14 December 2016 Presentation by the Global Perspectives Studies Team for the Workshop on Long – term scenarios for sustainable and inclusive agriculture, food security and nutrition: Agricultural technologies, production systems and natural resource use under climate change” © http://www.fao.org/

1. Long-term scenarios for sustainable
and inclusive agriculture, food
security and nutrition:
Agricultural technologies, production
systems and natural resource use
under climate change
Global Perspectives Studies Team
FAO, Rome, Dec-14, 2016

2. FAO forward looking exercise: FAT2080
2
• FAO is upgrading/updating long term projections for World Food and
Agriculture towards 2030-50-80 (FAT2080)
• Economic, social, technical and demographic factors, together with
climate change are key drivers of transformative processes in food and
agriculture.
• While in the previous exercises one single scenario was considered,
alternative futures are now considered.
• This is a corporate effort. The Global Perspectives Studies team is
catalyzing in-house knowledge and information regarding different
dimensions of food and agriculture.
• The possible evolution of agricultural and food systems in the light of
ongoing transformative processes is a key aspect.

3. Technological changes and resource use
3
• Technological changes in agriculture and the implied
changes in natural resource use are at the core of scenario
building and projections for food and agriculture.
• The GPS team has identified some sets of questions related
to the role of agriculture in climate change mitigation, the
evolution of land and water availability, possible changes in
crop yields, fish and livestock production.
• This workshop is part of a collaborative corporate effort to
find plausible and scenario-consistent answers to these
questions.

4. Objectives of this internal workshop
This is the name of the 4
The aims of the workshop are to:
1. Share with you key questions related to production
systems and resource use that we have to address
in designing this future scenario (and alternative
ones);
2. Elicit some preliminary thoughts and discussion;
and
3. Establish collaborative linkages with your units to
address these questions.

5. Agenda
5
14.00 – 14.15. Building forward-looking scenarios for food
security and nutrition: the “business-as-Usual” scenario (FAT2)
14.15 – 15.00. Land use, water and forests: current situation
and prospects under climate change: setting the stage (15 min);
key questions and discussion (30 min)
15.00 – 15.45. Crop production: setting the stage (15 min); key
questions and discussion (30 min)
15.50 – 16.00. Coffee break
16.00 – 16.45. Livestock and fish production: setting the stage
(15 min); key questions and discussion (30 min)
16.45 – 17.00. Concluding remarks and further steps

6. Methodological Approach
• “Back-casting”snapshots of alternative futures in
2080 and associated pathways
• Changes in climate, socio-economic, bio-physical,
institutional, cultural, and policy conditions
• Shared Socio-economic Pathways (SSPs)
– Assumptions about the future set of the society
• Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs)

7. Challenges
for food access
and
utilization
Challenges for food
availability and stability
FAT1
Overall
Sustainability
FAT2 Business
as Usual
FAT3
Stratified
Societies
Climate change – GDP – Total Factor Productivity – Trade, ..
Incomeinequality–Poverty-Empowerment–Opportunities,..
The FAT 2080 Challenge Space

8. The Way to FAT 2080

9. Future develops according to socio-economic, technological and environmental
trends similar to historical patterns; the world continues to do things as
“usual”:
• Economic growth is medium and somehow uneven
• Long-term cross-country convergence is doubtful
• Population growth high, following a “medium” path on fertility and mortality
• Diverse economic transformation, role of fiscal systems and social protection
mechanisms
• Technological progress in agriculture should take place but cross-country
yield gap will still remain
• Role of institutions (national, international) limited to solve conflicts and
protracted crisis
• Moderate challenges to food availability/stability and access/utilization
FAT2: Business as Usual

10. Source: World Population Prospects: The 2015 Revision, UN DESA; AT2050 uses the medium variant from the 2008 Revision
World Population Prospects

11. Source: World Population Prospects: The 2015 Revision, UN DESA; AT2050 uses the medium variant from the 2008 Revision
Population by Region

12. GDP Projections for FAT 2

13. GHG Emission Scenarios
Fuss et al., 2014

14. Timing is Critical
Stocker et al., 2013
Contours of peak CO2 -induced warming (as given by Eq. 3 in the Box)
as a function of the starting date of the GMS and the implemented reduction rate of emissions. The later the GMS
starts, the higher the required emissions reduction rate is for a given peak warming

15. Questions on GHG Emissions
and mitigation in the agricultural sector
1. What are the costs associated with GHG mitigation in
agricultural production? Are cost estimates available
depending on mitigation technology? Can costs be specified
in terms of investment costs vs input and other costs?
2. What are the impacts of adaptation practices on
productivity?
3. What are plausible assumptions regarding the reduction of
food losses in production processes?
4. What trends in emission intensity can be assumed in the
future by commodity?
5. How will mitigation affect productivity in the agricultural
sector?

