Nature Climate Change 9 (2019)1. - ISSN 1758-678X - p. 66 - 72.
Agricultural methane and nitrous oxide emissions represent around 10–12% of total anthropogenic GHG emissions and have a key role to play in achieving a 1.5 °C (above pre-industrial) climate stabilization target. Using a multi-model assessment approach, we quantify the potential contribution of agriculture to the 1.5 °C target and decompose the mitigation potential by emission source, region and mitigation mechanism. The results show that the livestock sector will be vital to achieve emission reductions consistent with the 1.5 °C target mainly through emission-reducing technologies or structural changes. Agriculture may contribute emission reductions of 0.8–1.4 Gt of CO2-equivalent (CO2e) yr−1 at just US$20 per tCO2e in 2050. Combined with dietary changes, emission reductions can be increased to 1.7–1.8 GtCO2e yr−1. At carbon prices compatible with the 1.5 °C target, agriculture could even provide average emission savings of 3.9 GtCO2e yr−1 in 2050, which represents around 8% of current GHG emissions.
Risk of increased food insecurity under stringent global climate change mitigation policy
Hasegawa, Tomoko ; Fujimori, Shinichiro ; Havlík, Petr ; Valin, Hugo ; Bodirsky, Benjamin Leon ; Doelman, Jonathan C. ; Fellmann, Thomas ; Kyle, Page ; Koopman, Jason F.L. ; Lotze-Campen, Hermann ; Mason-D’Croz, Daniel ; Ochi, Yuki ; Pérez Domínguez, Ignacio ; Stehfest, Elke ; Sulser, Timothy B. ; Tabeau, Andrzej ; Takahashi, Kiyoshi ; Takakura, J. ; Meijl, Hans van; Zeist, Willem Jan van; Wiebe, Keith ; Witzke, Peter - \ 2018
Nature Climate Change 8 (2018)8. - ISSN 1758-678X - p. 699 - 703.
Food insecurity can be directly exacerbated by climate change due to crop-production-related impacts of warmer and drier conditions that are expected in important agricultural regions1–3. However, efforts to mitigate climate change through comprehensive, economy-wide GHG emissions reductions may also negatively affect food security, due to indirect impacts on prices and supplies of key agricultural commodities4–6. Here we conduct a multiple model assessment on the combined effects of climate change and climate mitigation efforts on agricultural commodity prices, dietary energy availability and the population at risk of hunger. A robust finding is that by 2050, stringent climate mitigation policy, if implemented evenly across all sectors and regions, would have a greater negative impact on global hunger and food consumption than the direct impacts of climate change. The negative impacts would be most prevalent in vulnerable, low-income regions such as sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, where food security problems are already acute.
Comparing impacts of climate change and mitigation on global agriculture by 2050
Meijl, Hans van; Havlik, Petr ; Lotze-Campen, Hermann ; Stehfest, Elke ; Witzke, Peter ; Domínguez, Ignacio P. ; Bodirsky, Benjamin L. ; Dijk, Michiel van; Doelman, Jonathan ; Fellmann, Thomas ; Humpenöder, Florian ; Koopman, Jason F.L. ; Müller, Christoph ; Popp, Alexander ; Tabeau, Andrzej ; Valin, Hugo ; Zeist, Willem J. van - \ 2018
Environmental Research Letters 13 (2018)6. - ISSN 1748-9318
adaptation - agriculture - climate change - economic models - mitigation - shared socioeconomic pathways
Systematic model inter-comparison helps to narrow discrepancies in the analysis of the future impact of climate change on agricultural production. This paper presents a set of alternative scenarios by five global climate and agro-economic models. Covering integrated assessment (IMAGE), partial equilibrium (CAPRI, GLOBIOM, MAgPIE) and computable general equilibrium (MAGNET) models ensures a good coverage of biophysical and economic agricultural features. These models are harmonized with respect to basic model drivers, to assess the range of potential impacts of climate change on the agricultural sector by 2050. Moreover, they quantify the economic consequences of stringent global emission mitigation efforts, such as non-CO2 emission taxes and land-based mitigation options, to stabilize global warming at 2 °C by the end of the century under different Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. A key contribution of the paper is a vis-à-vis comparison of climate change impacts relative to the impact of mitigation measures. In addition, our scenario design allows assessing the impact of the residual climate change on the mitigation challenge. From a global perspective, the impact of climate change on agricultural production by mid-century is negative but small. A larger negative effect on agricultural production, most pronounced for ruminant meat production, is observed when emission mitigation measures compliant with a 2 °C target are put in place. Our results indicate that a mitigation strategy that embeds residual climate change effects (RCP2.6) has a negative impact on global agricultural production relative to a no-mitigation strategy with stronger climate impacts (RCP6.0). However, this is partially due to the limited impact of the climate change scenarios by 2050. The magnitude of price changes is different amongst models due to methodological differences. Further research to achieve a better harmonization is needed, especially regarding endogenous food and feed demand, including substitution across individual commodities, and endogenous technological change.
|Managing LUC‐induced GHG emissions and price impacts from bioenergy under different scenarios
Levin-Koopman, Jason ; Meijl, J.C.M. van; Smeets, E.M.W. ; Tabeau, A.A. ; Faaij, A. ; Stehfest, Elke ; Vuuren, Detlef P. van; Daioglou, Vassilis ; Gerssen-Gondelach, S. ; Wicke, Birka - \ 2017
Challenges of Global Agriculture in a Climate Change Context by 2050 : AgCLIM50
Meijl, J.C.M. van; Havlík, Petr ; Lotze-Campen, H. ; Stehfest, E. ; Witzke, P. ; Pérez Domínguez, I. ; Bodirsky, B. ; Dijk, M. van; Doelman, J.C. ; Fellmann, T. ; Humpenoeder, F. ; Levin-Koopman, Jason ; Mueller, C. ; Popp, A. ; Tabeau, A.A. ; Valin, Hugo - \ 2017
JRC (JRC science for policy report ) - 70 p.