Quantifying synergies and trade-offs in the global water-land-food-climate nexus using a multi-model scenario approach

The human-earth system is confronted with the challenge of providing a range of resources for a growing and more prosperous world population while simultaneously reducing environmental degradation. The sustainable development goals and the planetary boundaries define targets to manage this challenge. Many of these are linked to the land system, such as biodiversity, water, food, nutrients and climate, and are strongly interconnected. A key question is how measures can be designed in the context of multi-dimensional sustainability targets to exploit synergies. To address this, a nexus approach is adopted that acknowledges the interconnectedness between the important sub-systems water, land, food, and climate. This study quantifies synergies and trade-offs from ambitious interventions in different components of this water-land-fod-climate nexus at the global scale. For this purpose, a set of six harmonized scenarios is simulated with the model of agricultural production and its impact on the environment and Integrated model to assess the global environment models. The multi-model approach improves robustness of the results while shedding light on variations coming from different modelling approaches. Our results show that measures in the food component towards healthy diets with low meat consumption have synergies with all other nexus dimensions: Increased natural land improving terrestrial biodiversity (+4% to +8%), lower greenhouse gas emissions from land (−45% to −58%), reduced irrigation water withdrawals to protect or restore hydrological environmental flows (−3% to −24%), and reductions in nitrogen surpluses (−23% to −35%). Climate mitigation measures in line with the Paris Agreement have trade-offs with the water and food components of the nexus, as they adversely affect irrigation water withdrawals (+5% to +30% in 2050 compared to reference scenario) and food prices (+1% to +20%). The analysis of a scenario combining all measures reveals how certain measures are in conflict while others reinforce each other. This study provides an example of a nexus approach to scenario analysis providing input to the next generation of pathways aiming to achieve multiple dimensions of sustainable development.SHAPEHorizon 2020 Framework Programmehttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100010661Deutsche Bundesstiftung Umwelthttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100007636Peer Reviewe

Projecting terrestrial biodiversity intactness with GLOBIO 4

Scenario-based biodiversity modelling is a powerful approach to evaluate how possible future socio-economic developments may affect biodiversity. Here, we evaluated the changes in terrestrial biodiversity intactness, expressed by the mean species abundance (MSA) metric, resulting from three of the shared socio-economic pathways (SSPs) combined with different levels of climate change (according to representative concentration pathways [RCPs]): a future oriented towards sustainability (SSP1xRCP2.6), a future determined by a politically divided world (SSP3xRCP6.0) and a future with continued global dependency on fossil fuels (SSP5xRCP8.5). To this end, we first updated the GLOBIO model, which now runs at a spatial resolution of 10 arc-seconds (~300 m), contains new modules for downscaling land use and for quantifying impacts of hunting in the tropics, and updated modules to quantify impacts of climate change, land use, habitat fragmentation and nitrogen pollution. We then used the updated model to project terrestrial biodiversity intactness from 2015 to 2050 as a function of land use and climate changes corresponding with the selected scenarios. We estimated a global area-weighted mean MSA of 0.56 for 2015. Biodiversity intactness declined in all three scenarios, yet the decline was smaller in the sustainability scenario (-0.02) than the regional rivalry and fossil-fuelled development scenarios (-0.06 and -0.05 respectively). We further found considerable variation in projected biodiversity change among different world regions, with large future losses particularly for sub-Saharan Africa. In some scenario-region combinations, we projected future biodiversity recovery due to reduced demands for agricultural land, yet this recovery was counteracted by increased impacts of other pressures (notably climate change and road disturbance). Effective measures to halt or reverse the decline of terrestrial biodiversity should not only reduce land demand (e.g. by increasing agricultural productivity and dietary changes) but also focus on reducing or mitigating the impacts of other pressures.Peer reviewe

Reducing sectoral hard to abate emissions to limit reliance of Carbon Dioxide Removal in 1.5°C scenarios

Achieving net-zero greenhouse gas targets is often achieved by compensating residual greenhouse gas emissions in the hard to abate (HtA) sectors, with carbon dioxide removal (CDR) options. However, large-scale application of CDR may lead to environmental, technical and social concerns. The extent to which residual emissions can be reduced in the industry, agriculture, buildings and transport sector is analysed based on integrated assessment of scenarios with ambitious measures in the HtA sectors. Two scenarios that explore demand and technology-focused approaches show that by reducing residual emissions, the CDR ceiling can be significantly lowered (23-30%) compared to reference in the net-zero year. The agriculture sector plays a critical role in this given the large share of residual emissions. The additional measures allow to create a 1.5°C scenario in which crop-based bioenergy use is limited to 40 EJ/yr, therefore within sustainable limits, and afforestation can be limited to abandoned cropland and grassland

Key determinants of global land-use projections

Land use is at the core of various sustainable development goals. Long-term climate foresight studies have structured their recent analyses around five socio-economic pathways (SSPs), with consistent storylines of future macroeconomic and societal developments; however, model quantification of these scenarios shows substantial heterogeneity in land-use projections. Here we build on a recently developed sensitivity approach to identify how future land use depends on six distinct socio-economic drivers (population, wealth, consumption preferences, agricultural productivity, land-use regulation, and trade) and their interactions. Spread across models arises mostly from diverging sensitivities to long-term drivers and from various representations of land-use regulation and trade, calling for reconciliation efforts and more empirical research. Most influential determinants for future cropland and pasture extent are population and agricultural efficiency. Furthermore, land-use regulation and consumption changes can play a key role in reducing both land use and food-security risks, and need to be central elements in sustainable development strategies

