Common assumptions about future agricultural trends across MACSUR integrated case studies

Martin Köchy Thünen Institute

Braunschweig Global Food Security Challenges – European Research approaches:

Case studies in MACSUR TradeM, 18–20 November 2013, Müncheberg, Germany

Integrated case studies

•  explore the effects of climate change adaptation strategies on food security

•  through the use and development of modelling techniques at different scales

•  across Themes

CropM

TradeM

LiveM

I

Integrated case studies •  Farms are the focus of policy

impact and their reactions are important for planning.

•  Regions with visible CC impact and promising strategies for adaptation and mitigation

•  North: 2 FI, 6 NO, UK •  Central: AT, 4 DE •  Medit.: 2 IT, IL •  Subsaharan-Africa:

Tanzania (2 regions), Nile basin Dono et al. (2013) Most relevant aspects of climate change in hot-spot analysis. FACCE MACSUR Reports 1: D-T3.1

Assessments in case studies

•  great diversity in farming systems and climatic challenges —  Dono et al. (2013) Most relevant aspects of climate change in

hot-spot analysis. FACCE MACSUR Reports 1: D-T3.1

•  similar diversity in consequences and potential adaptation approaches that will be assessed —  Dono et al. (2013) Storylines regarding climate change and

scenarios. FACCE MACSUR Reports 1:D-T3.2

•  used a variety of scenarios, most used SRES, up to 2020, OECD prices, CC mitig. & adapt. —  Barnes & Moran (2013) Modelling Food Security and Climate

Change: Scenario Analysis. FACCE MACSUR Reports 1:D-T1.2 è local conditions can be fully explored

Regional Pilot Studies

greater scope, more stringent requirements •  assist policy makers and actors in the agri-food chain

in identifying effective adapatation and mitigation measures

•  use common assumptions for pan-European comparisons

•  in line with AgMIP and global scenarios

•  stakeholder involvement •  representative of a NUTS2

region

CropM

TradeM

LiveM

Status of Regional Pilot Studies •  Locations, time slices,

scenarios (June) •  Regional Guide (since July) •  Development of scenarios

—  key drivers, spatial variability, importance (August, September))

—  review of existing scenarios, long-term EU policies (October)

—  narratives (here, tomorrow) •  CAPRI socio-economic baseline

available since September •  Results for baseline at Mid-

Term meeting, 1 April 2014

Regional Pilot Studies

Workshop participants •  suggested locations of

pilot studies •  agreed on

time slices, global climate scenarios, global socio-economic scenarios, assessment time line (results for BAU at mid-term meeting)

Time slices

central year climate econ. •  current 2010 ±15 ±3 •  near future 2020 ±15 ±3 •  mid-term 2030 ±15 ±3 •  mid-century 2050 ±15 ±3

AgMIP uses 2025 (2010-2039) and 2055 (2040-2069) ISI-MIP uses 2020 (2005-2035) and 2050 (2035-2065)

Global scenarios

up to IPCC Assessment Report 4 •  SRES Scenarios,

e.g. A2, A1B, B2, … •  greenhouse gas emission and

socioeconomic changes were strongly linked

èimpacts were difficult to attribute to either GHG or socioeconomy

Global scenarios

for IPCC Assessment Report 5ff •  climate separated from socioeconomy •  clearer attribution of impacts J •  more complex, new acronyms L

—  climate: representative concentration pathways “RCP” —  society: shared socio-economic pathways “SSP”

Representative Concentration Pathways

Knutti & Sedláček 2013

Global scenarios for climate in Regional Pilot Studies

•  present climate (1980–2010) extended —  basis for comparisons

•  climate warms drastically till 2100 (+4 K), “RCP8.5”

Knutti & Sedláček 2013

Shared Socioeconomic Pathways

•  Global societal capabilities, structures, independent of climate change

•  5 major pathways

SSP1 SSP4

SSP3 regionalized world

SSP5

SSP2 business as usual

cond

uciv

e fo

r GH

G e

mis

sion

s

societal obstacles to deal with climate change

Global scenarios for socioeconomy in Regional Pilot Studies

•  reference, baseline, business as usual, SSP2 —  extension into the future of current trends, i.e. dx/dt≈const.

