European anthropogenic AFOLU greenhouse gas emissions : A review and benchmark data
Maria Roxana Petrescu, Ana ; Peters, Glen G. ; Janssens-Maenhout, Greet ; Ciais, Philippe ; Tubiello, Francesco F. ; Grassi, Giacomo ; Nabuurs, Gert Jan ; Leip, Adrian ; Carmona-Garcia, Gema ; Winiwarter, Wilfried ; Höglund-Isaksson, Lena ; Günther, Dirk ; Solazzo, Efisio ; Kiesow, Anja ; Bastos, Ana ; Pongratz, Julia ; Nabel, Julia E.M.S. ; Conchedda, Giulia ; Pilli, Roberto ; Andrew, Robbie R. ; Schelhaas, Mart Jan ; Dolman, Albertus A. - \ 2020
Earth System Science Data 12 (2020)2. - ISSN 1866-3508 - p. 961 - 1001.
Emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and removals from land, including both anthropogenic and natural fluxes, require reliable quantification, including estimates of uncertainties, to support credible mitigation action under the Paris Agreement. This study provides a state-of-the-art scientific overview of bottom-up anthropogenic emissions data from agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU) in the European Union (EU281). The data integrate recent AFOLU emission inventories with ecosystem data and land carbon models and summarize GHG emissions and removals over the period 1990-2016. This compilation of bottom-up estimates of the AFOLU GHG emissions of European national greenhouse gas inventories (NGHGIs), with those of land carbon models and observation-based estimates of large-scale GHG fluxes, aims at improving the overall estimates of the GHG balance in Europe with respect to land GHG emissions and removals. Whenever available, we present uncertainties, its propagation and role in the comparison of different estimates. While NGHGI data for the EU28 provide consistent quantification of uncertainty following the established IPCC Guidelines, uncertainty in the estimates produced with other methods needs to account for both within model uncertainty and the spread from different model results. The largest inconsistencies between EU28 estimates are mainly due to different sources of data related to human activity, referred to here as activity data (AD) and methodologies (tiers) used for calculating emissions and removals from AFOLU sectors. The referenced datasets related to figures are visualized at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3662371 (Petrescu et al., 2020).
Environmental footprint family to address local to planetary sustainability and deliver on the SDGs
Vanham, Davy ; Leip, Adrian ; Galli, Alessandro ; Kastner, Thomas ; Bruckner, Martin ; Uwizeye, Aimable ; Dijk, Kimo Van; Ercin, Ertug ; Dalin, Carole ; Brandão, Miguel ; Bastianoni, Simone ; Fang, Kai ; Leach, Allison ; Chapagain, Ashok ; Velde, Marijn Van Der; Sala, Serenella ; Pant, Rana ; Mancini, Lucia ; Monforti-ferrario, Fabio ; Carmona-garcia, Gema ; Marques, Alexandra ; Weiss, Franz ; Hoekstra, Arjen Y. - \ 2019
Science of the Total Environment 693 (2019). - ISSN 0048-9697
The number of publications on environmental footprint indicators has been growing rapidly, but with limited efforts to integrate different footprints into a coherent framework. Such integration is important for comprehensive understanding of environmental issues, policy formulation and assessment of trade-offs between different environmental concerns. Here, we systematize published footprint studies and define a family of footprints that can be used for the assessment of environmental sustainability. We identify overlaps between different footprints and analyse how they relate to the nine planetary boundaries and visualize the crucial information they provide for local and planetary sustainability. In addition, we assess how the footprint family delivers on measuring progress towards Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), considering its ability to quantify environmental pressures along the supply chain and relating them to the water-energy-food-ecosystem (WEFE) nexus and ecosystem services. We argue that the footprint family is a flexible framework where particular members can be included or excluded according to the context or area of concern. Our paper is based upon a recent workshop bringing together global leading experts on existing environmental footprint indicators.
Marginal abatement cost curves for agricultural climate policy : State-of-the art, lessons learnt and future potential
Eory, Vera ; Pellerin, Sylvain ; Carmona Garcia, Gema ; Lehtonen, Heikki ; Licite, Ieva ; Mattila, Hanna ; Lund-Sørensen, Thøger ; Muldowney, John ; Popluga, Dina ; Strandmark, Lisbeth ; Schulte, Rogier - \ 2018
Journal of Cleaner Production 182 (2018). - ISSN 0959-6526 - p. 705 - 716.
Agriculture - Greenhouse gas emissions - Marginal abatement cost curves - Methodology
Combatting climate change has risen to the top of the international policy discourse. Effective governance necessitates the generation of concise information on the costs-effectiveness of policy instruments aimed at reducing atmospheric greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The marginal abatement cost curve (MACC) approach is a framework commonly used to summarise information of potential mitigation effort, and can help in identifying the most cost-effective managerial and technological GHG mitigation options. Agriculture offers key opportunities to mitigate GHG emissions and utilise carbon (C) sink potentials. Therefore, a number of countries have developed national agricultural MACCs in the last decade. Whilst these MACCs have undoubtedly been catalysers for the information exchange between science and policy, they have also accentuated a range of constraints and limitations. In response, each of the scientific teams developed solutions in an attempt to address one or more of these limitations. These solutions represent ‘lessons learned’ which are invaluable for the development of future MACCs. To consolidate and harness this knowledge that has heretofore been dispersed across countries, this paper reviews the engineering agricultural MACCs developed in European countries. We collate the state-of-the-art, review the lessons learnt, and provide a more coherent framework for countries or research groups embarking on a trajectory to develop an agricultural MACC that assesses mitigations both within the farm gate and to the wider bioeconomy. We highlight the contemporary methodological developments, specifically on 1) the emergence of stratified MACCs; 2) accounting for soil carbon sequestration 3) accounting for upstream and downstream emissions; 4) the development of comprehensive cost-calculations; 5) accounting for environmental co-effects and 6) uncertainty analyses. We subsequently discuss how the mitigation potential summarised by MACCs can be incentivised in practice and how this mitigation can be captured in national inventories. We conclude that the main purpose of engineering MACCs is not necessarily the accurate prediction of the total abatement potential and associated costs, but rather the provision of a coherent forum for the complex discussions surrounding agricultural GHG mitigation, and to visualise opportunities and low-hanging fruit in a single graphic and manuscript.
Deliverable No. D9.4: Enhanced modelling of sustainable food and nutrition security: the agri-food commodity and nutrient flows and the food supply chains
Carmona-Garcia, G. ; Leip, A. ; Weiss, F. ; Witzke, P. ; Verma, M. ; Philippidis, George ; Kuiper, M.H. - \ 2017
SUSFANS - 86 p.