To combat global warming, we urgently need to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. It seems obvious. Failing to be simple. But researchers are now reminding us that mitigation measures should also be decided on the basis of the effects they will have, particularly on agriculture.
You will also be interested
[EN VIDÉO] Our agriculture will soon be affected by global warming Some of the effects of global warming are already being felt. Others are yet to come. The yields of certain crops could thus drop tangibly from 2030 under the effect of rising temperatures, variations in precipitation patterns and high levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere. This is the conclusion of researchers who have worked on the most efficient climate and crop models of the moment. Maize yields, for example, could drop sharply. (in English) © NASA Goddard
Reduce our emissions of greenhouse gas. This is absolutely essential if we hope to limit the global warming and its effects. Goals of carbon neutrality have been set by the states. But it is far from simple. And it could even get a little more complicated if we believe the conclusions of a study conducted by an international team. The researchers underline the collateral damage that the measures to mitigate our emissions — especially on agriculture, forestry and the use of land — could cause matter food security.
Thus, we could witness a spike in food prices. With a potential impact on food security. At least from some countries. Why ? Firstly because with the decrease in the use of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (NOT2O) — two powerful greenhouse gases — production costs will increase. Then, because if the crops intended for the production ofgreen energy increase, competition for land will intensify. Finally, because forests could increase in value as carbon sink and thus prevent large-scale agricultural plantations.
Economic models, when they consider only projections of socio-economic conditions — such as population growth or improved living standards — predict that around 420 million people worldwide could experience a risk of hunger in 2050. The figure increases when measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions are injected into economic models. With a rise in food prices estimated at 27%, no less than 120 million additional people will be exposed to the risk of famine.
Reducing our emissions, but not at any cost
And the researchers even offer a more detailed analysis. They managed to estimate that at the global level, 60% of the price increase would be attributable to large-scale reforestation, while 33% would come from the increase in production costs linked to the reduction in the use of CH.4 and a2O. Thus the additional risk for the population would be approximately 50% due to reforestation, 33% due to the increase in production costs and 14% “only” to the expansion of bioenergy crops.
“Traditionally, the expansion of bioenergy to achieve negative emissions has been seen as a problem of Food Safety. However, it turns out that other factors are rather more important”notes Stefan Frank, researcher, in a release of theInternational Institute for Applied System Analysis (IIASA, Austria). Even more so in some parts of the world. Like Africa where, a little more than elsewhere, the question of reforestation seems central.
However, the researchers stress that these results should be viewed with caution. Notably because they were obtained on the basis of a carbon tax global uniform. Considering, for example, that carbon stocks in forests will be affected by carbon taxes, increasing the value of land, the cost of agricultural production and the price of foodstuffs. Adjustments will certainly have to be made. Nor do they consider the effects that global warming could have on food security. However, this work retains the merit of recalling the complexity and challenges of implementing the measures of decarbonization in agriculture, forestry management and other land uses.
Interested in what you just read?