Policy strategies and challenges for climate change mitigation in the Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) sector. OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers No. 149

Henderson, B., Frank, S. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5702-8547, Havlík, P. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5551-5085, & Valin, H. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0618-773X (2021). Policy strategies and challenges for climate change mitigation in the Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) sector. OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers No. 149. OECD-IIASA , Paris, France. 10.1787/47b3493b-en.

Preview

Text 47b3493b-en.pdf - Published Version Available under License All Rights Reserved. Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

This study uses GLOBIOM ‒ the most detailed global economic model of agriculture, land use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions ‒ to assess the effectiveness of different policies in cutting net emissions from the Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) sector, with a view to helping limit long-term global temperature increases to 1.5°C and 2°C. Trade-offs between emission reductions and impacts on food producers, consumers and government budgets are also evaluated for each policy package. A full complement of policy options is deployed globally across AFOLU, comprising emission taxes for emitting AFOLU activities and subsidies rewarding carbon sequestration. Using a carbon price consistent with the 2°C target (1.5°C target), this is projected to mitigate 8 GtCO2 eq/yr (12 GtCO2 eq/yr) in 2050, representing 89% (129%) reduction in net AFOLU emissions, and 12% (21%) of total anthropogenic GHG emissions. Nearly two-thirds of the net emission reductions are from the Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) component of AFOLU, mostly from reduced deforestation. A global carbon tax on AFOLU is found to be twice as effective in lowering emissions as an equivalently priced emission abatement subsidy because the latter keeps high emitting producers in business. However, a tax has trade-offs in terms of lower agricultural production and food consumption, which a subsidy avoids. A shift to lower emission diets by consumers has a much smaller impact on reducing agricultural emissions than any of the policy packages involving taxes on emissions.

Item Type:	Other
Uncontrolled Keywords:	Paris Agreement, Abatement subsidy, GHG emission tax, GLOBIOM
Depositing User:	Michaela Rossini
Date Deposited:	28 Jan 2021 16:44
Last Modified:	27 Aug 2021 17:34
URI:	https://pure.iiasa.ac.at/17012

Actions (login required)

View Item