Policy Briefs/ Options Feature Articles

Food is a universal human right. Food security means ensuring that all people at all times have physical, social, and economic access to sufficient, safe, palatable, and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs for an active and healthy life.

IIASA has developed an integrated ecological, economic, and socio-demographical policy model comprised of a detailed spatial agro-ecological zone (AEZ) model that covers all countries and a regionalized (18 national models and 33 aggregated regional models) general equilibrium model (base-linked-system known as BLS) of world food economy. The IIASA AEZ–BLS enables an analysis of

  • policy related to future demographic and economic development pathways
  • potential impacts of climate change on food production, prices, trade, and consumption
  • and an assessment of the scale and location of risks of hunger and malnutrition.

Recent Options Feature Articles:

The highlights of some policy briefs are summarized below.

Global and Regional Effects of Mitigation on Agriculture

Within the global project “Food and Agriculture to 2100” two studies were completed and recently published. First, the study on “Reducing Climate Change Impacts on Agriculture: Global and Regional Effects of Mitigation, 2000-2080” quantified agricultural and food system impacts of climate mitigation. In a second study on “Climate Change Impacts on Irrigation Water Requirements: Effects of Mitigation, 1990-2080” potential changes in global and regional agricultural water demand for irrigation were investigated. Key trends expected over this century for food demand, production and trade were computed, with specific attention given to potential monetary (aggregate value added) and human (risk of hunger and malnutrition) implications of mitigation. Robust findings from these studies include:

  • Mitigation of GHG emissions, leading to stabilization of CO2 at 550 ppm, would significantly reduce the negative impacts of climate change on agriculture, both in terms of production, water requirements and hunger.
  • Complex interactions of elevated CO2 effects and climate change are key to determine the magnitude and in some cases even the direction of mitigation benefits in the first part of the 21st century.
  • Even in the presence of well-defined long-term global mitigation goals, current simulations demonstrate that corresponding changes in the regional and temporal distribution of winners and losers are very uncertain, requiring planning for adaptation at the same time as mitigation targets are set.

Agricultural Resources
According to the LUC analysis (pdf) of the unused cultivable land available in the world today, 70 percent is found in just seven countries in South America and Africa. There is little prospect of expanding arable land in Asia, making research essential to enhancing agricultural productivity on that continent. Currently more than 30 countries with a total population of over 500 million are regarded as water scarce. By 2025 some 50 countries with a total population of about 3 billion may be fall into that category. See Climate Change and Agricultural Vulnerability (pdf)

The IIASA analysis provides levels of potential food production according to agricultural natural resources and technology, which is important information for national policy makers concerned with agricultural resource planning and investments. Moreover, climatic changes will further undermine agricultural resource security in many poor and least-developed countries in Africa – a possible 60 percent reduction in boreal and arctic ecosystems is forecast, together with an expansion of tropical zones to cover most of Africa.

Globalization and International Food Trade
LUC results show that agricultural GDP in parts of the developed world will benefit from climate change, whereas in many developing regions it will decrease. The net cereal imports of developing countries will increase within the 170 – 430 million ton range, depending on the future demographic and economic development pathway and climate change. Such a substantial increase in world cereal trade also needs to be considered in the context of the economic and environmental cost of food transport over long distances as well as the inability of many food-insecure countries to finance long-term essential food imports. IIASA is currently formulating scenario analysis to assess the worldwide food security implications of agricultural subsidy reforms, international food prices, globalization of diets, and the impact on international food supplies and prices of, for example, droughts and crop failures in major production and food deficit regions. (See Globalization and Food Systems — A Holistic Perspective (pdf))