Protecting 30% of the planet for nature: costs, benefits and economic implications

A. Waldron, K. Nakamura, J. Sze, T. Vilela, A. Escobedo, P. Negret Torres, R. Button, K. Swinnerton, A. Toledo, P. Madgwick, N. Mukherjee were supported by National Geographic and the Resources Legacy Fund. V. Christensen was supported by NSERC Discovery Grant RGPIN-2019-04901. M. Coll and J. Steenbeek were supported by EU Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 817578 (TRIATLAS). D. Leclere was supported by TradeHub UKRI CGRF project. R. Heneghan was supported by Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities, Acciones de Programacion Conjunta Internacional (PCIN-2017-115). M. di Marco was supported by MIUR Rita Levi Montalcini programme. A. Fernandez-Llamazares was supported by Academy of Finland (grant nr. 31176). S. Fujimori and T. Hawegawa were supported by The Environment Research and Technology Development Fund (2-2002) of the Environmental Restoration and Conservation Agency of Japan and the Sumitomo Foundation. V. Heikinheimo was supported by Kone Foundation, Social Media for Conservation project. K. Scherrer was supported by the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 682602. U. Rashid Sumaila acknowledges the OceanCanada Partnership, which funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). T. Toivonen was supported by Osk. Huttunen Foundation & Clare Hall college, Cambridge. W. Wu was supported by The Environment Research and Technology Development Fund (2-2002) of the Environmental Restoration and Conservation Agency of Japan. Z. Yuchen was supported by a Ministry of Education of Singapore Research Scholarship Block (RSB) Research Fellowship

Working paper analysing the economic implications of the proposed 30% target for areal protection in the draft post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framewor

58 pages, 5 figures, 3 tables- The World Economic Forum now ranks biodiversity loss as a top-five risk to the global economy, and the draft post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework proposes an expansion of conservation areas to 30% of the earth’s surface by 2030 (hereafter the “30% target”), using protected areas (PAs) and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs). - Two immediate concerns are how much a 30% target might cost and whether it will cause economic losses to the agriculture, forestry and fisheries sectors. - Conservation areas also generate economic benefits (e.g. revenue from nature tourism and ecosystem services), making PAs/Nature an economic sector in their own right. - If some economic sectors benefit but others experience a loss, high-level policy makers need to know the net impact on the wider economy, as well as on individual sectors. [...]A. Waldron, K. Nakamura, J. Sze, T. Vilela, A. Escobedo, P. Negret Torres, R. Button, K. Swinnerton, A. Toledo, P. Madgwick, N. Mukherjee were supported by National Geographic and the Resources Legacy Fund. V. Christensen was supported by NSERC Discovery Grant RGPIN-2019-04901. M. Coll and J. Steenbeek were supported by EU Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 817578 (TRIATLAS). D. Leclere was supported by TradeHub UKRI CGRF project. R. Heneghan was supported by Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities, Acciones de Programacion Conjunta Internacional (PCIN-2017-115). M. di Marco was supported by MIUR Rita Levi Montalcini programme. A. Fernandez-Llamazares was supported by Academy of Finland (grant nr. 311176). S. Fujimori and T. Hawegawa were supported by The Environment Research and Technology Development Fund (2-2002) of the Environmental Restoration and Conservation Agency of Japan and the Sumitomo Foundation. V. Heikinheimo was supported by Kone Foundation, Social Media for Conservation project. K. Scherrer was supported by the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 682602. U. Rashid Sumaila acknowledges the OceanCanada Partnership, which funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). T. Toivonen was supported by Osk. Huttunen Foundation & Clare Hall college, Cambridge. W. Wu was supported by The Environment Research and Technology Development Fund (2-2002) of the Environmental Restoration and Conservation Agency of Japan. Z. Yuchen was supported by a Ministry of Education of Singapore Research Scholarship Block (RSB) Research FellowshipPeer reviewe

The future of EU agriculture in a global context

This study gathered views of the potential future development of the EU agri-food sectors in the long term (up to and including 2050) and investigated what this could mean for the course of action to be taken. What are the possible consequences of several driving forces – as far as they are known today – that will determine the future of EU agriculture and horticulture? The starting point was a reference scenario: how will agriculture develop if policies do not change? Several variants were then considered. The variation is related to the degree of greening (implementation of the Paris Agreement/Green Deal) and whether this greening takes place unilaterally in the EU or also globally. Another variable is the extent to which trade is further liberalised

De toekomst van de land- en tuinbouw in Nederland, binnen de Europese en mondiale context

This study gathers images about the possible future development of the Dutch agri-food sectors in the long term (until 2050) and what this could mean for the courses of action for LNV. The starting point is a reference scenario: how will agriculture develop if policy remains unchanged. Subsequently, a number of variants are examined. The variation lies in the degree of greening (implementation of the Paris Agreement / EU Green Deal) and whether this greening takes place unilaterally in the EU or also worldwide. Another variable is the degree of further liberalization (or the opposite) of trade