[PPT] - National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES) Tomoko Hasegawa, PowerPoint Presentation

SLIDE 1

National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES) Tomoko Hasegawa, Shinichiro Fujimori, Kiyoshi Takahashi and Toshihiko Masui

1

The 20th AIM international workshop, Tsukuba, January 23-24, 2015

Hasegawa, T., Fujimori, S., Takahashi, K., Masui, T., 2015. Scenarios for the risk of hunger in the twenty-first century using Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. Environmental Research Letters 10, 014010. Artic Article URL e URL http:/ http://iop

pscience.io

science.iop.or

rg/

g/1748-9326/10/1/014010 1748-9326/10/1/014010

SLIDE 2

Background

Climate change would increase the number of

malnourished children.

The climate impacts strongly depend on population

and GDP.

– Based on the SRES and CMIP3; Need updated. – Only population and GDP were considered; other socioeconomic indicators could be considered.

A new interdisciplinary scenario framework (SSP+RCP)

has recently been designed for climate change research.

Scenarios for various fields (e.g. water use) have been

developed based on SSPs.

– No scenarios for risk of hunger consistent with SSPs have been developed.

2

Introduction

SLIDE 3

Objectives

1. Develop 21st‐century scenarios for the risk of

hunger consistent with SSPs as a baseline of climate impact research on agriculture

2. Identify the elements strongly affecting future

risk of hunger

7 socioeconomic indicators were considered:

– Population, demographic change, GDP, equality of food distribution, crop yields, irrigation area, land productivity of livestock and wood products

3

Introduction

SLIDE 4

Shared Socioeconomic Pathways

4

Low population growth; high economic growth; high levels of education and governance; globalization, international cooperation, technological development, and environmental awareness. Rapid population growth; Moderate economic growth; low levels of education and governance; Regionalization; low environmental awareness. Low population growth; high economic growth; high human development; low environmental awareness.

Method

Based on O’Neill et al. (2014)

A mixed world, with rapid technological development in high income

countries. In other regions,

development proceeds

slowly. Inequality remains

high.

SLIDE 5

Economic model
Fundamental idea:
supply = demand,
balanced by price mechanism

Population & income growth Increase in food demand Increase in food price Producers: increase in production (cropland expansion, yield growth) Consumers: decrease in consumption; shift to less expensive goods

AIM/CGE (Computable General Equilibrium)

Price Quantity Supply curve Demand curve

5

Domestic distribution of food energy (FAO,2008)

Method

SLIDE 6

Parameters related to food and hunger

6

Method

AIM/CGE

Parameters: Population, demographic change GDP Equality of food distribution Crop yield Irrigation area Land productivity of livestock and wood products Income elasticity of food demand Price elasticity of land use change Price elasticity of trade Endogenous variables: Food consumption Meat consumption Land use (Cropland, pasture, forest) Each parameters were determined from the adaptation viewpoint

Hasegawa et al. 2015

SLIDE 7

7

AIM/CGE

Parameters: Population, demographic change GDP Equality of food distribution Crop yield Irrigation area Land productivity of livestock and wood products Income elasticity of food demand Price elasticity of land use change Price elasticity of trade Endogenous variables: Food consumption Meat consumption Land use (Cropland, pasture, forest)

Three approaches for assuming parameters 1. Based on observed data (Stylized fact) 2. Based on existing studies 3. Assumed in line with SSP storylines if neither were available.

Method

Parameters related to food and hunger

SLIDE 8

0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 20000 40000 60000 80000

Coefficient of variation (CV) of the domestic distribution of dietary energy consumption

GDP per capita [US$, 2005]

bserved data

Optimistic Median Pessimistic

0.134 0.109 2 0.054

0.6894 0.6531 (Observed data; 0.61) 0.4609 y x y x R y x

− − −

= ⋅ = ⋅ = = ⋅

Comparison with observed data: the improved equality of food distribution with income growth

8

Intermediate Pessimistic Optimistic Equality Inequality

(2005)

Method

Hasegawa et al. 2015

SLIDE 9

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 20000 40000 60000 80000 Meat‐based calorie intake [kcal/day/cap]

income [US$/person]

bserved data

Optimistic Medium Pessimistic

2

60.0 ln 399.8 87.8 ln 545.3(Observed data; 0.57) 130 ln 833.0 y x y x R y x = ⋅ − = ⋅ − = = ⋅ −

Comparison with observed data: increased meat consumption with income growth

9

(1980 ‐ 2009) Intermediate Pessimistic Optimistic

Method

Hasegawa et al. 2015

SLIDE 10

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 2005 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

Carolie intake [kcal /person/day]

The 21st‐century Scenarios of risk of hunger using SSPs

10

Food consumption per capita

2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 SSP1 SSP2 SSP3 SSP4 SSP5 2005 2100 Land use [Mha] Food crops Pasture Grassland Managed forest Primary forest

SSP1 SSP2 SSP3 SSP4 SSP5

Land use change Population at risk of hunger

Results 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 2005 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100 Population at risk of hunger [million]

SSP3 SSP4 SSP2 SSP5 SSP1

Hasegawa et al. 2015

SLIDE 11

Decomposition analysis What strongly affects future risk of hunger?

Change in hunger risk was decomposed into

three factors;

11

Change in pop. at risk of hunger = ＋＋＋Residual Population growth Inequality of food distribution Food consumption

＊See discussion paper for more detail @http://www.nies.go.jp/social/dp/dpindex.html.

Method

SLIDE 12

12