Links between agricultural development and protection of natural capital: insights from the resource nexus

Mario Giampietro, Raimon Ripoll Bosch, Evelien de Olde, Maarten Krol, Keith Matthews, Thomas Volker, Ângela Perreira

EEA - MAGIC Joint Workshop “EU environmental policy frameworks through a resource nexus lens” 15th and 16th May 2018 European Environment Agency, Copenhagen

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under grant agreement No. 689669.

Part 1 - CAP, the Nexus and Sustainability Narratives (Keith Matthews) Part 2 - Narratives environmental policy, externalization and aspects of animal production (Evelien de Olde, Raimon Bosch) Part 3 - Global perspective in narratives (Maarten Krol)

Structure of the presentation

Using Quantitative Story Telling to reflect on how CAP narratives, mechanisms and outcomes deliver improvements in sustainability.

EEA - MAGIC Joint Workshop - “EU environmental policy frameworks through a resource nexus lens” 15th and 16th May 2018 European Environment Agency, Copenhagen

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under grant agreement No. 689669.

CAP, the Nexus and Sustainability Narratives

K.B. Matthewsa, K.L. Blackstocka, M. Rivingtona, K, Waylena, A. Juarez Bourkea, D.G. Millera, D. Wardell-Johnsona, Z. Kovacicb, V. Cabellob, M. Ripab and M. Giampietrob,c, T. Volkerd aThe James Hutton Institute, Aberdeen, Scotland, bInstitut de Ciència i Tecnologia Ambientals, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Catalunya, cInstitució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats (ICREA), Barcelona, Catalunya, dJoint Research Centre, Ispra, Italy.

Why CAP narratives?

4

EU Budget 2015 145B€

Smart & Inclusive Growth

68B€

Sustainable Growth: Natural

Resources 58B€

Security & Citizenship 3B€

Global Europe

8B€

Admin 9B€

Economic, Social &

Territorial Cohesion

58B€

Competitiveness for growth & jobs 17B€

CSF research & innovation

10B€ 13 other Progs. @17B€

6 other Progs. @3B€

5 other Progs. @1B€

Investment for growth and jobs

48B€

European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) 45B€

European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development

(EAFRD) 12B€

The text of the draft CAP proposals – March 2018

Article 7 (Draft)

Specific objectives of the CAP

1. The achievement of the general objectives of the CAP shall be pursued through the following nine specific objectives:

(a) Support viable farm income and resilience across the EU territory (to support food security);

(b) Increase competitiveness and enhance market orientation;

(c) Improve farmers' position in the value chain;

(d) Contribute to climate change mitigation and adaptation

(e) Foster sustainable development and efficient management of natural resources;

(f) Preserve nature and landscapes;

(g) Attract new farmers and facilitate their business development;

(h) Promote employment, growth, social inclusion and local development in rural areas (including bio-economy);

(i) Address societal expectations on food and health.

5

Example CAP narratives

• Budgeting – Pillars

• Decoupling – “abandonment”

• Historic and area-based <basis>

• Basic – regionalised • Capping <limited> • Redistributive <optional>

• Greening – 30% P1 <defunct>

• Coupled <deprecated>

• Young/New <tiny>

• Less Favoured Areas move to ANC <extended time>

• Pillar 2 - RDP <voluntary and/or competitive>

• Agri-Env, Marketing, Advice, Social (LEADER), etc, etc, etc.

• Between Pillar transfers <small>

• Being squeezed harder in next CAP period (?)

• Simplification agenda <reinforcing the status quo>

6

CAP mechanisms – improving sustainability?

A key narrative from the CAP QST

The CAP as an old policy - narratives about tensions and opposing objectives

• Competitiveness (justification, script)

CAP aims to ensure European agricultural competitiveness in the world market and aims to deliver public goods such as biodiversity conservation, water quality and climate change mitigation. These aims are in opposition.

• Analysis – The basis of EU farm competitiveness and its wider consequences • Commodities, Sectors and Trade

• Specific tension between competitiveness and the delivery of public goods.

• Historic perspective (how far can we go back)

• Relative levels of competitiveness of outputs from EU

• Changes in agricultural sector structure (and openness)

• Funds and flows of public goods (e.g. biodiversity, water quality and GHGs)

• How competitiveness is conceptualised, how it has changed over time

7

Option - linking CAP spend, MAGIC metrics and PEGASUS maps CAP aims to ensure European agricultural competitiveness in the world market and aims to deliver public goods such as biodiversity conservation, water quality and climate change mitigation. These aims are in opposition.

