Climate change mitigation to limit warming to 1.5◦C or well below 2◦C, as suggested by the Paris Agreement, can rely on large-scale deployment of land-related measures (e.g. afforestation, or bioenergy production). This can increase food prices, and hence raises food security concerns. Here we show how an inclusive policy design can avoid these adverse side-effects. Food-security support through international aid, bioenergy tax, or domestic reallocation of income can shield impoverished and vulnerable people from the additional risk of hunger that would be caused by the economic effects of policies narrowly focussing on climate objectives only. In the absence of such support, 35% more people might be at risk of hunger by 2050 (i.e. 84 million additional people) in a 2◦C-consistent scenario. The additional global welfare changes due to inclusive climate policies are small (0.1%) compared to the total climate mitigation cost (3.7% welfare loss), and the financial costs of international aid amount to about half a percent of high-income countries' GDP. This implies that climate policy should treat this issue carefully. Although there are challenges to implement food policies, options exist to avoid the food security concerns often linked to climate mitigation.
|Fachzeitschrift||Environmental Research Letters|
|Publikationsstatus||Veröffentlicht - 6 Juli 2018|
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Erneuerbare Energien, Nachhaltigkeit und Umwelt
- Umweltwissenschaften (insg.)
- Öffentliche Gesundheit, Umwelt- und Arbeitsmedizin