This document summarizes preliminary results from the GLOBIOM model on the impacts of regional development and global mitigation policies on the agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU) sectors. The key findings are: 1) AFOLU emissions are reduced by 50% globally under mitigation scenarios, with 30% of reductions coming from Latin America and 24% from Africa. 2) Biomass supply for bioenergy doubles under mitigation, with 45% from Latin America and 17% from Africa, providing a potential new source of income. 3) Crop production increases 87% globally but less in Latin America and Africa under mitigation scenarios, which also see lower livestock production increases and shifts

1. Regional
Development
versus
Global
Mi2ga2on:
Insights
from
GLOBIOM
P.
Havlík,
N.
Forsell,
Y.
W.
Zhang,
U.
Kleinwechter
O.
Fricko,
K.
Riahi,
M.
Obersteiner
7th
Annual
IAMC
Annual
Mee2ng
Maryland,
17
November
2014

2. Introduc2on
2
2
17/11/2014
Regional
Development
versus
Global
Mi2ga2on
-­‐
7th
IAMC
Annual
Mee2ng
} Large
demands
for
mi2ga2on
from
the
land
use
sectors
} Direct
non-­‐CO2
emissions
reduc2on
} Avoided
CO2
emissions
and
carbon
sequestra2on
} Biomass
for
energy
} Agriculture
plays
a
key
role
in
developing
countries
} Source
of
food
in
oYen
food
insecure
regions
} Source
of
economic
growth
} Trade-­‐offs
need
to
be
considered
in
mi2ga2on
policy
design

3. Scenarios
3
3
17/11/2014
Regional
Development
versus
Global
Mi2ga2on
-­‐
7th
IAMC
Annual
Mee2ng
SSP
RCP
SPA
REFL
SSP2
-­‐
-­‐
SPA0
SSP2
2p6
SPA0
SPA2
SSP2
2p6
SPA2
Preliminary
results:
Focus
on
2050

4. Modeling
approach
4
4
17/11/2014
Regional
Development
versus
Global
Mi2ga2on
-­‐
7th
IAMC
Annual
Mee2ng
Land:
GLOBIOM
Energy:
MESSAGE
“Look-­‐up
tables”
Common
drivers:
POP,
GDP,
storylines
CO2
price,
bioenergy
demand

5. GLOBIOM
5
5
17/11/2014
Regional
Development
versus
Global
Mi2ga2on
-­‐
7th
IAMC
Annual
Mee2ng

6. AFOLU
emissions
[MtCO2eq]
6
6
17/11/2014
Regional
Development
versus
Global
Mi2ga2on
-­‐
7th
IAMC
Annual
Mee2ng
} AFOLU
emissions
globally
to
reduced
by
50%
(40%
in
SPA2)
to
today
} 30%
of
reduc2on
coming
from
LAM
and
24%
from
AFR
} The
propor2onal
contribu2on
does
not
change
between
SPAs

7. Biomass
supply
for
bioenergy
[EJ
primary]
7
7
17/11/2014
Regional
Development
versus
Global
Mi2ga2on
-­‐
7th
IAMC
Annual
Mee2ng
} Biomass
supply
for
bioenergy
to
DOUBLE
compared
to
reference
} 45%
to
come
from
LAM
and
17%
from
AFR
} Poten2al
source
of
new
income

8. Crop
produc2on
[tDM]
8
8
17/11/2014
Regional
Development
versus
Global
Mi2ga2on
-­‐
7th
IAMC
Annual
Mee2ng
} Crop
produc2on
to
increase
by
87%
globally,
94%
in
LAM
and
255%
in
AFR
} Increase
lower
by
22%
in
LAM
and
29%
in
AFR
under
SPA0
} Increase
lower
by
13%
in
LAM
and
19%
in
AFR
under
SPA2

9. Livestock
produc2on
[t
protein]
9
9
17/11/2014
Regional
Development
versus
Global
Mi2ga2on
-­‐
7th
IAMC
Annual
Mee2ng
} Livestock
produc2on
to
increase
by
73%
globally,
107%
in
LAM
and
194%
in
AFR
} Bovine
meat,
small
ruminant
meat,
and
small
ruminant
milk
produc2on
-­‐20%
} Poultry
produc2on
-­‐6%
} Increase
in
total
produc2on
lower
by
32%
in
LAM
and
39%
in
AFR
under
SPA0