• MAGIC • Analysis framework

• FADN • Financial and physical data

• PEGASUS* • Maps of environmental outcomes

• Mix • Farm types • Fam sizes • Regions – heterogeneity within and

between

• Kinds of trade-offs • Intensity • Size • etc.

*www.pegasus.ieep.eu

8

The present work reflects only the author's view and the Funding Agency can not be held responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under grant agreement No. 689669.

Externalisation for environmental protection?

Raimon Ripoll Bosch and Evelien de Olde Animal Production Systems group, Wageningen University & Research

‘Quantitative Story-Telling’

Summarise policy narratives

Agree aspects to explore (Grammar)

Set up MuSIASEM processor

Run flow/fund accounting

Run sensitivity analysis

Benchmark metrics

Discuss outputs

Environmental policy Evelien Raimon

Narratives Environmental Policy

• Long list: 46 narratives • Interviews

• Focus group discussion

• Text analysis of policy documents (i.e. Birds Directive, Habitats Directive and Natura 2000)

• From relatively narrow Directives, to broader discussions linking to other policy domains, the SDGs and Nexus

Diversity of narratives

• Short list: 5 narratives • Value of ecosystem services – lack of knowledge

• Evidence based policy – challenges in methods, concepts

• Decarbonisation vs supply of energy, food and water

• Externalisation of environmental impact to reach environmental targets

• Agricultural intensification vs biodiversity

Externalisation

“In order to reach sustainability goals, environmental impacts need to be externalized such as with regard to livestock, with many products being imported from South America. Hence, landscape protection and conservation happens at the expense of degradation of other regions of the world.”

Questions

• Does externalisation of food production (i.e. import of food) help meeting environmental targets in the EU?

• With the current production system, can we meet our environmental targets? • Extensive and low input agriculture to meet environmental targets vs impact

on economic competitiveness and self-sufficiency of the EU

• Intensive and high input agriculture to spare land

Follow-up steps

•Policy analysis • Directives and Natura 2000

• Protect valuable habitats and species, halt biodiversity loss

• Externalisation not considered

• Biodiversity strategy • Integrative: “By conserving and enhancing its natural resource base and

using its resources sustainably, the EU can improve the resource efficiency of its economy and reduce its dependence on natural resources from outside Europe.”

•QST • Developments: openness of the system, self-sufficiency,

type of production systems

QST: the livestock sector

Dairy sector

Milk

Meat

Inp

uts

Load

ings

Inp

uts

Load

ings

Inp

uts

Load

ings

QST: the tool-kit

Dairy sector

(Imp

ort) fee

d

Energy

Water

Imp

ort fee

d

(Imp

.) an

imals

Labo

ur (H

A)

LAn

d

Manure

Meat

Milk

GH

Gs

Leachin

g

Soil

fert

ility

Rai

nfa

ll

Eco

. se

rvic

es

Input flows Input funds

Nat. res.

Ou

tpu

ts

Loadings

Acc

ou

nti

ng

inp

uts

!

Acc

ou

nti

ng

syst

ems!

Acc

ou

nti

ng

Sect

ors

!

Acc

ou

nti

ng

lives

tock

p

rod

uct

ion

Food Energy Water Funds Money

Plant (kg)

Animal (kg)

Electricity (GJ)

Heat (GJ)

Fuel (GJ)

Blue Water Consumption

(m3)

Blue Water Non Consumptive Use

(m3)

Green Water Consumption

(m3)

Human Activity

(hr)

Land Use (ha)

GDP (€)

Relative to EU 8 countries x2.49 x2.41 x1.42 x5.05 x3.47 x1.41 x0.60 x0.81 x1.44 x1.18 x1.25

TOTAL CONSUMPTION 5740 1451 39 306 182 363 851 769 82 0.799 40400

EXTERNALIZATION 3970 475 17 138 86 26 513 580 56 0.622 - Total consumption/ domestic production x3.2 x1.5 x1.8 x1.8 x1.9 x1.1 x2.5 x4.1 x3.2 x4.5 -

FOR SECURITY 2187 548 35 74 39 351 760 252 82 0.799 -

FOR EXPORT 3553 903 4 232 143 12 91 517 0 0 -

Quantities p.c./year

Plant (kg)

Animal (kg)

Electricity (GJ)

Heat (GJ)

Fuel (GJ)

Blue Water Consumption

(m3)

Blue Water Non consumptive Use

(m3)

Green Water Consumption

(m3)

Human Activity

(hr)

Land Use (ha)

GDP (€)

