How much land-based greenhouse gas mitigation can be achieved without compromising food security and environmental goals?

P. Smith; H. Haberl; A. Popp; K-H Erb; C. Lauk; R. Harper; F.N. Tubiello; A. de Siqueira Pinto; M. Jafari; S. Sohi; O. Masera; H. Böttcher; G. Berndes; M. Bustamante; H. Ahammad; H. Clark; H. Dong; E.A. Elsiddig; C. Mbow; N.H. Ravindranath; C.W. Rice; C. Robledo Abad; A. Romanovskaya; F. Sperling; M. Herrero; J.I. House; S. Rose

doi:10.1111/gcb.12160

Back

How much land-based greenhouse gas mitigation can be achieved without compromising food security and environmental goals?

Journal article

Open access

Peer reviewed

How much land-based greenhouse gas mitigation can be achieved without compromising food security and environmental goals?

P. Smith, H. Haberl, A. Popp, K-H Erb, C. Lauk, R. Harper, F.N. Tubiello, A. de Siqueira Pinto, M. Jafari, S. Sohi, …

Global Change Biology Bioenergy, Vol.19(8), pp.2285-2302

2013

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12160

Files and links (2)

pdf

land_based_greenhouse_gas_mitigation.pdfDownload View

Author’s Version Open Access

url

Link to Published Version *Subscription may be requiredView

Abstract

Feeding 9-10 billion people by 2050 and preventing dangerous climate change are two of the greatest challenges facing humanity. Both challenges must be met while reducing the impact of land management on ecosystem services that deliver vital goods and services, and support human health and well-being. Few studies to date have considered the interactions between these challenges. In this study we briefly outline the challenges, review the supply- and demand-side climate mitigation potential available in the Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use AFOLU sector and options for delivering food security. We briefly outline some of the synergies and trade-offs afforded by mitigation practices, before presenting an assessment of the mitigation potential possible in the AFOLU sector under possible future scenarios in which demand-side measures codeliver to aid food security. We conclude that while supply-side mitigation measures, such as changes in land management, might either enhance or negatively impact food security, demand-side mitigation measures, such as reduced waste or demand for livestock products, should benefit both food security and greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation. Demand-side measures offer a greater potential (1.5-15.6 Gt CO2-eq. yr-1) in meeting both challenges than do supply-side measures (1.5-4.3 Gt CO2-eq. yr-1 at carbon prices between 20 and 100 US$ tCO2-eq. yr-1), but given the enormity of challenges, all options need to be considered. Supply-side measures should be implemented immediately, focussing on those that allow the production of more agricultural product per unit of input. For demand-side measures, given the difficulties in their implementation and lag in their effectiveness, policy should be introduced quickly, and should aim to codeliver to other policy agenda, such as improving environmental quality or improving dietary health. These problems facing humanity in the 21st Century are extremely challenging, and policy that addresses multiple objectives is required now more than ever.

Details

Title: How much land-based greenhouse gas mitigation can be achieved without compromising food security and environmental goals?
Authors/Creators: P. Smith (Author/Creator) - University of Aberdeen
H. Haberl (Author/Creator) - Adria Airways
A. Popp (Author/Creator) - Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research
K-H Erb (Author/Creator) - Adria Airways
C. Lauk (Author/Creator) - Adria Airways
R. Harper (Author/Creator) - Murdoch University
F.N. Tubiello (Author/Creator) - Virginia Tech
A. de Siqueira Pinto (Author/Creator) - Universidade de Brasília
M. Jafari (Author/Creator) - Research Institute of Forests and Rangelands
S. Sohi (Author/Creator) - University of Edinburgh
O. Masera (Author/Creator) - CIUDAD
H. Böttcher (Author/Creator) - International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
G. Berndes (Author/Creator) - Chalmers University of Technology
M. Bustamante (Author/Creator)
H. Ahammad (Author/Creator) - Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics
H. Clark (Author/Creator) - AgResearch
H. Dong (Author/Creator) - Institute of Environment and Sustainable Development in Agriculture
E.A. Elsiddig (Author/Creator) - University of Khartoum
C. Mbow (Author/Creator) - World Agroforestry Centre
N.H. Ravindranath (Author/Creator) - Indian Institute of Science Bangalore
C.W. Rice (Author/Creator)
C. Robledo Abad (Author/Creator)
A. Romanovskaya (Author/Creator) - Institute of Global Climate and Ecology
F. Sperling (Author/Creator) - African Development Bank Group
M. Herrero (Author/Creator) - Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
J.I. House (Author/Creator) - University of Bristol
S. Rose (Author/Creator)
Publication Details: Global Change Biology Bioenergy, Vol.19(8), pp.2285-2302
Publisher: Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Identifiers: 991005544501007891
Copyright: © 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Murdoch Affiliation: School of Environmental Science; School of Veterinary and Life Sciences
Language: English
Resource Type: Journal article

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

Source: InCites

Metrics

3055 File views/ downloads

516 Record Views

450 Times Cited - Web of Science

InCites Highlights

These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output

Collaboration types: Industry collaboration; Domestic collaboration; International collaboration
Citation topics: 6 Social Sciences; 6.263 Agricultural Policy; 6.263.1720 Dietary Sustainability
Web Of Science research areas: Biodiversity Conservation; Ecology; Environmental Sciences
ESI research areas: Environment/Ecology