Trading more food: Implications for land use, greenhouse gas emissions, and the food system

► The study analyses the impact of increased trade on economic and environmental indicators. ► Global costs of food production decrease and the food scarcity index increases with a lower rate. ► Deforestation, mainly in Latin America, leads to significant amounts of additional carbon emissions. ► No...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Global environmental change 2012-02, Vol.22 (1), p.189-209
Hauptverfasser: Schmitz, Christoph, Biewald, Anne, Lotze-Campen, Hermann, Popp, Alexander, Dietrich, Jan Philipp, Bodirsky, Benjamin, Krause, Michael, Weindl, Isabelle
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 209
container_issue 1
container_start_page 189
container_title Global environmental change
container_volume 22
creator Schmitz, Christoph
Biewald, Anne
Lotze-Campen, Hermann
Popp, Alexander
Dietrich, Jan Philipp
Bodirsky, Benjamin
Krause, Michael
Weindl, Isabelle
description ► The study analyses the impact of increased trade on economic and environmental indicators. ► Global costs of food production decrease and the food scarcity index increases with a lower rate. ► Deforestation, mainly in Latin America, leads to significant amounts of additional carbon emissions. ► Non-CO2 emissions will increase most in China due to comparative advantages in livestock production. ► With the generated economic benefits it is possible to compensate for increased emissions and deforestation. The volume of agricultural trade increased by more than ten times throughout the past six decades and is likely to continue with high rates in the future. Thereby, it largely affects environment and climate. We analyse future trade scenarios covering the period of 2005–2045 by evaluating economic and environmental effects using the global land-use model MAgPIE (“Model of Agricultural Production and its Impact on the Environment”). This is the first trade study using spatially explicit mapping of land use patterns and greenhouse gas emissions. We focus on three scenarios: the reference scenario fixes current trade patterns, the policy scenario follows a historically derived liberalisation pathway, and the liberalisation scenario assumes a path, which ends with full trade liberalisation in 2045. Further trade liberalisation leads to lower global costs of food. Regions with comparative advantages like Latin America for cereals and oil crops and China for livestock products will export more. In contrast, regions like the Middle East, North Africa, and South Asia face the highest increases of imports. Deforestation, mainly in Latin America, leads to significant amounts of additional carbon emissions due to trade liberalisation. Non-CO2 emissions will mostly shift to China due to comparative advantages in livestock production and rising livestock demand in the region. Overall, further trade liberalisation leads to higher economic benefits at the expense of environment and climate, if no other regulations are put in place.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.09.013
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_920050884</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0959378011001488</els_id><sourcerecordid>920050884</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-47f0257085606ca56917a941e96072ce106b5ac7c0fe6f488d85655c037295d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkMtqwzAQRUVpoenjG6pdN7E7si3L6i6EPgKBbrLrQqjyOFGwrVRyAvn7yrh029nMMJy53LmEPDBIGbDyaZ9uW4f9yex0mgFjKcgUWH5BZqwSWSILyS_JDCSXSS4quCY3IewhlszzGfnceF3bfks755E2ztXPdNUdWmv0YF0f4srTVvc1PQac061H7HcuznSrA8XOhjBiczoiw26SoOEcBuzuyFWj24D3v_2WbF5fNsv3ZP3xtlou1okpymxICtFAxgVUvITSaF5KJrQsGMoSRGaQQfnFtREGGiyboqrqSHJuIBeZ5HV-Sx4n2YN330cMg4quDLbRNUanSmYAHKqqiKSYSONdCB4bdfC20_6sGKgxTLVXf2GqMUwFUsUw4-ViusT4x8miV8FY7A3W1qMZVO3svxo_ukiBUw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>920050884</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Trading more food: Implications for land use, greenhouse gas emissions, and the food system</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Schmitz, Christoph ; Biewald, Anne ; Lotze-Campen, Hermann ; Popp, Alexander ; Dietrich, Jan Philipp ; Bodirsky, Benjamin ; Krause, Michael ; Weindl, Isabelle</creator><creatorcontrib>Schmitz, Christoph ; Biewald, Anne ; Lotze-Campen, Hermann ; Popp, Alexander ; Dietrich, Jan Philipp ; Bodirsky, Benjamin ; Krause, Michael ; Weindl, Isabelle</creatorcontrib><description>► The study analyses the impact of increased trade on economic and environmental indicators. ► Global costs of food production decrease and the food scarcity index increases with a lower rate. ► Deforestation, mainly in Latin America, leads to significant amounts of additional carbon emissions. ► Non-CO2 emissions will increase most in China due to comparative advantages in livestock production. ► With the generated economic benefits it is possible to compensate for increased emissions and deforestation. The volume of agricultural trade increased by more than ten times throughout the past six decades and is likely to continue with high rates in the future. Thereby, it largely affects environment and climate. We analyse future trade scenarios covering the period of 2005–2045 by evaluating economic and environmental effects using the global land-use model MAgPIE (“Model of Agricultural Production and its Impact on the Environment”). This is the first trade study using spatially explicit mapping of land use patterns and greenhouse gas emissions. We focus on three scenarios: the reference scenario fixes