Download AGRICULTURAL POLICY AND CLIMATE CHANGE

AGRIMONITOR AND CLIMATE
CHANGE
Tim Josling
Presentation to IDB group, 11/14/14
1
Premises
• AGRIMONITOR is up and running
• Provides more information on polices in LAC than
hitherto available in convenient, comparable
form
• Agricultural policy has a broad set of objectives
and constraints
–
–
–
–
Food Security
Competitiveness
Integration
Climate change
• Next step is to develop AGRIMONITOR as a tool
to address these new issues as well as the
information needed for more traditional policy
analysis
2
Contents
• Conceptual Framework
• Two stage approach
• Baseline GHG emissions in
AGRIMONITOR
• Example
• Mitigation and Adaptation Policies
• Issues to be resolved
Presentation to IDB group, 11/14/14
3
Conceptual Framework
• Crops and livestock products contribute
significantly to the emission of Greenhouse
gases (GHG), particularly CO2 and Methane
• Emissions are in part offset by sequestration
• Agricultural policy can influence emissions by
impact on cropping patterns and livestock
• Climate change mitigation policy can
intervene in agricultural production decisions
directly by limiting emissions or requiring
offsets
Presentation to IDB group, 11/14/14
4
Conceptual Framework
• Adaptation measures will also become
relevant in coming years: resilience also
important
• Crop yields will be affected by temperature
and rainfall variations and extreme weather
events associated with climate change
• Other impacts will be less direct, such as
through pest and disease linkages
• Individual governments can help the sector to
adjust, or remediation or compensation could
be attempted
Presentation to IDB group, 11/14/14
5
Conceptual Framework
• Mitigation policies require knowledge of GHG
emissions from agriculture
• Calculations can be made using standard
emission factors (EF) and knowledge of current
farming practices
• Adaptation policies require knowledge of the
influence of climate parameters on yields under
different farming practices
• Calculation of effectiveness of such policies is
more complex: have to rely on proxies such as
expenditure and policy classification
Presentation to IDB group, 11/14/14
6
Conceptual Framework
• Link with Agrimonitor is to focus on the GHG
emission issue and the “climate friendliness” of
agricultural policies
• Data on Emission Factors for crops and livestock
systems are available
• Policy instruments that directly try to influence GHG
emissions (mandated offsets, etc.) should be
included in the data set
• Data can be collected by farming system where
necessary (e.g. smallholder vs estate)
7
Conceptual Framework
• The link with mitigation and adaptation is
through classification of policies
• Policies that promote adaptation, through
adoption of low-carbon practices, renewable
energy, etc.
• Policies that help mitigation by "implicitly or
explicitly" taxing carbon
• Policies that restrict adaptation, such as fossilfuel subsidies
Presentation to IDB group, 11/14/14
8
Two stage approach
• First stage is to benchmark GHG emission by
commodity
• Establish relationship between transfers as
measured by PSE and GHG emissions
• Simplest approach is “allocation” by commodity
– 20 percent PSE for bananas and 400 tons of CO2
• Add in those GHG emissions not commodityspecific
• Convert emissions to monetary base using carbon
price – compare "subsidy" of no carbon cost with
other subsidies to producers
• Beware of over interpretation and weak
causation (policy may not be linked with cause of
emission)
Presentation to IDB group, 11/14/14
9
Two stage approach
• Second stage would be to model policy impacts
on farmer decisions, building on PSE database
• Derive land use patterns as a result of policy and
other factors
• Emissions expressed as a by-product of farming
practices following policy incentives
• More complete accounting of link between
policies and emissions possible
• Model could be linked to changes in rainfall and
temperature expected from climate change
• But existence of adequate models for all LAC
countries problematic
Presentation to IDB group, 11/14/14
10
First stage: Establish Baseline
• Insert information into PSE database that
relates to climate change
– GHG emissions per ha or per ton
– Carbon sequestration
– Offsets purchased by producers
– Abatement measures mandated
• Derive net contribution to GHG from crop and
aggregate over sector (ACE)
Presentation to IDB group, 11/14/14
11
Example
• Take three crop example for Jamaica –
sugar,bananas and coffee - (numbers made
up)
• Insert calculations of GHG emissions by crop
• Apply to PSE framework
• Calculate ACE measure by crop and aggregate
over all crops (including GHG emissions not
allocable to individual crops)
Presentation to IDB group, 11/14/14
12
Example
Presentation to IDB group, 11/14/14
13
Example
Presentation to IDB group, 2/12/09
14
Mitigation Policies
• Categories of policies grouped by mitigation
impact
– Subsidies for alternative fuels
– Conservation and improved efficiency programs
– Promotion of sequestration
– Current taxes, subsidies and controls on GHG
emissions
• Expenditures on each of these policies
• Relationship with overall support measures
Presentation to IDB group, 2/12/09
15
Adaptation Policies
• Categories of policies that promote
adaptation, resilience and sustainability
– Reduce risks associated with climate variability
– Improve infrastructure in rural areas to improve
resilience
– Promote R&D&I in appropriate areas
– Improve response to extreme events
– Risk management instruments
Presentation to IDB group, 2/12/09
16
Map over time and by country
• Aggregate expenditure on mitigation to
country level
• Compare with costs of GHG emissions
• Track path of expenditures over recent period
(5 years?)
• Aggregate expenditure on adaptation policies
• Relate to losses from extreme events
• Compare experiences across countries
Presentation to IDB group, 2/12/09
17
Issues to be resolved
• How far to go in linking policy developments
with GHG emissions?
– Full model of land use and livestock inventory?
– Use expenditure as proxies for policy intensity,
effectiveness?
• How disaggregated to take policy analysis?
– Farming system level?
– Size of farm?
• How far upstream and downstream to go?
– Transportation? Processing? Retailing?
Presentation to IDB group, 11/14/14
18