Impacts of supply-side climate change mitigation practices and trade policy regimes under dietary transition: the case of European agriculture

被引:20
作者
Clora, Francesco [1 ]
Yu, Wusheng [1 ]
Baudry, Gino [2 ]
Costa, Luis [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Copenhagen, Dept Food & Resource Econ, Copenhagen, Denmark
[2] Imperial Coll London, Fac Nat Sci, London, England
[3] Potsdam Inst Climate Impact Res, Climate Resilience, Potsdam, Germany
基金
欧盟地平线“2020”;
关键词
agriculture system; climate change mitigation; dietary changes; food; trade; European Union; CGE model; BORDER CARBON ADJUSTMENTS; GREENHOUSE-GAS EMISSIONS; LAND-USE; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS; INTENSIFICATION; BIODIVERSITY; HEALTH; PATHWAYS; SYSTEMS; LEAKAGE;
D O I
10.1088/1748-9326/ac39bd
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The European Union's Green Deal proposal and Farm to Fork strategy call for both demand and supply measures to reduce emissions from the food system. While research clearly illustrates the importance of dietary transitions, impacts of potential supply-side measures are not well understood in relation to competitiveness concerns and leakage effects. This study assesses trade and GHG emission impacts of two supply-side mitigation strategies (intensification vs. extensification) in the EU, UK and Switzerland (EU + 2), against a 2050 baseline featuring healthy/sustainable diets adopted by European consumers. To capture potential leakage effects arising from changing external trade flows, the two supply-side strategies are assessed against three trade policy regimes (i.e. status quo, regional trade liberalization with and without border carbon adjustment), resulting in six scenarios formulated with detailed inputs from the EUCalc model and other literature and simulated with a purported-designed CGE model. Results show that intensification, while improving the EU + 2's external trade balance, does not reduce emissions in the EU + 2, compared to the baseline. In contrast, extensification leads to a substantial emission abatement that augments reductions from the assumed dietary transition in the baseline, resulting in a combined 31% agricultural emission reduction in EU + 2 during 2014-2050. However, this is at the expense of reduced net agrifood exports by US$25 billion compared to the baseline and significant carbon leakage at a rate of 48% (i.e. nearly half of agricultural emission reduction in the EU + 2 'leaked' to elsewhere). Furthermore, implementing the EU + 2's prospective regional trade agreements results in increased territorial emissions. Although a border carbon adjustment by the EU + 2 can improve its trade balance and partially shift mitigation burdens to other countries, the associated reductions in global emissions (and carbon leakage) would be marginal. Finally, different trade and emission effects are identified between the crop and livestock sectors, pointing to the desirability of a mixed agriculture system with intensified livestock sector and extensified crop agriculture in the EU + 2 that balances emission reduction goals and competitiveness concerns.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 94 条
[1]  
Aguiar A, 2019, J GLOB ECON ANAL, V4, P1
[2]   The Impacts of Dietary Change on Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Land Use, Water Use, and Health: A Systematic Review [J].
Aleksandrowicz, Lukasz ;
Green, Rosemary ;
Joy, Edward J. M. ;
Smith, Pete ;
Haines, Andy .
PLOS ONE, 2016, 11 (11)
[3]  
Alteri MA, 2002, AGR ECOSYST ENVIRON, V93, P1, DOI 10.1016/S0167-8809(02)00085-3
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2009, TRAD CLIM CHANG
[5]  
[Anonymous], Trade Policy Review of the European Union
[6]  
Aubert P-M, 2019, Agroecology and carbon neutrality in Europe by 2050: what are the issues? Findings from the TYFA modelling exercise, P02
[7]   Assessing the environmental impacts of production- and consumption-side measures in sustainable agriculture intensification in the European Union [J].
Bais-Moleman, Anna Liza ;
Schulp, Catharina J. E. ;
Verburg, Peter H. .
GEODERMA, 2019, 338 :555-567
[8]   The Environmental Impacts of Agricultural Trade A Systematic Literature Review [J].
Balogh, Jeremias Mate ;
Jambor, Attila .
SUSTAINABILITY, 2020, 12 (03)
[9]   Agriculture and nature: Trouble and strife? [J].
Baudron, Frederic ;
Giller, Ken E. .
BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2014, 170 :232-245
[10]  
Baudry G., 2019, EUCALC AGR LAND USE, DOI [10.1016/j.acvd.2019.04.008, DOI 10.1016/J.ACVD.2019.04.008]