Volume 45, Issue 1 pp. 103-116
Original Article

Impacts of increased bioenergy demand on global food markets: an AgMIP economic model intercomparison

Hermann Lotze-Campen

Corresponding Author

Hermann Lotze-Campen

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Telegrafenberg A 31, 14473 Potsdam, Germany

Corresponding author. Tel.: +49-331-288-2699; fax: +49-331-288-2600. E-mail address: [email protected] (H. Lotze-Campen).Search for more papers by this author
Martin von Lampe

Martin von Lampe

Trade and Agriculture Directorate (TAD), Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2 rue André Pascal, 75775, Paris Cedex 16, France

Search for more papers by this author
Page Kyle

Page Kyle

Joint Global Change Research Institute, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, 5825 University Research Court, Suite 3500, College Park, MD 20740 USA

Search for more papers by this author
Shinichiro Fujimori

Shinichiro Fujimori

National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), Center for Social & Environmental Systems Research, 16-2 Onogawa, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 305-8506 Japan

Search for more papers by this author
Petr Havlik

Petr Havlik

Ecosystems Services and Management Program, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Schlossplatz 1, 2361, Laxenburg, Austria

Search for more papers by this author
Hans van Meijl

Hans van Meijl

Agricultural Economics Research Institute (LEI) Wageningen University and Research Centre, 2585 DB, The Hague, The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author
Tomoko Hasegawa

Tomoko Hasegawa

National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), Center for Social & Environmental Systems Research, 16-2 Onogawa, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 305-8506 Japan

Search for more papers by this author
Alexander Popp

Alexander Popp

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Telegrafenberg A 31, 14473 Potsdam, Germany

Search for more papers by this author
Christoph Schmitz

Christoph Schmitz

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Telegrafenberg A 31, 14473 Potsdam, Germany

Search for more papers by this author
Andrzej Tabeau

Andrzej Tabeau

Agricultural Economics Research Institute (LEI) Wageningen University and Research Centre, 2585 DB, The Hague, The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author
Hugo Valin

Hugo Valin

Ecosystems Services and Management Program, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Schlossplatz 1, 2361, Laxenburg, Austria

Search for more papers by this author
Dirk Willenbockel

Dirk Willenbockel

Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton BN1 9RE, United Kingdom

Search for more papers by this author
Marshall Wise

Marshall Wise

Joint Global Change Research Institute, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, 5825 University Research Court, Suite 3500, College Park, MD 20740 USA

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 10 December 2013
Citations: 83

Abstract

Integrated Assessment studies have shown that meeting ambitious greenhouse gas mitigation targets will require substantial amounts of bioenergy as part of the future energy mix. In the course of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP), five global agro-economic models were used to analyze a future scenario with global demand for ligno-cellulosic bioenergy rising to about 100 ExaJoule in 2050. From this exercise a tentative conclusion can be drawn that ambitious climate change mitigation need not drive up global food prices much, if the extra land required for bioenergy production is accessible or if the feedstock, for example, from forests, does not directly compete for agricultural land. Agricultural price effects across models by the year 2050 from high bioenergy demand in an ambitious mitigation scenario appear to be much smaller (+5% average across models) than from direct climate impacts on crop yields in a high-emission scenario (+25% average across models). However, potential future scarcities of water and nutrients, policy-induced restrictions on agricultural land expansion, as well as potential welfare losses have not been specifically looked at in this exercise.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.