10. GHG
emissions
efficiency
17/11/2014
Regional
Development
versus
Global
Mi2ga2on
-­‐
7th
IAMC
Annual
Mee2ng
10
Herrero
et
al.
2013

11. Beef
produc2on
systems
[%]
11
11
17/11/2014
Regional
Development
versus
Global
Mi2ga2on
-­‐
7th
IAMC
Annual
Mee2ng
} Globally,
intensive
systems
share
increase
from
30%
to
40%
in
SPAs
} In
AFR,
intensive
systems
represent
37%
under
mi2ga2on
compared
to
24%
in
the
baseline

12. Industrial
round
wood
produc2on
[Mm3]
12
12
17/11/2014
Regional
Development
versus
Global
Mi2ga2on
-­‐
7th
IAMC
Annual
Mee2ng
} Industrial
round
would
supply
to
increase
by
87%
between
2000
and
2050
} Liile
effect
of
mi2ga2on
policie
(+/-­‐10%)
} Incen2ves
for
sequestra2on
outweigh
bioenergy
demand

13. Sectorial
revenue
and
CO2
tax
[billion
USD2000]
13
13
17/11/2014
Regional
Development
versus
Global
Mi2ga2on
-­‐
7th
IAMC
Annual
Mee2ng
} Liile
effect
on
total
global
income,
forestry
benefits,
agriculture
looses
} LAM:
+22%
(+16%
in
SPA2)
–
agriculture
and
forest
products
+
forest
carbon
} AFR:
-­‐20%
(-­‐20%
in
SPA2)
–
losses
in
agriculture,
no
compensa2on
in
forests

14. Ag
commodity
prices
(%
change
to
2000)
14
14
17/11/2014
Regional
Development
versus
Global
Mi2ga2on
-­‐
7th
IAMC
Annual
Mee2ng
} Crop
price
increase
by
14%
(8%
in
SPA2),
by
9%
in
AFR
(5%
in
SPA2)
} Livestock
price
increase
by
25%
(13%
in
SPA2),
by
47%
in
AFR
(30%
in
SPA2)
} Opportunity
for
producer
threat
for
consumers

15. Food
availability
(kcal/cap/day)
17/11/2014
Regional
Development
versus
Global
Mi2ga2on
-­‐
7th
IAMC
Annual
Mee2ng
15
} In
REFL,
food
availability
in
AFR
increases
by
25%
} Only
66%
of
increase
under
SPA0,
78%
under
SPA2
} Developed
regions
much
less
affected
than
developing

16. Total
abatement
calorie
cost
(TACC)
17/11/2014
Regional
Development
versus
Global
Mi2ga2on
-­‐
7th
IAMC
Annual
Mee2ng
16
Havlík
et
al.
2014

17. Total
abatement
calorie
cost
(TACC)
17/11/2014
Regional
Development
versus
Global
Mi2ga2on
-­‐
7th
IAMC
Annual
Mee2ng
17
Havlík
et
al.
2014

18. Conclusions
18
18
17/11/2014
Regional
Development
versus
Global
Mi2ga2on
-­‐
7th
IAMC
Annual
Mee2ng
} Mi2ga2on
presents
opportuni2es
for
land
use
sectors
} New
demands
(biomass)
} Payments
for
carbon
sequestra2on
} Higher
prices
(producers)
} Mi2ga2on
presents
also
challenges
} Higher
produc2on
cost
} Restructuring
of
the
sectors
} Higher
prices
(consumers)
} Sectors
and
regions
affected
very
differently
} Forestry
tends
to
benefit
and
agriculture
to
loose
} Developed
regions
marginally
affected
and
least
developed
most
afected
} How
to
make
mi2ga2on
work
for
least
developed
countries?

19. Thank
you
!
havlikpt@iiasa.ac.at
www.globiom.org