Domestic use 1970 530 26 67 39 326 302 62 8760 1767 40400 AF 26% 11% 7% 8% 3% 6% 0% 91% 0.25% 62% 2%

MC 32% 0% 29% 26% 3% 76% 0% 0% 1.00% 1.33% 18%

ES 0% 0% 12% 16% 0% 2% 100% 9% 0.04% 0.21% 3%

SG 12% 2% 32% 20% 52% 2% 0% 0% 6.79% 26% 77%

HH 29% 87% 21% 29% 42% 14% 0% 0% 91% 10% -

• High input high output country economy! • High consumption of plants per capita (double EU average),

but for livestock production • NL saves labour by imports • NL dependent on land imports

QST: first results - NL

NETHERLANDS (2012) - POPULATION 16.7 Million - quantities p.c./year

Livestock sector in EU

(Imp

.) feed

Energy

Water

(Imp

.) anim

.

Labo

ur (H

A)

Land

Manure

Meat

Milk

GH

Gs

Leachin

g

Soil

fert

ility

Rai

nfa

ll

Eco

. ser

vice

s

Bio

diversity

Bio

div

ers

ity

Biodiversity Bio

diversity

Biodiversity: the complexity

• We can largely discuss about arrows... Biodiversity more complicated! • How do we measure biodiversity? • How do we measure the state, the pressure and the response? • Biodiversity ≈ Ecosystem services

Input flows Input funds

Natural resources/ resource extraction

Mach

ine

ry

Environmental impact/ Loadings to environment

Bio

diversity

Ou

tpu

ts

P

The environment // externalisation

• Externalisation at sector level (specialization!) & Externalisation at country level (inputs for higher value products!)

• Trend of intensification (e.g. less & bigger farms; higher inputs) & competitiveness vs. paradigm of EU model of agriculture

• Can we internalise production of inputs? At what cost?

• How to keep other (agricultural) sectors off from marginal lands (e.g. biofuels): lower production but high nature potential?

• Can we extensify agriculture but at the expense of nature goals in third countries?

• What responsibility we hold?

The present work reflects only the author's view and the Funding Agency can not be held responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under grant agreement No. 689669.

Global scale narratives on food & environment: global food production by 2050

Maarten Krol

Global scale environmental narrative

• EU policy goal to reduce environmental pressures within and outside EU

• Planetary boundary narrative borders of safe operation space already exceeded or nearing exceedance on various environmental themes

business as usual trends in demography and economy / consumption patterns drastically increase pressures

radical transitions due in consumption patterns or resource use efficiency

a fair degree of self-sufficiency is valued in an uncertainly developing world

Food production sector

Energy

Water

Imp

ort cro

ps

Imp

ort an

imal

pro

du

cts

Labo

ur

Land

Animal products

Crop products

GH

Gs

Leachin

g

Soil

fert

ility

Nat

ura

l ru

no

ff

Input flows Input funds

Natural resources

Ou

tpu

ts

Loadings Acc

ou

nti

ng

glo

bal

/ r

egio

nal

fo

od

su

pp

ly

Rai

nfa

ll

Planetary boundaries

Food production sector

Energy

Water

Imp

ort

crop

s

Imp

ort

anim

al p

rod

ucts

Labo

ur

Land

Animal products

Crop products

GH

Gs

Leachin

g

Soil

fert

ility

Nat

ura

l ru

no

ff

Input flows Input funds

Natural resources

Ou

tpu

ts

Loadings

Acc

ou

nti

ng

glo

bal

/ r

egio

nal

foo

d

sup

ply

Rai

nfa

ll

Scenarios global food supply 2050

Population increases to 9.6 billion people

Relevant policy elements

diets (France/Bulgaria/India)

sustainable intensification (close yield gap)

self-sufficiency for food security (internalize)

All influencing the End-Use Matrix

of region and in mutual dependency

Scale of analysis: coarse world regions

Scenarios global food supply 2050 Under assumptions made

- Internalizing food production in EU requires diet change

- Scenario with drastic changes show global food security

- Continued EU reliance on imports could imply risk

Discussion issues

• Global dimension food – environment nexus very relevant for EU

• Externalization bears risks for the future

• Simple footprint-like indicators may be effective in conveying narratives on (regional) boundaries

• Feasibility, viability and desirability in interplay

• Scale of analysis can hide smaller-scale infeasibility

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under grant agreement No. 689669.

The present work reflects only the authors’ views and the Funding Agency can not be held responsible for

any use that may be made of the information it contains.

http://magic-nexus.eu/ https://www.facebook.com/MagicNexusEu/ #MAGIC_NEXUS @MAGIC_NEXUS