Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Stehfest, Elke

Publications and source records attributed to Stehfest, Elke.

Bundling measures for food systems transformation: a global, multimodel assessment

Background Current food systems leave one in ten individuals at risk of hunger while driving unsustainable environmental impacts. Inaction risks further exacerbating negative impacts on both human and planetary health. These challenges emerge from complex system interactions, requiring approaches that engage with this complexity and consider how transformation measures interact across food systems. We aimed to quantify the magnitude and uncertainty of the impacts of key food systems transformation measures both individually and in a bundle using an ensemble of global economic models. Methods In this global multimodel assessment, we applied an ensemble of ten state-of-the-art global economic models to evaluate the potential of four key measures in transforming food systems: increasing agricultural productivity, halving food loss and waste, shifting towards healthier diets, and economy-wide climate mitigation policies aligned with limiting warming to 1·5°C. The scenarios used a middle-of-the-road shared socioeconomic pathway for population and gross domestic product growth, climate impact data from Jägermeyr and colleagues, Thornton and colleagues, and Nelson and colleagues, and dietary targets based on the EAT–Lancet healthy reference diet, with model simulations conducted from 2020 to 2050. We then assessed the effect of these measures in isolation and in combination in a bundled scenario. To further understand the interactions between these measures, we conducted a decomposition analysis that distinguishes between the individual effects of a measure (effect when implemented alone), total effects (its contribution within the bundle), and interaction effects (the difference between total and individual effects). This approach aimed to show complementarities and trade-offs that emerge when multiple measures are implemented simultaneously. Findings Our analysis showed that individual measures in isolation are insufficient to achieve high-level environmental objectives and might generate unintended consequences. In contrast, bundling measures produces co-benefits: avoiding 50% of projected agricultural greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and almost 20% of anticipated land conversion, while moderating food price increases associated with ambitious climate change mitigation policies. Our decomposition analysis further shows that measures can have varying effects across different dimensions. Although dietary shifts and climate mitigation policies are the largest drivers of environmental benefits (each contributing to a median decline of >10 percentage points in non-CO 2 emissions and 5 percentage points in agricultural land use globally), productivity improvements and reducing food loss and waste play essential roles in moderating price increases (each contributing to a median decline of >5 percentage points in average prices). Interpretation This study highlights the importance of implementing coordinated approaches to food system transformation and climate change mitigation rather than relying on isolated interventions. Comprehensive transformation requires understanding how supply-side and demand-side changes can interact with climate mitigation policies, enabling policy makers to design intervention packages that maximise benefits while minimising trade-offs across environmental, economic, and social dimensions.

Sundiang, Marina [Cornell Univ., Ithaca, NY (Unite↗

Are scenario projections overly optimistic about future yield progress?

Historical increases in agricultural production were achieved predominantly by large increases in agricultural productivity. Intensification of crop and livestock production also plays a key role in future projections of agricultural land use. Here, we assess and discuss projections of crop yields by global agricultural land-use and integrated assessment models. To evaluate these crop yield projections, we compare them to empirical data on attainable yields by employing a linear and plateauing continuation of observed attainable yield trends. While keeping in mind the uncertainties of attainable yields projections and future climate change impacts, we find that, on average for all cereals on the global level, global projected yields by 2050 remain below the attainable yields. Additionally, this is also true for future pathways with high technological progress and mitigation efforts, indicating that projected yield increases are not overly optimistic, even under systemic transformations. Furthermore, on a regional scale, we find that for developing regions, specifically for sub-Saharan Africa, projected yields stay well below attainable yields, indicating that the large yield gaps which could be closed through improved crop management, may also persist in the future. In OECD countries, in contrast, current yields are already close to attainable yields, and the projections approach or, for some models, even exceed attainable yields by 2050. This observation parallels research suggesting that future progress in attainable yields in developed regions will mainly have to be achieved through new crop varieties or genetic improvements. The models included in this study vary widely in their implementation of yield progress, which are often split into endogenous (crop management) improvements and exogenous (technological) trends. More detail and transparency are needed in these important elements of global yields and land use projections, and this paper discusses possibilities of better aligning agronomic understanding of yield gaps and yield potentials with modelling approaches.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Global rules for translating land-use change (LUH2) to land-cover change for CMIP6 using GLM2

Anthropogenic land-use and land-cover change activities play a critical role in Earth system dynamics through significant alterations to biogeophysical and biogeochemical properties at local to global scales. To quantify the magnitude of these impacts, climate models need consistent land-cover change time series at a global scale, based on land-use information from observations or dedicated land-use change models. However, a specific land-use change cannot be unambiguously mapped to a specific land-cover change. Here, nine translation rules are evaluated based on assumptions about the way land-use change could potentially impact land cover. Utilizing the Global Land-use Model 2 (GLM2), the model underlying the latest Land-Use Harmonization dataset (LUH2), the land-cover dynamics resulting from land-use change were simulated based on multiple alternative translation rules from 850 to 2015 globally. For each rule, the resulting forest cover, carbon density and carbon emissions were compared with independent estimates from remote sensing observations, U.N. Food and Agricultural Organization reports, and other studies. The translation rule previously suggested by the authors of the HYDE 3.2 dataset, that underlies LUH2, is consistent with the results of our examinations at global, country and grid scales. This rule recommends that for CMIP6 simulations, models should (1) completely clear vegetation in land-use changes from primary and secondary land (including both forested and non-forested) to cropland, urban land and managed pasture; (2) completely clear vegetation in land-use changes from primary forest and/or secondary forest to rangeland; (3) keep vegetation inland-use changes from primary non-forest and/or secondary non-forest to rangeland. Our analysis shows that this rule is one of three (out of nine)rules that produce comparable estimates of forest cover, vegetation carbon and emissions to independent estimates and also mitigate the anomalously high carbon emissions from land-use change observed in previous studies in the 1950s. According to the three translation rules, contemporary global forest area is estimated to be 37.42×106 km2, within the range derived from remote sensing products. Likewise, the estimated carbon stock is in close agreement with reference biomass datasets, particularly over regions with more than 50 % forest cover

58 GEOSCIENCES↗