The direct impacts of climate change on crop yields and human health are individually well-studied, but the interaction between the two have received little attention. Here we analyze the consequences of global warming for agricultural workers and the crops they cultivate using a global economic model (GTAP) with explicit treatment of the physiological impacts of heat stress on humans’ ability to work. Based on two metrics of heat stress and two labor functions, combined with a meta-analysis of crop yields, we provide an analysis of climate, impacts both on agricultural labor force, as well as on staple crop yields, thereby accounting for the interacting effect of climate change on both land and labor. Here we analyze the two sets of impacts on staple crops, while also expanding the labor impacts to highlight the potential importance on non-staple crops. We find, worldwide, labor and yield impacts within staple grains are equally important at +3∘C warming, relative to the 1986–2005 baseline. Furthermore, the widely overlooked labor impacts are dominant in two of the most vulnerable regions: sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia. In those regions, heat stress with 3∘C global warming could reduce labor capacity in agriculture by 30%–50%, increasing food prices and requiring much higher levels of employment in the farm sector. The global welfare loss at this level of warming could reach $136 billion, with crop prices rising by 5%, relative to baseline.
Estimating realistic potential yields by crop type and region is challenging; such yields depend on both biophysical characteristics (e.g., soil characteristics, climate, etc.), and the crop management practices available in any site or region (e.g., mechanization, irrigation, crop cultivars). A broad body of literature has assessed potential yields for selected crops and regions, using several strategies. In this study we first analyze future potential yields of major crop types globally by two different estimation methods, one of which is based on historical observed yields (“Empirical”), while the other is based on biophysical conditions (“Simulated”). Potential yields by major crop and region are quite different between the two methods; in particular, Simulated potential yields are typically 200% higher than Empirical potential yields in tropical regions for major crops. Applying both of these potential yields in yield gap closure scenarios in a global agro-economic model, GCAM, the two estimates of future potential yields lead to very different outcomes for the agricultural sector globally. In the Simulated potential yield closure scenario, Africa, Asia, and South America see comparatively favorable outcomes for agricultural sustainability over time: low land use change emissions, low crop prices, and high levels of self-sufficiency. In contrast, the Empirical potential yield scenario is characterized by a heavy reliance on production and exports in temperate regions that currently practice industrial agriculture. At the global level, this scenario has comparatively high crop commodity prices, and more land allocated to crop production (and associated land use change emissions) than either the baseline or Simulated potential yield scenarios. This study highlights the importance of the choice of methods of estimating potential yields for agro-economic modeling.
more » « less- Award ID(s):
- 1739823
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10372990
- Publisher / Repository:
- Springer Science + Business Media
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Food Security
- Volume:
- 14
- Issue:
- 5
- ISSN:
- 1876-4517
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- p. 1177-1190
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Abstract -
more » « less
Abstract The concept of sustainability inherently spans multiple spatial scales, sectors, variables, and time horizons. This study links a recently developed method of assessing present‐day agricultural sustainability across environmental, economic, and social dimensions with a process‐based integrated assessment model, in order to allow forward‐looking analysis of sustainability by region and scenario. The sustainable agriculture matrix estimates present‐day agricultural sustainability at the national level using 18 indicator variables, of which this study estimates nine to the year 2100, using an enhanced version of the Global Change Analysis Model. Scenarios include a reference scenario, and scenarios that apply the following measures, both individually and in combination, that are thought to improve sustainability: yield intensification, transition toward more plant‐based (“flexitarian”) diets, and economy‐wide greenhouse gas emissions mitigation. The scenarios illustrate considerable complexity and tradeoffs inherent to efforts to improve agricultural sustainability in all regions globally. For example, yield intensification typically increases nitrogen pollution, flexitarian diets can reduce agricultural output, and greenhouse gas mitigation efforts may either increase deforestation or crowd out crop and livestock production due to consequent bioenergy demands. However, there is considerable inter‐regional heterogeneity in the responses, and the importance of such secondary responses also differs by region. The analysis and post‐processing methods developed in this study allow quantification and visualization of the absolute and relative magnitude of the tradeoffs between agricultural sustainability indicator variables across regions, time periods, and scenarios.