current trade patterns, the policy scenario follows a historically derived liberalisation pathway, and the liberalisation scenario assumes a path, which ends with full trade liberalisation in 2045. Further trade liberalisation leads to lower global costs of food. Regions with comparative advantages like Latin America for cereals and oil crops and China for livestock products will export more. In contrast, regions like the Middle East, North Africa, and South Asia face the highest increases of imports. Deforestation, mainly in Latin America, leads to significant amounts of additional carbon emissions due to trade liberalisation. Non-CO2 emissions will mostly shift to China due to comparative advantages in livestock production and rising livestock demand in the region. Overall, further trade liberalisation leads to higher economic benefits at the expense of environment and climate, if no other regulations are put in place.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0959-3780</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-9495</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.09.013</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Agricultural production ; Carbon emissions ; Demand ; GHG emissions ; International trade ; Land use ; Land use change ; Land use model ; Livestock ; Trade liberalization</subject><ispartof>Global environmental change, 2012-02, Vol.22 (1), p.189-209</ispartof><rights>2011 Elsevier Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-47f0257085606ca56917a941e96072ce106b5ac7c0fe6f488d85655c037295d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-47f0257085606ca56917a941e96072ce106b5ac7c0fe6f488d85655c037295d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378011001488$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schmitz, Christoph</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Biewald, Anne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lotze-Campen, Hermann</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Popp, Alexander</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dietrich, Jan Philipp</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bodirsky, Benjamin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krause, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weindl, Isabelle</creatorcontrib><title>Trading more food: Implications for land use, greenhouse gas emissions, and the food system</title><title>Global environmental change</title><description>► The study analyses the impact of increased trade on economic and environmental indicators. ► Global costs of food production decrease and the food scarcity index increases with a lower rate. ► Deforestation, mainly in Latin America, leads to significant amounts of additional carbon emissions. ► Non-CO2 emissions will increase most in China due to comparative advantages in livestock production. ► With the generated economic benefits it is possible to compensate for increased emissions and deforestation. The volume of agricultural trade increased by more than ten times throughout the past six decades and is likely to continue with high rates in the future. Thereby, it largely affects environment and climate. We analyse future trade scenarios covering the period of 2005–2045 by evaluating economic and environmental effects using the global land-use model MAgPIE (“Model of Agricultural Production and its Impact on the Environment”). This is the first trade study using spatially explicit mapping of land use patterns and greenhouse gas emissions. We focus on three scenarios: the reference scenario fixes current trade patterns, the policy scenario follows a historically derived liberalisation pathway, and the liberalisation scenario assumes a path, which ends with full trade liberalisation in 2045. Further trade liberalisation leads to lower global costs of food. Regions with comparative advantages like Latin America for cereals and oil crops and China for livestock products will export more. In contrast, regions like the Middle East, North Africa, and South Asia face the highest increases of imports. Deforestation, mainly in Latin America, leads to significant amounts of additional carbon emissions due to trade liberalisation. Non-CO2 emissions will mostly shift to China due to comparative advantages in livestock production and rising livestock demand in the region. Overall, further trade liberalisation leads to higher economic benefits at the expense of environment and climate, if no other regulations are put in place.</description><subject>Agricultural production</subject><subject>Carbon emissions</subject><subject>Demand</subject><subject>GHG emissions</subject><subject>International trade</subject><subject>Land use</subject><subject>Land use change</subject><subject>Land use model</subject><subject>Livestock</subject><subject>Trade liberalization</subject><issn>0959-3780</issn><issn>1872-9495</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkMtqwzAQRUVpoenjG6pdN7E7si3L6i6EPgKBbrLrQqjyOFGwrVRyAvn7yrh029nMMJy53LmEPDBIGbDyaZ9uW4f9yex0mgFjKcgUWH5BZqwSWSILyS_JDCSXSS4quCY3IewhlszzGfnceF3bfks755E2ztXPdNUdWmv0YF0f4srTVvc1PQac061H7HcuznSrA8XOhjBiczoiw26SoOEcBuzuyFWj24D3v_2WbF5fNsv3ZP3xtlou1okpymxICtFAxgVUvITSaF5KJrQsGMoSRGaQQfnFtREGGiyboqrqSHJuIBeZ5HV-Sx4n2YN330cMg4quDLbRNUanSmYAHKqqiKSYSONdCB4bdfC20_6sGKgxTLVXf2GqMUwFUsUw4-ViusT4x8miV8FY7A3W1qMZVO3svxo_ukiBUw</recordid><startdate>201202</startdate><enddate>201202</enddate><creator>Schmitz, Christoph</creator><creator>Biewald, Anne</creator><creator>Lotze-Campen, Hermann</creator><creator>Popp, Alexander</creator><creator>Dietrich, Jan