16. Sources of Growth in Crop Production
Source: Alexandratos and Bruinsma, 2012

17. Projecting Ag. Land Area Expansion
Project future uses of these lands for crop
production and animal feed
• Land allocation decisions will be largely driven by
economic reasoning; most profitable crops will be first
grown on the most suitable areas.
• The profitability of a crop will depend on product and
input prices as well as on yields
• Upper boundaries defined by bio-physical constraints

18. Defining Future Land Constraints
• FAO’s Global Agro-Ecological Zones (GAEZ)
– Climate, agronomic, and bio-physical drivers to estimate
yield and land suitability globally at 5 arcmin resolution
under present-day and future climate scenarios
– For 46 crops under irrigated and rainfed conditions
• FAO’s Global Land Cover Classification (GLC-Share
2014)
– High resolution (30 arcseconds) from multiple sources
– Current land cover types to mask out areas that cannot
be used for agriculture (forest, built-up, mangroves, etc)

19. Land Suitability (GAEZ 3.0)
GAEZ suitability classes for crop production
(VS = very suitable, S= suitable, MS = moderately suitable,
mS = marginally suitable, vmS= very marginally suitable, NS= not suitable)

20. Land Cover
FAO GLCShare, 201430 arc seconds (~1km)

21. Land Suitability
Net balance of suitable land 1,446 million ha (current climate conditions)
Suitable areas under future conditions from GAEZ 4.0

22. Land Degradation
Globally, 33% of farmland is moderately to highly degraded [TAC, 2016],
As a result of both, human induced or natural processes

23. Historical Land Area and harv Area
EAP: East Asia/Pacific
ECA: Eastern Europe/Central Asia
HIC: High Income Countries
LAC: Latin America/Carribean
MNA: Mediterranean/North Africa
SAS: South Asia
SAS: Sub-Saharan Africa

24. AT 2050 Land Projections
AT 2050 projections: Harvested area increase from 1256 to 1380 in 2050

25. Irrigation Potential
• Potential for converting existing rainfed areas to
irrigated areas is limited by water availability (water
stress index)
• Water availability (TWR) in a country is the sum of
inflowing water and internally generated runoff
minus committed outflows (AQUASTAT method)
• Inflowing water resources are calculated from pixel-
based runoff from global hydrological models, driven
with climate data from climate models and routed
through a global river network
– Ensemble mean values for each RCP

26. Changing Future Water Resources
ISI-MIP Runoff data, routed

27. Irrigation Limits
• Water abstraction = crop water demand (GAEZ) /
efficiency
• Limit water abstraction to 20% of TWR
Irrigation efficiency as a function of GDP/cap and water stress (AQUSTAT)

28. Irrigated Areas
AT 2050 Projection: Moderate growth of 0.1% pa year

29. Questions on Land
• Into which land classes should we allow croplands and pasture lands to
expand, if needed (e.g. savannas, grazing areas)? Converting non-
agricultural land into agricultural entails costs. Do you have data on
this? And do you anticipate changes in these costs (for example
because technological progress will enable the conversion at lower
costs?)
• What are plausible pathways for land degradation in currently used
cropland areas?
• What is the percentage of protected forest areas on total forested
areas?
• Are there a systematic country- or region-specific patterns of land
transformation? If yes, which are they?

30. Questions on Irrigation
• What are the observed trends in improvements in
irrigation efficiency? Can trends be estimated by
looking at different time intervals in AQUASTAT?
• Which improvement in irrigation efficiency can be
expected in the future and where?
• Is there a better proxy for investment potential to
improve water efficiency than GDP per capita?
• What is the typical cost per hectare of converting
surface irrigation to sprinkler or sprinkler to drip
irrigation?
• Are there estimates of maintenance and replacement
costs?

31. Historical Yield Growth
TAC, 2016

32. Will Yield Gaps be Closed?
Potential yields from GAEZ
Historical yields
from FAOSTAT
Example: Maize yields
for selected countries

33. Yield Gaps
Attainable yields,
depending on
production system

34. Attainable yields
Theoretical yield
time
now Far future
Trend
Potential yield
Water-limited yield

35. AT 2050 Yield Projections
Increases in yield for different crop groups by world region, projected by AT 2050.
Note that these changes do not consider the effects of climate change
or changing prices and do not bear a cost.