•  global change to “fragmented world”, SSP3 —  Slowly decreasing fossil fuel dependency —  Reductions of resource and energy intensity —  Uneven development of low-income countries —  Slow continuation of globalization with some barriers remaining —  Medium economic growth, slow convergence —  High intra-regional disparities —  Delay of achievement of Millenium Development Goals • used in global assessments by ICCP, AgMIP, ISI-MIP

What’s in a SSP? •  mostly qualitative (phrase, key points, storylines),

regional differentiation by poverty, quantitative interpretations may differ among models —  population growth, urbanization, education —  economic growth, structure, inequality across world regions,

intern’l trade, consumption, diet —  intern’l cooperation, environm’l policy, effectiveness of

institutions —  technological development, energy intensity, carbon

intensity —  share of arable land, degradation of environment, agric.

productivity, management è little detail for agricultural models è Representative Agricultural Pathways, RAPs

still evolving!

summer 2014

Using the global scenarios

Representative Agricultural Pathways

•  global SSPs provide little guidance on agriculture

•  farms, animals, crops, methods are regionally very diverse

•  EU policies have a strong influence on agriculture in Europe

è global SSPs should be complemented by regional Representative Agricultural Pathways

Representative Agricultural Pathways

SSPs

global RAPs

other pathways and scenarios

regional RAPs

crop, livestock, economic, and other model inputs and parameters

dri

vers

con

sistency

•  global economy, trade, society, technology

•  productivity, sustainability •  EU GHG targets, CAP

•  input costs, reg. N input, farm-technol. progress

•  irrigation, crop varieties, fertilizer, tillage, pests, diseases, greening

SSPs and RAPs are evolving

global SSPs will change till summer 2014 global RAPs: an AgMIP group has started work regional RAPs: AgMIP (4 S-As, 4 Ss-Afr)

work on NAm RAP about to start

Elements of Eu-rRAPs

local, country Europe world

impo

rtanc

e input costs price fluctuations

farm-technol. progress diseases, pests

crop species used

regulation of N-input

tariffs irrigation

requirements regulation of

GHG emissions fertilizer input

…

Review of agricultural scenarios with focus on Europe

and involvement of stakeholders •  ENTRACTE (FP7, 2012–2015) è 2020–2050

—  review of EU roadmaps for energy and GHG emissions

•  VOLANTE (FP7, 2010–2015) è 2040 —  land use transitions, based on SRES

•  PRELUDE (EEA, 2006) è 2035 —  land use development, based loosely on SRES and ATEAM

•  ATEAM (FP6, 2001–2004) è2020, 2050, 2080 —  vulnerability of ecosystem services, based on SRES

•  CLIMSAVE (FP7, 2010–2013) è 2020, 2050 —  cross-sectoral adaptation &vulnerability, SRES for climate

•  European Food Systems (ESF, 2009) è 2040

Representative Agricultural Pathways in MACSUR

SSPs

global RAPs

other pathways and scenarios

regional RAPs

crop, livestock, economic, and other model inputs and parameters

dri

vers

con

sistency

•  SSP3 — fragmented world

—

•  EU GHG targets from ENTRACTE

•  use VOLANTE V-A2α +? input costs, reg. N input, price fluct., farm-technol. progress

•  irrigation, crop varieties, fertilizer, tillage, pests, diseases, greening

Eu-RAP will feed into global RAP

Thank you

Available information

•  Workshop on Regional Pilot Studies —  FACCE MACSUR Reports 2: R-H1.2.1

•  Background information on SSPs —  FACCE MACSUR Reports 2:R-H2.1-1

•  Overview of European Agricultural Scenarios … —  in progress, via MACSUR’s Google drive

•  Guide for Regional Pilot Studies in MACSUR —  in progress, via MACSUR’s Google drive

Available data

1. IIASA, PIK, OECD simulations at IIASA site —  5 socioeconomic scenarios (SSP 1-5)

•  5-yr steps, 1970–2100 •  GDP, population, urbanization •  by region and country