Global Environmental Change and Hunger
 For 2080 IIASA results show little progress toward reducing hunger in the period to 2020, even in a situation of high economic growth. The IIASA results highlight that some some 175 million will be at risk of hunger as a result of future climate change. Climate change and variability will result in irreparable damage to arable land, water, and biodiversity resources, with serious consequences for food production and food security. And most of these losses will occur in developing countries with low capacity to cope and adapt. While the international community has focused on climate change mitigation, the issue of adaptation to climate change is equally pressing. This is of critical importance to many developing countries that, to date, have contributed little to greenhouse gas emissions but whose food systems will bear the brunt of the negative impacts of climate change and variability.  The IIASA analysis has relevance for assessing crop–land–water adaptation options as well as evaluating levels of agricultural greenhouse gas emissions and the prospects for mitigation. (See: Socio-economic and climate change impacts on agriculture:an integrated assessment, 1990-2080. (pdf))

Restructuring Europe towards Sustainability

In the EU-funded project “Modeling Opportunities and Limits for Restructuring Europe towards Sustainability (MOSUS)”, LUC scientists participated in the development and application of an integrated ecological-economic simulation model to quantify the interrelations between socio-economic driving forces and the state of the environment in Europe.

The most important conclusion from the scenario simulations performed in this project is that the implementation of a well-designed mix of (mostly) environmental policies can result in a win-win situation for the economy and the environment. Environmental policy measures primarily geared towards decoupling economic activity from material and energy throughput can be conducive to economic growth, contrary to the popular assumption that such policies will mainly raise costs for enterprises, decrease competitiveness and thus have an opportunity cost in terms of reduced economic performance.

Policy measures were identified, which could significantly contribute to a transformation towards more sustainable production and consumption patterns, including: Shift of tax burden from labor to the use of natural resources; removal of environmentally (and socially) harmful subsidies that encourage overuse of resources; stimulating research and technology development for resource efficiency in products and processes; implementation of best practice programs; stimulation of transfer of knowledge and information instead of material goods; fostering of voluntary environmental agreements between industries; and promoting green consumerism and non-material and public consumption vs. material and individual consumption.

Sustainability of China’s Agriculture and Food Security

The LUC-led study on “Policy Decision Support for Sustainable Adaptation of China’s Agriculture to Globalization (CHINAGRO)” engaged in an informed policy dialogue between institutions in China and the EU on the realization of improving China’s food security, increasing farmer’s income and achieving sustainable agricultural development, based on a joint specification and analysis of a range of development and policy scenarios over a 30-year time horizon, from 2001 to 2030.

To ensure the nation’s food security in the future, to cater to the food preferences of richer and more urbanized consumers, to mitigate widening rural-urban as well as regional income disparities, and to prevent massive environmental pollution, China needs to make fundamental changes in the national food policies and in refocusing the priorities of grain security. Some major policy implications are summarized below:

  • A shift in the emphasis of grain security is recommended from all grain to food grain. In order to maintain the spirit of China’s food and grain security policies without imposing excessively costly and ineffective restrictions, the national government should redefine its grain security goals in terms of rice and wheat, the two major food grains. This would provide considerable protection against any external economic threat while being attainable without causing major distortions.
  • A shift in the emphasis from aggregate national food supply to household food accessibility is indicated. While China’s aggregate supply of food grains is not expected to encounter serious problems, there will nevertheless be millions of households in disadvantaged rural areas with an income level at or below the relative poverty line. The main focus of national food security policy should therefore be placed on these households and measures should be implemented that raise average incomes in these areas and buffer these households against income shocks.
  • Investment policies should be geared towards enhancing long-run productivity and improving efficiency of land and water resources use in major grain producing regions. This is particularly important in North, Northeast and Central China. Investment in agricultural R&D, farmer education, water-saving irrigation technology, and in other rural infrastructure will provide a long-run safeguard for food grain security.
  • Geography plays a major role not only in environmental differences but also in economic matters. This needs to be reflected in policy analysis and formulation, which must be geographically differentiated. This effect is critical for the income position of farmers in regions with limited scope for improved agricultural productivity and lack of off-farm opportunities.
  • Without adequate measures – technological, financial, and legislative – to cope and prevent existing and looming environmental problems, various hot-spots of agro-environmental pressures may suffer irreversible environmental impacts. This especially concerns the densely populated areas where intensive livestock and crop production may also increase human health risks.

Responsible for this page: Elisabeth Kawczynski
Last updated: 24 Feb 2011
^