Search

Recent research shows that the combined contributions of deforestation, forest degradation and peat land emissions account for about 15% of greenhouse gas emissions. The REDD policy which preserves forests and values standing forests, enables substantial emission reductions. Since agricultural production and area expansion is a primary driver of tropical deforestation, REDD policies might limit the expansion possibilities of agricultural land use and therefore influence competitiveness of the agricultural sector, agricultural prices, trade patterns, agricultural production and therefore food security in the world. This paper studies the impact of REDD policies on the agri-food sector and food security with a global CGE model called MAGNET using a scenario approach. It focuses on the restrictions on agricultural land expansion within the REDD policy package. Simulation results show that REDD policies start to affect the agri-food sector in some lower developed countries if more than 15% of potentially available agricultural areas are protected from deforestation. A stringent REDD policy that protects 90% of land reserves that could potentially be used for agriculture production results in a global real agricultural price increase of almost 7.6%, and a worldwide agricultural production decrease of 1.7%. Regional differences are large, with real agricultural price changes ranging from 4% in North America to about 24% in Sub-Saharan Africa and South-East Asia. Food access rapidly deteriorates for low-income population in these regions in the case of high forest protection levels. Compensatory payments are necessary from a food security point of view if the level of forest protection increases. Our results indicate that from a food security perspective REDD policy should stop short of trying to protect more than 40% of global carbon if the compensation mechanism is not effectively implemented within REDD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An important objective of the mandated blending of biofuel in conventional gasoline and diesel in the EU is reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. An important assumption thereby is that biofuels replace the production and consumption of oil. However, recent literature challenges this assumption, because an increased use of biofuels will lower oil prices and therefore result in increase crude oil consumption. This so-called rebound effect offsets the expected GHG emission saving effects of using biofuels. A review of eight studies, mainly on current and future US biofuel policies, provides insights in the current state of research into this topic, showing a wide range of values of the rebound effect of biofuel use, depending among others on the biofuel policy, the applied method and the model parameter assumptions. Generally, estimated rebound effects are negative in the country where biofuel use is being promoted (i.e. the use of 1 unit of biofuel reduces oil consumption by less than 1 unit; units on energy basis). The rebound effects in other countries are always positive (biofuel use reduces oil consumption by less than 1 unit so the total fuel consumption is increasing). The net global rebound effect is usually positive, which means that GHG emissions savings are not achieved as much as usually is assumed, or emissions may even increase. Own estimations with the global MAGNET computable general equilibrium model indicate a global rebound effect of the 10% biofuel blend mandate in the EU in the year 2020 of 22-30% (i.e. the use of 1 unit of biofuel reduces global oil consumption by 0.78-0.70 units). This means that GHG emissions will not be reduced as much as usually is assumed, or may even increase. These results show that rebound effects can significantly lower the effectiveness of biofuel policies in reducing GHG emissions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article analyses the impact of the EU Biofuels Directive (BFD) on the EU agri-food supply chain using a computable general equilibrium model of the world economy, LEITAP. LEITAP is an extended version of the Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) model including improved land market modeling, substitution possibilities between capital and energy, different energy sources including biofuels, feed byproducts of biofuel production and the substitution between different feed components and feed byproducts. The simulation results show that the implementation of the EU BFD has a pronounced impact on the markets of cereals, oilseeds and sugar and shows only with a limited impact on production and consumption of other agri-food commodities not directly affected by biofuel production. As a direct effect of the BFD the harvested area and production of biofuel crops (grains, oilseeds) is expected to increase by 17% and 25%, respectively, and sugar production by 12%. EU imports of these commodities are expected to more than double. The increasing demand for biofuel crops and sugar will raise domestic prices of these commodities by 25% and 19%, respectively, but overall agri-food price inflation will be limited to 3% in the EU and to less than 1% at world market level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The European Union aims to increase the share of renewable energy in its total energy consumption to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and make the economy more CO2 neutral. This policy is further motivated by a desire to reduce dependency on fossil fuel imports and to stimulate rural development and the agricultural sector. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This paper assesses the macroeconomic impacts in terms of GDP, trade balance and employment of large-scale bioenergy production on surplus agricultural land. An input–output model is developed with which the direct, indirect and induced macroeconomic impacts of bioenergy production and agricultural intensification, which is needed to make agricultural land become available for bioenergy production, are assessed following a scenario approach. The methodology is applied to a case study of Argentina. The results of this study reveal that large-scale pellet production in 2015 would directly increase GDP by 4%, imports by 10% and employment by 6% over the reference situation in 2001. When accounting for indirect and induced impacts, GDP increases by 18%, imports by 20% and employment by 26% compared to 2001. Agricultural intensification reduces but does not negate these positive impacts of bioenergy production. Accounting for agricultural intensification, the increase in GDP as a result of bioenergy production on surplus agricultural land would amount to 16%, 20% in imports and 16% in employment compared to 2001. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Afforestation is considered a cost‐effective and readily available climate change mitigation option. In recent studies afforestation is presented as a major solution to limit climate change. However, estimates of afforestation potential vary widely. Moreover, the risks in global mitigation policy and the negative trade‐offs with food security are often not considered. Here we present a new approach to assess the economic potential of afforestation with the IMAGE 3.0 integrated assessment model framework. In addition, we discuss the role of afforestation in mitigation pathways and the effects of afforestation on the food system under increasingly ambitious climate targets. We show that afforestation has a mitigation potential of 4.9 GtCO2/year at 200 US$/tCO2 in 2050 leading to large‐scale application in an SSP2 scenario aiming for 2°C (410 GtCO2 cumulative up to 2100). Afforestation reduces the overall costs of mitigation policy. However, it may lead to lower mitigation ambition and lock‐in situations in other sectors. Moreover, it bears risks to implementation and permanence as the negative emissions are increasingly located in regions with high investment risks and weak governance, for example in Sub‐Saharan Africa. Afforestation also requires large amounts of land (up to 1,100 Mha) leading to large reductions in agricultural land. The increased competition for land could lead to higher food prices and an increased population at risk of hunger. Our results confirm that afforestation has substantial potential for mitigation. At the same time, we highlight that major risks and trade‐offs are involved. Pathways aiming to limit climate change to 2°C or even 1.5°C need to minimize these risks and trade‐offs in order to achieve mitigation sustainably. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Global biodiversity is projected to further decline under a wide range of future socio-economic development pathways, even in sustainability-oriented scenarios. This raises the question how biodiversity can be put on a path to recovery, the core challenge for the implementation of the CBD Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. We designed two ambitious global conservation strategies, 'Half Earth' (HE) and 'Sharing the Planet' (SP), and evaluated their ability to restore terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity and to provide nature's contributions to people (NCP), while also limiting global warming below 2 degrees and ensuring food security. We applied the integrated assessment framework IMAGE with the GLOBIO biodiversity model, using the 'Middle of the Road' Shared Socio-economic Pathway (SSP2) with its projected human population growth as baseline. We found that the HE strategy performs generally better for terrestrial biodiversity (biodiversity intactness (MSA), Area of Habitat, Living Planet Index, Red List Index) in currently still natural regions. The SP strategy yields more improvements for biodiversity in human-used areas, for freshwater biodiversity and for regulating NCP (pest control, pollination, erosion control, water quality). However, both strategies were insufficient to restore biodiversity and corresponded with considerable increases in food security risks and global temperature. Only when we combined the conservation strategies with a portfolio of 'integrated sustainability measures', including climate change mitigation and reductions of food waste and animal product consumption, our scenarios resulted in a restoration of biodiversity and NCP while keeping global warming below two degrees and food security risks below the baseline projection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper takes three global visions of world development to 2050 and quantifies their implications for sustainable progress employing the metrics of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The SDG outcomes are structured through the interconnectivities of the three 'wedding cake' layers of 'economy', 'society' and 'biosphere', as posited by the Stockholm Resilience Centre. The key policy contribution is to quantify the resulting SDG synergies and trade-offs, whilst also decomposing and calculating the part-worth of the market drivers which contribute to these outcomes. The paper employs a global economic simulation model that combines rational market behaviour with environmental constraints (MAGNET) and is further extended with an SDG metrics module. A 'non-sustainable' world reveals trade-offs between economy and biosphere SDGs, with population growth of particular concern to a safe planetary operating space in the world's poorest regions. Sustainable visions could reduce natural resource pressures and emissions and meet energy requirements at potentially limited economic cost. Notwithstanding, these futures do not address income inequalities and potentially increase food security concerns for the most vulnerable members of society. Consequently, developed region led international cooperation and in-kind income transfers to developing countries, constitutes a necessary prerequisite to help remedy the SDG trade-offs exhibited within the more sustainable global pathways. • Three world visions to 2050 are simulated with a computable general equilibrium model. • Sustainable development goal trade-offs and synergies are measured and their drivers. • Global economic prosperity can be achieved within a safe planetary operating space. • Sustainable pathways do not address global inequalities or food security concerns. • Developed country burden sharing is necessary to ensure fairer sustainable futures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]