Available data

2. CAPRI (Zimmermann) at MACSUR site —  climate × socioeconomic scenarios

•  same combinations as used in AgMIP (S1 … S6) — business as usual & present climate: reference (S1) —  fragmented world & present climate (S2) — business as usual & hot climate

× 2 different global climate/crop models (S3, S6)

•  full consideration of recent CAP and WTO regulations •  baseline till 2020 produced by complex process involving

extrapolation of trends, expert opinions, and physical/logical constraints (Britz & Witzke 2012)

•  2020 till 2050 involves more guesswork

Available data

3. Climate —  worldclim

•  1 km grid •  historic mean monthly climate, mostly 1960-1990 •  http://www.worldclim.org/

—  ENES •  CMIP5 results, historic climate •  http://climate4impact.eu/impactportal/general/index.jsp

—  LARS WG •  for stochastic weather simulation (e.g. extreme events) •  http://www.rothamsted.ac.uk/mas-models/larswg.html

SSP3

•  Slowly decreasing fossil fuel dependency •  Reductions of resource and energy intensity •  Uneven development of low-income countries •  Few weak global institutions •  Slow continuation of globalization with some barriers

remaining •  Well regulated information flow •  Medium economic growth, slow convergence •  High intra-regional disparities •  Medium population growth related to medium educational

investments •  Delay of achievement of MDGs;

EU Energy Pathway (from ENTRACTE) 80 to 95% reduction in GHG emissions below 1990 levels

• decline in nuclear power• increase in wind energy or CSS technology• improved energy efficiency• reduced electrical demand

• 55% share of renewable energy sources

• 72% improvement in energy efficiency

• buildings with zero-energy standards

• more efficient energy use in transportation and industry

• electricity from renewable resources doubles (wind, but foremost biofuels)

VOLANTE V-A2 follows a Keynesian path, protectionism of European markets from the vagaries of the world market is essential; no signing up to any climate change mitigation or adaptation commitments. V-A2α: Eurosceptic Europe -  protectionism of European production -  → increased production in home-grown agriculture and other sectors with guaranteed home

market at inflated prices; leads to less mobility and more insulated Europe; EU just regulate trade with other regions

-  little commitment in agriculture to R&D and slower adoption of technological advances than in V-A1; more emphasis on sustainable management techniques; less increase in average farm size than in V-A1, but more than in V-B1/2;

-  strong focus on improving energy, water-use and fertiliser up-take efficiency; adoption of GM technology boosts yield and reduces agro-chemical imputs

-  food production is maintained through subsidy support (nation based) and extension activities; focus on sustainable landscape management (soils, water, etc.)

-  more homogenised land use due to more specialised and “site/climate” matched production; large increase in forest cover for most countries

-  push towards utilising most of existing European mineral reserves; dramatic increase in bio-ethanol use from crops; less reliance on energy imports from Russia and Middle East; national portfolios of utilising own best natural resources (wave, solar, wind, nuclear, gas)

ATEAM

PRELUDE

•  Quantitative model parameters —  Technical report, Table 3.18 —  Audiovisual tools

SSP/RCP

AgMIP scenarios used in MACSUR Scenario code

SSP RCP GCM Crop model

Bioenergy

S1 SSP2 Present climate None None Model specific

S2 SSP3 Present climate None None Model specific

S3 SSP2 RCP8.5 IPSL-CM5A-LR LPJmL Model specific

S4 SSP2 RCP8.5 HadGEM2-ES LPJmL Model specific

S5 SSP2 RCP8.5 IPSL-CM5A-LR DSSAT Model specific

S6 SSP2 RCP8.5 HadGEM2-ES DSSAT Model specific

S7 SSP2 Present climate None None 1st-gen. ca. 6 EJ; no 2nd-gen. (2050)

S8 SSP2 Present climate None None 1st-gen. ca. 6 EJ; 2nd-gen. Ca. 108EJ (2050)

34

Source: Von Lampe et al. (under review)