• Climate mitigation measures could impact

    From ScienceDaily@1:317/3 to All on Mon Mar 7 21:30:46 2022
    Climate mitigation measures could impact food security, study finds


    Date:
    March 7, 2022
    Source:
    International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
    Summary:
    Many countries have set carbon neutrality as a policy goal, but
    according to a new study, there are various risks associated with
    the reduction of greenhouse gases, especially in the agriculture,
    forestry, and land use sectors, that need to be considered when
    formulating mitigation strategies.



    FULL STORY ==========================================================================
    Many countries have set carbon neutrality as a policy goal, but according
    to a new study by an international team of researchers from IIASA, Japan,
    and the US, there are various risks associated with the reduction of
    greenhouse gases, especially in the agriculture, forestry, and land
    use sectors, that need to be considered when formulating mitigation
    strategies.


    ========================================================================== While eliminating emissions from the energy sector is undoubtedly a
    step in the right direction to reach the goals of the Paris Agreement, agriculture, forestry, and other land use accounted for 20-25% of global greenhouse gas emissions in 2010. According to the authors of the study
    just published in Nature Food, both the magnitude of baseline emissions
    and the impact on other Sustainable Development Goals when trying to
    mitigate these emissions, means that this sector cannot be ignored in the context of meeting ambitious long- term climate change mitigation targets.

    The strategies needed to decarbonize the agriculture, forestry, and other
    land use sectors, however, may cause food prices to soar, which may have a potential negative impact on food security. The authors suggest three main reasons for this. The first of these is increased costs associated with
    methane and nitrous oxide abatement. Secondly, current decarbonization strategies could cause intensified competition for land due to the
    expansion of bioenergy crops; and lastly, they could lead to a higher
    value being placed on forest carbon to sequester additional carbon and
    prevent large-scale plantations and bioenergy crops from encroaching on forestland. Although these factors are thought to affect agricultural
    markets through different mechanisms, it is still uncertain to what
    extent they could affect future agricultural prices and food security.

    "Previous studies have pointed out that decarbonization strategies in
    the agriculture and land use sectors could lead to higher food prices
    and potential negative impacts on food security, but it has not been
    clear which of the three main factors would have the greatest impact. In
    this study, we used six global agricultural economic models to show
    the extent to which these three factors would change the agricultural
    market and food security situation under a decarbonization scenario,"
    explains Shinichiro Fujimori, a guest researcher in the IIASA Energy,
    Climate, and Environment Program and lead author of the study.

    Considering only socioeconomic conditions such as future population growth
    and economic level improvement, the findings indicate a population at
    risk of hunger in 2050 of around 420 million people.

    If all three of the above greenhouse gas reduction measures for
    agriculture and land use are implemented, the international food price
    will increase by about 27%. This would lead to a decrease in food
    consumption among the poor in developing countries, which would in turn
    lead to an estimated additional 120 million people at risk of hunger.

    Of the above additional hunger risk, it was estimated that about 50%
    would likely be due to large-scale afforestation, and 33% to increased
    costs of methane and nitrous oxide abatement, while 14% could be ascribed
    to the expansion of bioenergy crops. The study also estimates that
    large-scale afforestation could account for nearly 60% of the increase
    in international food prices, followed by the increase in the cost of
    methane and nitrous oxide reduction, which accounts for about another 33%.

    From a regional perspective, the impact is not uniform, with methane
    and nitrous oxide reduction costs having a greater impact in Asia, and large-scale afforestation having a greater impact in Africa. According
    to the authors, this can be attributed to the fact that methane emissions
    from rice cultivation account for a large proportion of the breakdown of greenhouse gas emissions attributable to the agricultural sector in Asia.

    "Traditionally, the expansion of bioenergy to achieve negative emissions
    has been discussed as a food security concern. However, it turns out
    that other factors are rather more significant, particularly in general equilibrium models," notes Stefan Frank, a researcher in the IIASA
    Integrated Biosphere Futures Research Group and one of the study authors.

    The researchers caution that, since all emission reduction measures
    in their study are expressed by assuming a uniform global carbon tax,
    the results should be used with caution. For example, afforestation and
    forest protection are represented by assuming that carbon stocks in
    forests will be taxed by carbon taxes. The model estimates that this
    would greatly increase the potential value of land, raise the cost of agricultural production, and increase food prices.

    Whether such a measure will really be taken needs to be scrutinized. On
    the other hand, previous studies have highlighted that bioenergy crops
    can erode forests on a large scale if the carbon stored in forests is
    not properly valued. It is also assumed that methane and nitrous oxide
    will be subject to the same carbon taxes as carbon dioxide.

    "Unlike carbon dioxide from fossil fuels, it is not so easy to measure
    these emissions, so we need to be careful about generalizing our model assumptions.

    Similarly, the actual risk of hunger in response to agricultural price increases or mean food consumption decreases is difficult to elucidate
    due to the complex nature of hunger and poverty," says study coauthor
    Petr Havlik, IIASA Integrated Biosphere Futures Research Group leader.

    With that said, the study's results are important in that they highlight
    the complexity and challenges in the implementation of decarbonization
    measures in agriculture, forestry management, and other land use from
    multiple angles. This could be helpful to ensure better coordination
    in emissions reduction and agricultural market management policies,
    as well as better representation of land use and associated greenhouse
    gas emissions in modeling.


    ========================================================================== Story Source: Materials provided by International_Institute_for_Applied_Systems_Analysis.

    Note: Content may be edited for style and length.


    ========================================================================== Journal Reference:
    1. Shinichiro Fujimori, Wenchao Wu, Jonathan Doelman, Stefan Frank,
    Jordan
    Hristov, Page Kyle, Ronald Sands, Willem-Jan van Zeist, Petr
    Havlik, Ignacio Pe'rez Domi'nguez, Amarendra Sahoo, Elke Stehfest,
    Andrzej Tabeau, Hugo Valin, Hans van Meijl, Tomoko Hasegawa,
    Kiyoshi Takahashi.

    Land-based climate change mitigation measures can affect
    agricultural markets and food security. Nature Food, 2022; 3 (2):
    110 DOI: 10.1038/ s43016-022-00464-4 ==========================================================================

    Link to news story: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/03/220307113123.htm

    --- up 1 week, 10 hours, 51 minutes
    * Origin: -=> Castle Rock BBS <=- Now Husky HPT Powered! (1:317/3)