Philipp</creator><creator>Bodirsky, Benjamin</creator><creator>Krause, Michael</creator><creator>Weindl, Isabelle</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201202</creationdate><title>Trading more food: Implications for land use, greenhouse gas emissions, and the food system</title><author>Schmitz, Christoph ; Biewald, Anne ; Lotze-Campen, Hermann ; Popp, Alexander ; Dietrich, Jan Philipp ; Bodirsky, Benjamin ; Krause, Michael ; Weindl, Isabelle</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-47f0257085606ca56917a941e96072ce106b5ac7c0fe6f488d85655c037295d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Agricultural production</topic><topic>Carbon emissions</topic><topic>Demand</topic><topic>GHG emissions</topic><topic>International trade</topic><topic>Land use</topic><topic>Land use change</topic><topic>Land use model</topic><topic>Livestock</topic><topic>Trade liberalization</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schmitz, Christoph</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Biewald, Anne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lotze-Campen, Hermann</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Popp, Alexander</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dietrich, Jan Philipp</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bodirsky, Benjamin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krause, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weindl, Isabelle</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Global environmental change</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schmitz, Christoph</au><au>Biewald, Anne</au><au>Lotze-Campen, Hermann</au><au>Popp, Alexander</au><au>Dietrich, Jan Philipp</au><au>Bodirsky, Benjamin</au><au>Krause, Michael</au><au>Weindl, Isabelle</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Trading more food: Implications for land use, greenhouse gas emissions, and the food system</atitle><jtitle>Global environmental change</jtitle><date>2012-02</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>22</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>189</spage><epage>209</epage><pages>189-209</pages><issn>0959-3780</issn><eissn>1872-9495</eissn><abstract>► The study analyses the impact of increased trade on economic and environmental indicators. ► Global costs of food production decrease and the food scarcity index increases with a lower rate. ► Deforestation, mainly in Latin America, leads to significant amounts of additional carbon emissions. ► Non-CO2 emissions will increase most in China due to comparative advantages in livestock production. ► With the generated economic benefits it is possible to compensate for increased emissions and deforestation. The volume of agricultural trade increased by more than ten times throughout the past six decades and is likely to continue with high rates in the future. Thereby, it largely affects environment and climate. We analyse future trade scenarios covering the period of 2005–2045 by evaluating economic and environmental effects using the global land-use model MAgPIE (“Model of Agricultural Production and its Impact on the Environment”). This is the first trade study using spatially explicit mapping of land use patterns and greenhouse gas emissions. We focus on three scenarios: the reference scenario fixes current trade patterns, the policy scenario follows a historically derived liberalisation pathway, and the liberalisation scenario assumes a path, which ends with full trade liberalisation in 2045. Further trade liberalisation leads to lower global costs of food. Regions with comparative advantages like Latin America for cereals and oil crops and China for livestock products will export more. In contrast, regions like the Middle East, North Africa, and South Asia face the highest increases of imports. Deforestation, mainly in Latin America, leads to significant amounts of additional carbon emissions due to trade liberalisation. Non-CO2 emissions will mostly shift to China due to comparative advantages in livestock production and rising livestock demand in the region. Overall, further trade liberalisation leads to higher economic benefits at the expense of environment and climate, if no other regulations are put in place.</abstract><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.09.013</doi><tpages>21</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0959-3780
ispartof Global environmental change, 2012-02, Vol.22 (1), p.189-209
issn 0959-3780
1872-9495
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_920050884
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Agricultural production
Carbon emissions
Demand
GHG emissions
International trade
Land use
Land use change
Land use model
Livestock
Trade liberalization
title Trading more food: Implications for land use, greenhouse gas emissions, and the food system
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-10T12%3A56%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Trading%20more%20food:%20Implications%20for%20land%20use,%20greenhouse%20gas%20emissions,%20and%20the%20food%20system&rft.jtitle=Global%20environmental%20change&rft.au=Schmitz,%20Christoph&rft.date=2012-02&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=189&rft.epage=209&rft.pages=189-209&rft.issn=0959-3780&rft.eissn=1872-9495&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.09.013&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E920050884%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=920050884&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0959378011001488&rfr_iscdi=true