-
more » « less
Abstract This study seeks to understand how Argentina's energy, water, and land (EWL) systems will co‐evolve under a representative array of human and earth system influences, including socioeconomic change, climate change, and climate policy. To capture Argentina's sub‐national EWL dynamics in the context of global change, we couple the Global Change Analysis Model with a suite of consistent, gridded sectoral downscaling models to explore multiple stakeholder‐engaged scenarios. Across scenarios, Argentina has the economic opportunity to use its vast land resources to satisfy growing domestic and international demand for crops, such as oil (e.g., soy) and biomass. The human (rather than earth) system produces the most dominant changes in mid‐century EWL resource use. A Reference scenario characterized by modest socioeconomic growth projects a 40% increase in Argentina's agricultural production by 2050 (relative to 2020) by using 50,000 km2of additional cropland and 40% more water. A Climate Policy scenario designed to achieve net‐zero carbon emissions globally shortly after mid‐century projects that Argentina could use 100,000 km2of additional land (and 65% more water) to grow biomass and other crops. The burden of navigating these national opportunities and challenges could fall disproportionately on a subset of Argentina's river basins. The Colorado and Negro basins could experience moderate‐to‐severe water scarcity as they simultaneously navigate substantial irrigated crop demand growth and climate‐induced declines in natural water availability. Argentina serves as a generalizable testbed to demonstrate that multi‐scale EWL planning challenges can be identified and managed more effectively via integrated analysis of coupled human‐earth systems.
-
more » « less
Abstract Labor markets can shape the impacts of global market developments and local sustainability policies on agricultural outcomes, including changes in production and land use. Yet local labor market outcomes, including agricultural employment, migration and wages, are often overlooked in integrated assessment models (IAMs). The relevance of labor markets has become more important in recent decades, with evidence of diminished labor mobility in the United States (US) and other developed countries. We use the SIMPLE-G (Simplified International Model of agricultural Prices, Land use, and the Environment) modeling framework to investigate the impacts of a global commodity price shock and a local sustainable groundwater use policy in the US. SIMPLE-G is a multi-scale framework designed to allow for integration of economic and biophysical determinants of sustainability, using fine-scale geospatial data and parameters. We use this framework to compare the impacts of the two sets of shocks under two contrasting assumptions: perfect mobility of agricultural labor, as generally implicit in global IAMs, and relatively inelastic labor mobility (‘sticky’ agricultural labor supply response). We supplement the numerical simulations with analytical results from a stylized two-input model to provide further insights into the impacts of local and global shocks on agricultural labor, crop production and resource use. Findings illustrate the key role that labor mobility plays in shaping both local and global agricultural and environmental outcomes. In the perfect labor mobility scenario, the impact of a commodity price boom on crop production, employment and land-use is overestimated compared with the restricted labor mobility case. In the case of the groundwater sustainability policy, the perfect labor mobility scenario overestimates the reduction in crop production and employment in directly targeted grids as well as spillover effects that increase employment in other grids. For both shocks, impacts on agricultural wages are completely overlooked if we ignore rigidities in agricultural labor markets.
-
Efficient irrigation technologies, which seem to promise reduced production costs and water consumption in heavily irrigated areas, may instead be driving increased irrigation use in areas that were not traditionally irrigated. As a result, the total dependence on supplemental irrigation for crop production and revenue is steadily increasing across the contiguous United States. Quantifying this dependence has been hampered by a lack of comprehensive irrigated and dryland yield and harvested area data outside of major irrigated regions, despite the importance and long history of irrigation applications in agriculture. This study used a linear regression model to disaggregate lumped agricultural statistics and estimate average irrigated and dryland yields at the state level for five major row crops: corn, cotton, hay, soybeans, and wheat. For 1945–2015, we quantified crop production, irrigation enhancement revenue, and irrigated and dryland areas in both intensively irrigated and marginally-dependent states, where both irrigated and dryland farming practices are implemented. In 2015, we found that irrigating just the five commodity crops enhanced revenue by ~$7 billion across all states with irrigation. In states with both irrigated and dryland practices, 23% of total produced area relied on irrigation, resulting in 7% more production than from dryland practices. There was a clear response to increasing biofuel demand, with the addition of more than 3.6 million ha of irrigated corn and soybeans in the last decade in marginally-dependent states. Since 1945, we estimate that yield enhancement due to irrigation has resulted in over $465 billion in increased revenue across the contiguous United States (CONUS). Example applications of this dataset include estimating historical water use, evaluating the effects of environmental policies, developing new resource management strategies, economic risk analyses, and developing tools for farmer decision making.more » « less