36. Climate Change Impacts on Yields

37. Uncertainties from CO2 Effects
Based on ISI-MIP data
Decreases in yield resulting from climate change are partly offset by CO2 fertilization effects
Without CO2 fertilization effects With CO2 fertilization effects
Example: Global maize production [t] by 2080 under alternative
RCPs and GCMs, without area changes

38. Questions on Crop Productivity
• Most crop models and GAEZ do provide simulated yields under assumptions of CO2 fertilization
effects and with a constant CO2 concentration. CO2 fertilization generally increases yields and offsets
some of the negative impacts of climate change on yields. Should yield projections with CO2
fertilization generally be used? However, CO2 fertilization may have negative impacts on nutritional
properties. To what extent CO2 fertilization and related positive and negative impacts have to be
considered in designing forward-looking scenarios?
• Attainable yields for future climate conditions from GAEZ do not reflect technological improvements
(e.g. breeding improvements). What trends in yield should be assumed to 2080 under a “business as
usual” scenario (for example, are AT2050 assumptions applicable in FAT2) due to technological
improvements?
• Are these changes in yields, implying additional unit production costs (including externalities) (e.g.,
they depend on additional investment) ?.
• Should we adjust future yield growth rates depending on how close we are to yield potential?
• What is the theoretical yield (genetic potential) for each crop?
• To what extent attempts to fill so called “Yield gaps” generate additional unit production costs. Does
this require an upward pressure on prices?
• Can we make assumptions about changes in nutritional quality of crops as a result of increased CO2
concentration?

39. Changing Cropping Intensities
AT 2050 Projections:
• CI increase from 88 to 92 for all land
• 80 to 84 in rainfed systems
• 127 to 132 in irrigated systems
• Cropping intensities are the sum of all harvested areas by crop,
divided by arable land
• could be > 1 if multiple harvests are possible!

40. Questions on Intensification
• Higher cropping intensities may have implications for land
degradation, soil loss etc. How can limits for cropping
intensity be defined to be used in FAT2 scenario? How will
this impact yields?
• Is there evidence suggesting that climate change may affect
the duration of cropping seasons in specific regions? How
cropping intensities would be affected?

41. Livestock and fish production

42. Background (1)
• Historical data and assumptions on future economic growth do
suggest that we may well see dietary changes in the future
• Per capita calorie intake per source
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
1961
1963
1965
1967
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2011
2030
2050
kcal/person/day
High income countries
Cereals FruitVegetable MeatMilkEggs Other
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
1961
1963
1965
1967
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2011
2030
2050
kcal/person/day
Low & middle income countries
Cereals FruitVegetable MeatMilkEggs Other Source: FAOSTAT and AT2050

43. Background (2)
• According to AT2050:
• Globally calories per capita from meat are expected to nearly
double between 2005/2007-2050; highest growth in Asia
• Still this is a slowdown in meat consumption compared to
historical data (previous decades)
• Livestock production does not depend only on demand but also on:
• Land availability
• Productivity of pasture land
• Transboundary diseases
• Technological improvement
• We are grateful to the GLEAM colleagues for helping us to represent
livestock production systems; still its not trivial to build into an
economic model elements from a biophysical exercise

44. Relative changes in animal productivity
Source: AT2050

45. Relative changes in herd size
Source: AT2050

46. Questions related to livestock production
• Can limits for the future expansion of livestock herd size be defined by
country? (Extensive vs. intensive production, etc.?)
• What is the future carrying capacity under RCP 6.0 (livestock that can be
fed by on unit of pasture area) by country?
• What are plausible ranges of feed conversion ratios in the future, under
RCP 6.0 (kg feed per kg meat)?
• What are current water requirements for livestock and expected ones
under RCP 6.0 (drinking and service water)?
• Should expansion of pasture areas into other land covers be limited while
designing FAT2?
• Some assessments suggest that emissions could be reduced by 40% if all
livestock farmers would adopt low emission practices. What are
productivity effects of low-emission livestock production?
• What are the expected productivity improvements (in terms of output per
animal) which do not translate into additional unit production costs, in the
future? Are they applicable also under RCP 6.0? How to the change due to
“average” diseases under RCP 6.0?

47. Fish demand and supply
• In AT2050 fish was not a separate commodity; in FAT2080 we are working
on representing the demand of an aggregate fish (parameterization of
demand system)
• How can we represent fish supply? -> we are grateful to the Fishery
department for sending us recently data on fish production (quantities of
captures and aquaculture + unit values for aquaculture)
• What can we plausibly assume about fish supply from captures and
aquaculture in the long-run?
• What should we assume about technological change and productivity (is
there something analogous to crop yields?)
• What are the production costs of fish supply and what are the key
determinants?
• How much of additional feed is coming from crops and livestock and at
what price? (for livestock we know because of GLEAM)
• How does climate change (RCP 6.0) affect fish supply and where?
• What are mitigation and adaptation efforts in the fish sector? How can we
accommodate this inside our scenarios?