Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Item

Key determinants of global land-use projections

2019, Stehfest, Elke, van Zeist, Willem-Jan, Valin, Hugo, Havlik, Petr, Popp, Alexander, Kyle, Page, Tabeau, Andrzej, Mason-D’Croz, Daniel, Hasegawa, Tomoko, Bodirsky, Benjamin L., Calvin, Katherine, Doelman, Jonathan C., Fujimori, Shinichiro, Humpenöder, Florian, Lotze-Campen, Hermann, van Meijl, Hans, Wiebe, Keith

Land use is at the core of various sustainable development goals. Long-term climate foresight studies have structured their recent analyses around five socio-economic pathways (SSPs), with consistent storylines of future macroeconomic and societal developments; however, model quantification of these scenarios shows substantial heterogeneity in land-use projections. Here we build on a recently developed sensitivity approach to identify how future land use depends on six distinct socio-economic drivers (population, wealth, consumption preferences, agricultural productivity, land-use regulation, and trade) and their interactions. Spread across models arises mostly from diverging sensitivities to long-term drivers and from various representations of land-use regulation and trade, calling for reconciliation efforts and more empirical research. Most influential determinants for future cropland and pasture extent are population and agricultural efficiency. Furthermore, land-use regulation and consumption changes can play a key role in reducing both land use and food-security risks, and need to be central elements in sustainable development strategies.

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Item

The role of storage dynamics in annual wheat prices

2017, Schewe, Jacob, Otto, Christian, Frieler, Katja, Bodirsky, Benjamin Leo, Kriegler, Elmar, Lotze-Campen, Hermann, Popp, Alexander

Identifying the drivers of global crop price fluctuations is essential for estimating the risks of unexpected weather-induced production shortfalls and for designing optimal response measures. Here we show that with a consistent representation of storage dynamics, a simple supply–demand model can explain most of the observed variations in wheat prices over the last 40 yr solely based on time series of annual production and long term demand trends. Even the most recent price peaks in 2007/08 and 2010/11 can be explained by additionally accounting for documented changes in countries' trade policies and storage strategies, without the need for external drivers such as oil prices or speculation across different commodity or stock markets. This underlines the critical sensitivity of global prices to fluctuations in production. The consistent inclusion of storage into a dynamic supply-demand model closes an important gap when it comes to exploring potential responses to future crop yield variability under climate and land-use change.

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Item

Bioenergy production and sustainable development: Science base for policymaking remains limited

2016, Robledo‐Abad, Carmenza, Althaus, Hans‐Jörg, Berndes, Göran, Bolwig, Simon, Corbera, Esteve, Creutzig, Felix, Garcia‐Ulloa, John, Geddes, Anna, Gregg, Jay S., Haberl, Helmut, Hanger, Susanne, Harper, Richard J., Hunsberger, Carol, Larsen, Rasmus K., Lauk, Christian, Leitner, Stefan, Lilliestam, Johan, Lotze‐Campen, Hermann, Muys, Bart, Nordborg, Maria, Ölund, Maria, Orlowsky, Boris, Popp, Alexander, Portugal‐Pereira, Joana, Reinhard, Jürgen, Scheiffle, Lena, Smith, Pete

The possibility of using bioenergy as a climate change mitigation measure has sparked a discussion of whether and how bioenergy production contributes to sustainable development. We undertook a systematic review of the scientific literature to illuminate this relationship and found a limited scientific basis for policymaking. Our results indicate that knowledge on the sustainable development impacts of bioenergy production is concentrated in a few well‐studied countries, focuses on environmental and economic impacts, and mostly relates to dedicated agricultural biomass plantations. The scope and methodological approaches in studies differ widely and only a small share of the studies sufficiently reports on context and/or baseline conditions, which makes it difficult to get a general understanding of the attribution of impacts. Nevertheless, we identified regional patterns of positive or negative impacts for all categories – environmental, economic, institutional, social and technological. In general, economic and technological impacts were more frequently reported as positive, while social and environmental impacts were more frequently reported as negative (with the exception of impacts on direct substitution of GHG emission from fossil fuel). More focused and transparent research is needed to validate these patterns and develop a strong science underpinning for establishing policies and governance agreements that prevent/mitigate negative and promote positive impacts from bioenergy production.